Sermons and Chimes: The Bible

/ W. Keith Brenton / 9 Comments

Alfred Ellmore, my Great-Great GrandfatherI’m coming to terms with my heritage in Churches of Christ through the person of my great-great grandfather Alfred Ellmore, one of the early preachers in the Restoration Movement that yielded this fellowship. This is an installment from his 1914 book Sermons and Chimes, and my reactions to it in the form of a dialogue with him:

SERMONS

THE BIBLE.

The Bible is a finished book; it will admit of neither addition, subtraction nor change. No other book has such resources as the Bible. Each author has had full privilege to say all he wished to say, and therefore the book is complete. On this point the following summary is submitted. God in this book is heard, and has said all he wished to say, or to have said. Christ, both before and after his death, has said all he wants to say. The Holy Spirit, through men, is fully heard, good men uninspired have been heard, wicked men have been heard, the prophets have been heard, and the Arch-Deceiver once had an encounter, face to face, with the Master. All these have had impartial hearings, and wish to say nothing more. Now, if any man wish additional revelation, who would make it and what could he say?

I think I’ve been misunderstood in my answer to this question, dear ancestor, and I have no great desire to interrupt the flow of your thought, but … The Holy Spirit might well desire to make additional revelation and what He could say to and through people would be up to Him. But it might well take the form of personal direction or information (Acts 16:7), a warning (Acts 20:23; 21:11), or to inspire a realization of the blessed Lordship of Jesus, the Christ (1 Corinthians 12:3). These are revelations that are not supplanting, but supporting; not replacing, but reinforcing; not rescinding but reminding. I would not rush to say that His work is over and done.

There is no book in the world over which there has been as much debate and contention as has been over the Bible. And there is no room for another divine law. Its divinity has been discussed, upon by both sides, by as able controvertists as the world has ever had.

But because of the great controversies many reject the Bible. But are there not as great differences between men in other callings? Take men in the medical profession, and in the law, and over capital and labor, and we find in all these callings men who differ, and they are at sword’s points, each contending fore his dogma and his party. And while right and wrong are in the world, there will be religious differences. And while all acts pertaining to men’s duty are made plain in the Bible there is in it a depth, and a height and a breadth which no human mind can grasp. If all the mysteries in the Bible could have been solved, the book would have lost its interest many centuries ago.

But that the tyro may know that the Bible is super-human, take the following:

1. The Bible knows the past, the present and the future alike, and never makes a mistake as to date. It knows our course tomorrow as well as yesterday, our line to the grave as well as to our cradle. It gives a true history of our ancestry back to Eden. But it gives a minute history of the world for 4,000 years before Christ. And in recording events in history, behold the writers were giving prophecy for the future, and if these prophecies could be properly explained, their fulfillment would be as accurate as is the needle to the pole. But please turn to the future. The Bible lightens up the grave and gives assurance of the day of judgment, and when all the evidence is brought in, each part will fit into its place as the wheel fits into a perfect machine.

Great-great Grandpa … this 4,000-year reckoning of time, of course, depends solely on the research of Bishop James Ussher, whose chronological estimations were often included in the center margins of two-column commentary King James Version Bibles in your era, weren’t they? Especially the Scofield Reference Bible?

2. It advocates every pure thought, and every pure word, and every righteous deed performed by man. On the other hand, it condemns every licentious thought, every idle word, and every wicked act of man.

3. We dare not add to this volume nor take from it. “If any man shall add unto these things God shall add unto him the plagues which are written in this book, and if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy (Rev.) God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and from the holy city, and from the things written in this book.”

For near 2,000 years men have been legislating and forming laws and creeds for the supposed benefit of man, but no one man nor body of legislators have been found who could add even the eleventh command to the decalogue.

4. All other books, whether of history, of law, or of prophecy, when read once, or at most but a few times, lose their interest, and we keep them merely as books of reference. We have read them and exhausted their fountain. Not so with the Bible. We read it day by day, and chapter after chapter, and it is still the inexhaustible fountain to us.

5. It has been killed, and burned, and its funeral has been preached ten thousand times, but it rises up out of its ashes and haunts its assassin to the grave, and the more he opposes it the worse it troubles him. And in that sad hour which awaits all opposers of the blessed volume, the smoke of their sins will rise in awful density, until their lights will go out into eternal night, while the men of faith pass down into their graves with a halo of peace encircling them, into the palace royal of the universe

It is now about 1,900 years since the book was finished, and it has stood the storms of persecution, and it is gaining victories more wonderful than ever before.

But whether we shall ever be able to account for the book, one thing is certain, the book is here, and it is very much alive. And if we refuse to let it give its own origin, how shall we account for its advent into the world? It is not a product of nature, for nature reproduces of her kind. It is not spontaneous, it did not just happen.  Being a book of so much intelligence shows that it is the work of effort, of intelligence.

Well, did men — good men — of themselves, create the book? No, the authors who wrote claim they were moved to write by a higher power. We should not assign to men a work they claim not to be the authors of. But have bad men produced this book? Then, pray, what was their object in writing such a book, since from first to last it condemns wicked men, and seals their death warrant on almost every page? No, good men who wrote say they were moved by the Holy Spirit, and since God is its author, and the Holy Spirit is the medium, we claim that no evil design is in the book.

But one of the very greatest hindrances to the perfect understanding of the book is the lack of knowing how to classify and arrange its different parts into one perfect whole. A very common idea is, since the book is divine, that it is applicable to all people, under all circumstances, without considering as to the writer, to whom he is writing, and under which dispensation did those addressed live. They open, read and apply to themselves, when probably the language can not apply to them by hundreds of years.

Ah! Would that many of my siblings in Christ could understand this principle today: that some scripture is meant for us, some meant for all, and some was meant for others of a time long past. But the discernment of which sets of language within scripture does indeed apply to us can be difficult. What a blessing that we can ask and receive the discernment of God’s own Holy Spirit! (Luke 11:13; Ephesians 1:17; Colossians 1:9; James 1:5) Yet, dear ancestor, your era’s thrill over classification — which led to excesses like Dispensationalism — does not compare with the recognition that God through the Logos, His Christ, was consistently at work throughout the Word start to finish to reconcile mankind to Himself through His patient instruction with our best interests at heart.

It has been about 6,000 years since creation, and these years have been divided into three dispensations, the Patriarchal, the Jewish and the Christian. The Patriarchal began at creation, and ran to the giving of the law on Mt. Sinai. During this age there was no church of any kind in the world. The only worship the world had was family worship. The head of the family was the prophet, priest and ruler. The Jewish dispensation began with the giving of the law on Mt. Sinai, and ran to the crucifixion of Christ, and by that act it was taken away.

The Christian dispensation began fifty days after the resurrection of Christ, and will continue till the sounding of the trumpet and the end of the world. Obedience to the Patriarchal law will make neither a Jew nor a Christian. Obedience to the ten commandments, with all the carnal ordinances added, can not make a Christian. Obedience to the New Testament can make a man neither a Patriarch nor a Jew, but a Christian only. Observe these classifications and you will be aided much in coming to the perfect knowledge of the Bible.

The next grand division is to separate the two testaments. The first is the testament of Moses, the second is the testament of Christ. God has furnished the world two lawgivers, viz., Moses and Christ, and under these lawgivers we have two classes of inspired men, the prophets under Moses and the apostles under Christ. And from these divine leaders, and their bands of inspired men, we have substantially the Bible. Take Moses out of the Old Testament and we have a riddle, take Christ out of the New Testament and we have a novel. But we are not under Moses, but are under Christ. We are not the children of Abraham in the flesh, but we are children of Abraham in the spirit. We are not under the law, but we are under the gospel. We are not saved by the typical lamb, without blemish, but we are saved and sealed with the blood of Christ.

Here I must quibble over the appellation “lawgiver” applied to Jesus Christ. Though it is true He gave commandments (I can think of very few expressed as such, though: Matthew 22:37-40; John 13:34 — and the first two of this Law of Christ and the Spirit of Life were a part of the Mosaic law), I gather from John 1:17 and Galatians 3 and Romans 10:4 that He would prefer to be known as a bringer of grace and truth. We are indeed — as you say — under the gospel rather than law.

But we will hear Paul further upon this matter. Now that no man is justified by the law before it is evident. The righteous shall live by faith. Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us. Is then the law against the promises of God? God forbid. For if there had been a law given which could make alive, verily righteousness would have been by the law. But the scripture shut up all things under sin that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe. But before faith came we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterward be revealed, so that the law was our schoolmaster to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But now that faith is come, we are no longer [under] a schoolmaster. “For ye are the sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus, for as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There can be neither Jew nor Greek, there can be neither bond nor free, there can be no male and female, for ye are all one man in Christ Jesus, And if ye are Christ’s, then ye are Abraham’s seed and heirs according to the promise.” (Gal. 3:13, 29).

We are now brought to the New Testament, which when classified, the plan of salvation will become so plain that children can understand it. This book contains three laws, or rules, viz., the law of faith, the law of obedience, and the law of Christian Duty. Matthew, Mark Luke and John are establishing the divinity of Christ, and they take four different lines to prove this proposition, each one writing from his own standpoint and to his respective readers. The four historians show that Christ was the Son of Eve, the Son of Abraham, the Son of David, and that he was the Son of God. And when we have read these divine histories we have been referred to the Old Testament 193 times for prophetic proof, and behold when we follow references the statements are there, hence these two testaments are bound together by the golden threads of inspiration. And when we search his life, his miracles, his death and his resurrection, and to these proofs add the inspiration and the work of the apostles, we have a line of testimony as broad as earth, as deep as the grave, and as high as heaven. And John says, “These things are written that you might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God.” (John 20:30.)

Great-great Grandpa, the term “law of faith” is the only scriptural term among the three you outline (Romans 3:27); the others (the “law of obedience” and the “law of Christian Duty”) having failed to make an appearance in the Bible. The entirety of Romans 3 — indeed of the whole epistle — argues against the idea of the law’s sufficiency to save one. Had you clearly proposed these as principles rather than as law, I might have less to argue about — yet they still seem to be heavily works-oriented. In my era, we can look back on the damage that a works-centered doctrine has done to the faith, as opposed to the opportunities posed by a Christ-centered one.

And the four gospel authors do take pains to emphasize different aspects of Jesus’ Sonship, yet I would have to say that they all speak of His humanity as well as His divinity — especially the Synoptics, which have the emphases on “the Son of Eve, the Son of Abraham, the Son of David.” And I would not lean too heavily on the number 193 as the total number of prophecies of the Christ fulfilled in scripture. Some folks have compiled a good deal more.

Now when a man has become convinced of the divinity of Christ, and convicted of his own sins, he is ready for the question: What must I do to be saved? and for the divine answer he is brought to Acts of the Apostles. Here is the history of the work of the apostles who had been immersed in the Holy Spirit, and sent into all the world to preach the gospel, and here are reports of their work, showing how they converted men, and this is the book from which we learn how to become Christians. Our Savior, in giving to the apostles the authority to preach, says: “All authority in heaven and upon earth is given unto me: Go ye into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature: he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved, but he that disbelieveth shall be condemned.” (Mark 16:16.) And the reports given in Acts inform us that as soon as the people heard and believed, they were baptized immediately, after which they rejoiced. (Acts 2:38, 8:26, 16:19, 34.)

Having been made a believer by the testimonies of the four historians, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, and having become by Acts an obedient believer, having been born of water and of the Holy Spirit, baptized into Christ, he is now ready to hear the law of Christian duty. The first law informs him what to believe in order to become a Christian, the second what he must do to become a Christian, and the third law informs him how to live the Christian life and be saved in heaven. These Epistles of Paul, Peter, James, John and Jude, which, in their direct application, are not for the sinner in the world, but for the household of faith.

Having outlined the Bible and shown its proper classification, we are now ready to speak of some of its blessings and its wonderful influences upon the faithful in this life. The first will be its power.

1. It carries with it a secret power which is wholly unaccounted for, unless we admit that it is divine. And this power will be manifest upon every day life. It will accompany us not only into the sanctuary, upon the Lord’s day, but it will go with the devout man in his store, his fields and his bank. It will call him into the house of prayer and prepare him to worship.

Is this solely the power of the book authored by the Holy Spirit, dear ancestor, or the power of God working in the devout through the testimony of the book as well as the Spirit within?

2. Two young persons make contract in the marriage relation. They marry, and though the young lady has many friends of the opposite sex, she leaves them all for this young man, and though the young man has many young lady associates, he quits them all for her sake, and though they live fifty years, this Book will be the golden cord which will bind them together in the sweetest bond of earth. And what a home they will have all these years, if they will let the Bible govern their conduct.

3. When I was ten, I visited with my parents a community 140 miles distant, in which there was no church, but it had been known many years for whiskey, cards, dancing and horse racing. An uncle of mine and a few other good men had the gospel preached, a few obeyed, and from time to time good preachers visited them. When I became a preacher I began visiting them, once a year. The soil was thoroughly broken and the good seed bountifully sown, and within a few years more than 800 people were gathered in, and dancing and horse racing and card playing there were things unknown.

I am so curious about the name of this community! I wish you had shared it. Yet, as with many of the communities mentioned in scripture, there may be no surviving trace of this influence for good. Certainly there was an era in which the acts you name must have been regarded by polite society as the most dreadful of sins, but Great-great Grandpa, these seem quaint and relatively innocent to my peers. Was it because the word preached was against sin yet not for the righteousness of God imparted by Christ’s blood?

4. In a little city there are many powers brought to bear upon the wicked people — the municipal authority, the judge, the lawyers, the justices, the sheriff, the constables, with three to ten sessions of court each year — and will all these powers keep order? Thieves and gamblers and crooks of various kinds swarm into the city. But if some good preachers and just a few good men start the preaching of the gospel, the atmosphere quiets down, and, sirs, if all the people would take the New Testament and live it out perfectly, people could sleep with their doors unlocked, and without weapons under their pillows.

5. In order to [protect] safety of life and property, say nothing as to peace, our government must have a standing army, a navy, a penitentiary, and sometimes two in each state, a jail in each county seat, courts, judges, lawyers and thousands of law books, but if all men would abide just the New Testament, we might disband the army, tear down every penitentiary and jail, take the locks off our doors, and put away our weapons, and rest at night in peace! It is the power of God unto salvation, and it saves our souls!

But the Bible is a safe book. There are books the husband would not wish his wife to read, and there are many mean and immoral books the wife would not wish her husband to read. There are books you would not wish your children to read, but the Bible is not one of them. The Bible is a safe book in the hands of the President, of Congressmen, of Senators, of lawyers, of citizens, of neighbors, of parents and of children, and it is dangerous to none — no, not ONE.

I am uncertain how “safe” the Bible really is. Even in our era, only the bravest few will explore the Song of Solomon from the pulpit … or discuss the obliteration of entire peoples by God’s hand or His people’s armies … or investigate other aspects of divine sovereignty that still rock the foundations of our faith today. In our era, we have seen the Bible’s scripture used to justify all kinds of evil, especially when verses are lifted out of their context and given new, alien meanings by the interpretation of wicked people with selfish agendas. How safe is the Bible? It is only as safe as the one reading from it. Yet we are promised a Spirit to assist us with this task beyond our ken, if we would but ask.

But another objector says: “You Protestants can’t agree on what the Bible teaches.” Perhaps he has not considered the real source of division among the professed followers of Christ, or what it is they are differing over. Do not be surprised when I tell you we are almost perfectly agreed as to what the Bible contains, but the things we are quarreling about are the things not in the Bible. At first thought you may say this is a mistake, but it will be easy to convince you that it is true. Let us see: A penitent man wishes to be baptized, he and a preacher go out to where there is much water, they both go down into the water, the candidate is buried in the water, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, and they come up out of the water. Now who says that man has not been scripturally baptized? There is not an intelligent man in the United States who regards authority, who will say he has not been lawfully baptized. Why? Because this is in the Bible. But if the most intelligent preacher will argue that to sprinkle a few drops of water upon the person is also baptism, will he show you where such can be found in the New Testament? He will not venture to do so. Why? Because he knows there is no such scripture.

Ah! This begins, I see, a tirade which will accuse and lambaste a broad percentage of the Christian population whose interpretations differ with yours, Great-great Grandpa. (Though many who followed you would have begun it by recoiling at being called “Protestant” to begin with, as if part of a denomination.) Those who disagree either do not regard authority, are not intelligent, or are not a part of the United States (or some combination/totality thereof). Does this approach to the argument really do it justice? Does it address in a kind, teaching way the beautiful deep meaning of baptism and thereby provide an excuse to segue into the truth of Christ’s death, burial and resurrection providing for our own death to sin, immersion in water and into His life, and ultimate resurrection as first a new person and ultimately an immortal one?

But what is the name by which the followers of Christ should be called? Two names are found in the New Testament, disciples and Christians, but the name disciple does not apply as the family name. While John the Baptist, the twelve and the seventy were getting out materials for the church which Jesus built, their converts were properly called disciples — learners — but after the church was built, the followers were divinely called Christians. And now let us show that all recognize this name as divine. It is not offensive to the Presbyterian to tell him he is no Baptist. This no more offends him than to tell him he is not a blacksmith. It does not offend the Friend Quaker to tell him he is not a Methodist. They each care no more for the name by which some other sectarian body is called than to tell them they are not Modern Woodmen. And why is this? Because they all know these modern names are all human. But you tell any one of them that he is not a Christian, and see how he squirms. They know his is divine, and yet they each hold as tenaciously to their human names as if Paul were a Presbyterian or Peter were a Baptist.

Yet while Christians were first so-called at Antioch — perhaps divinely — it is equally possible that they were so-named pejoratively … and that would almost certainly hold true in the century of persecution to follow.

For the last half century there has been a terrific war over music in the divine worship. Now what caused this wrangle? Let us see. A band of worshipers meet in the sanctuary to worship, each one is furnished a song book, a hymn is announced, all sing with the spirit and with the understanding; is this divine worship? There is not a dissenting voice. Why? Because it is thus written in the Bible. But up come a few fidgety, ignorant, heady and likely impious members, and introduce the instrument, a number of the intelligent, faithful and loyal brethren object to the instrument, and we have a wrangle, a war. Now what is this fuss about and who caused it? Who are causing this musical war all over the country? Is the Bible responsible for it? Ask Mr. Garrison, of St. Louis, who are the guilty ones. We are warring over a thing unknown in the New Testament, and no people on earth know it better than our apostate brethren know it. And since the faithful have rung this in their ears a thousand times, and they refuse to hear, what kind of sentence to do they look for in the great day?

Here, Great-great Grandfather, you have offered no scriptural foundation for your position on instruments of music in worship … offering instead only insults for those who practice it with them, and judgment, and condemnation. (And compliments for those who practice worship without them.) With all due respect, my ancestor, this is beneath your dignity and the dignity of any follower of Christ. How was your position rung in the ears of those who opposed your view? Was it privately, as Aquila and Priscilla conversed with Apollos (Acts 18:26)? Did anyone go to them at all (Matthew 18:15-17) or were some steps in the process conveniently skipped so that it all went public in “brotherhood” publications first — and in tones that spoke of anything but brotherhood? I realize that the hurts of this division were fresh and real and sometimes personal in your day. Yet this approach is just meanness — and I am persuaded that the writer of Ecclesiastes would deem it “meaningless.”

But this is a comforting book, it brings a streak of sunshine into the heart of the poor man as he toils in the fields, or in the shops, for his bread. When the father returns from the funeral of his wife, and sits down with his half dozen children in mother’s room, and looks at the empty armchair, and then at the faded dresses, Oh, what is the source of consolation to him then? What is the book he would have read at the funeral, and who would he have to read it?

1. When the young man leaves home, what book will mother put in his suit case?

2. When the happy young bride and groom begin life, what book do they need first?

3. When a man fails in business, and his friends desert him, what book will give him comfort?

4. When the young man starts into business, what book does he most need?

5. When grandpa has reached his eightieth milestone, and grandma and half of his children, and nearly all his early associates, are in their graves, and he feels that he is now only in the way, what book will give him comfort then?

6. When your children get to be five, buy each of them a Bible, and see that they read a lesson from it every day.

Dear ancestor and brother, there are many worthy thoughts in this message. A lot of them survive the language and circumstances of a century ago. I understand some of the circumstances of your era, and its analytical focus on the Bible. At the same time, this message missed many opportunities to be gospel. It gives short shrift to the Savior in favor of the medium. It is not the Bible which saves souls, but the Christ. The power is not in the pages, but in the blood.

Whether classified and divided up into dispensations by man or unified by the eternal purpose of God, the Bible conveys the Story of God and us, culminating in gospel of Jesus Christ, His Son. Scripture looks forward to Him, looks directly at Him, looks back on Him, looks forward to His glorious return. It is not solely law any more than God is solely justice and righteousness. The Bible brings the message of grace and reconciliation, as surely as God is also loving and merciful — throughout all of scripture.

I am not at all certain that your era, Great-great Grandpa, was ready for — or would have accepted — a Jesus Hermeneutic. I’m not at all certain that mine is. But I am convinced that we need to adopt it, and soon, if we wish to recapture the true power of partnership with God found in scripture and delivered through the promised Holy Spirit:

  • I became a servant of this gospel by the gift of God’s grace given me through the working of his power. ~ Ephesians 3:7
  • For I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God that brings salvation to everyone who believes: first to the Jew, then to the Gentile. ~ Romans 1:16
  • I will not venture to speak of anything except what Christ has accomplished through me in leading the Gentiles to obey God by what I have said and done — by the power of signs and wonders, through the power of the Spirit of God. So from Jerusalem all the way around to Illyricum, I have fully proclaimed the gospel of Christ. It has always been my ambition to preach the gospel where Christ was not known, so that I would not be building on someone else’s foundation. ~ Romans 15:18-20
  • For no one can lay any foundation other than the one already laid, which is Jesus Christ. ~ 1 Corinthians 3:11

Sermons and Chimes: Introduction

/ W. Keith Brenton / 7 Comments

Alfred Ellmore, my Great-Great GrandfatherI would like to give you a free book, upon the condition that you pay for it. Not a great deal, it sounds like, but you will not be paying money; you will only have to pay attention to my reactions to the book as I share it. Oh, I guess you could ignore them, and just read the indented parts written by the original author. My feelings won’t be hurt.

Because the original author was my great-great grandfather Alfred Ellmore, and the full name of the tiny volume (7-1/2″ x 5-1/2″ x 3/4″) is Sermons, Reminiscences Both Pleasant and Sad, and Silver Chimes. (That was too long to appear on the binding.) The copyright, now long expired under existing law, is 1914 by G.H.P. Showalter for Firm Foundation Publishing House, Austin, Texas.

I have blogged about him before (link above), but that was before I recently acquired this work of his (the first I’ve been able to read in its entirety) via the seller’s market at Amazon.com. I want to comment on this quaint work as it has some ideas worthy of highlighting and merit, as well as some which deserve further examination and even criticism. I’d like for my comments to take the form of a conversation with my dear ancestor. My feelings toward him are unchanged, though some of my suspicions have been confirmed and I do not agree with everything that he bequeathed me in ink: I love and respect the gentleman as a brother in Christ as well as an accomplished ancestor.

If you received a publication from Pepperdine University called Pacific Church News this week, it likely featured a smaller reproduction of the D.S. Ligon Portraiture of Restoration preachers from the early part of the twentieth century, and Alfred’s picture is among those first 196 and subsequent 260 gospel preachers from Churches of Christ. (Also, next to him, his son/my great grandfather Will Ellmore. Early versions of the print misspelled their last names, which were later corrected to include the extra “L” that Alfred — according to legend — added.)

But I will let you get acquainted with him through the geniality of his publisher:

INTRODUCTION

To incline the erring into paths of rectitude, to impel wayward and sinful humanity to lives of righteousness in the sight of God, and to inspire all men — the good and pure, the bad and those who are out of the way — to stronger faith and brighter hope and nobler living, and to do this in kindness, in patience and in love is a service well worth the time and effort and thought of any one. Alfred Ellmore has spent almost a half century in the gracious and exalting work of turning souls to Christ. In this he has been remarkably successful. Few men among the disciples of Christ have baptized more people. His strong faith, deep and abiding piety and fervent love have carried him through many vicissitudes and have borne him up through seasons of adversity. Sunshine and sorrow have been blended in his life. He has passed through the deep dark vales of adversity and has emerged a stronger, greater, better man.

The following pages represent the rich gleanings of a long life and are offered the public on their own merit. The author brings forth from memory’s treasures many interesting lessons from the recent past. His vivid recitals of what he has seen and heard and learned will help others who are younger and who must pass through similar experiences. His sermons are strong, clear and convincing — they are soul-winners. The author is blessed in contemplation of that sweet promise: “They that shall be wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament, and they that turn many to righteousness, as the stars forever and ever.” [Daniel 12:3]

G.H.P. Showalter
Austin, Texas, December 1, 1914

I take Bro. Showalter at his word; that my great-great grandpa Alfred did indeed turn souls to Christ – though I have to wonder as I read the work that follows how many were turned to Christ or simply to the Church or to the Bible or to a hopefully-logical argument or a plan. I cannot judge this, so I will not.

You’ll immediately perceive from this introduction the quaint language of the works of this era — this one now going on 100 years old — and later, you’ll catch on to a frequent reliance on what at least sounds logical and a rather argumentative style of presentation. Oh, and a passionate manner of presenting a plea to obey.

Sermons and Chimes is divided into the three sections betrayed by the (long) title, and I will attempt to present them here in that order. “Sermons” and “Reminiscences” are self-explanatory; the “Chimes” are simply newspaper-column material which, I suspect, were used in the publications for which Alfred wrote, including the Gospel Advocate. They were the Twitter tweets and Facebook posts of more than a century ago.

I have elected to let typographic errors stand as printed, except where obvious omissions and other errors obscure the meaning; those will stand in [brackets] — like the added Bible citation above. References which have become unclear by the march of years I will attempt to link to explanatory material on other sites.

So, over the next few weeks, enjoy a revealing look backward — and enjoy your free book!

___________

Alfred Ellmore occupies the twenty-ninth chapter of V. Glenn McCoy’s tome Return to the Old Paths, readable online at this link.

What Not to Preach, Reconsidered

/ W. Keith Brenton / 14 Comments

A further thought on some previous posts (such as “What Is The Purpose of Preaching?”, “What Should We Preach?”, and “Preaching Jesus”) …

“Yet when I preach the gospel, I cannot boast, for I am compelled to preach. Woe to me if I do not preach the gospel!” ~ 1 Corinthians 9:16

I can’t believe that in all those posts, I missed quoting this perspective from Paul. The context is his right to receive financial support from those who heard the gospel from him, and his refusal to exercise it in order to preserve his integrity as a preacher and apostle.

I find this a poignant extension of his expressed resolve:

“For I resolved to know nothing while I was with you except Jesus Christ and him crucified.” ~ 1 Corinthians 2:2.

A good rule of thumb.

So my answer to the question “What is the purpose of preaching?” would be phrased like this, I think:

To draw people closer to God through Jesus Christ.

There might well be a dozen better ways to phrase it, but for me this is the essence. Teaching is important, but if it doesn’t lead people closer to God through Christ, it doesn’t really qualify as good news (news, maybe) or gospel (because if it doesn’t involve Christ, it isn’t gospel), or preaching (because if it doesn’t involve gospel, it isn’t preaching).

I understand that this is a tedious and one-sided definition, and we can wheedle each other about it all we want to – but when all is said and nothing’s done, it’s what I strongly and deeply believe is the commonly understood definition of “preaching” among the believing proclaimers of century one.

What they preached and proclaimed was Christ, and Him crucified and risen – plus what I tend to think of as “the ongoing Story of Christ”: the effect of His gospel on the lives of His followers. That, too, is gospel (Acts 11; 15:12; 21:10-20).

I think they would have viewed the spending of too much proclamation and preaching time on anything else was not a worthwhile use of it. Some might well have thought time spent that way would have been too close to sharing men’s teachings, philosophy, controversy, genealogies, useless talk, and what is falsely called “knowledge.”

Heretics of that time were those who taught something other than the gospel, as nearly as I can tell.

So if I’m ever asked to preach again, I believe my rule of thumb about what not to preach will be: anything that is not – in one way or any other – the gospel.

Correct me if I’m wrong.

What do you think?

Possibility vs. Promise

/ W. Keith Brenton / 63 Comments

Who among us would be willing to admit that they really, really want to believe in a Jesus who says, “If you have never heard of me – no matter how kind and loving and generous you are – if you have never heard of me, I will see to it that you fry in hell forever”?

I do, in fact, believe in Him; that He is the Son of God. But I do not believe His Word reveals Him to have said any such thing — either in His life here, or through the writers inspired by His Holy Spirit.

Yet many believers insist that this is what He means … placing an unbearably heavy burden on both the hearer to speak and convert, and upon the willing listener to hear where no one has spoken. What He says is that all come to the Father by Him, will be judged by Them, according to what they have said and done.

Belief in Him is never listed as some sort of prerequisite for those who have never heard of Him. It is, however, described as the naturally-expected response of those who have.

And for the believer, there is a promise of reconciliation with God and unending life that is never described as an impossibility for those who have never heard. That’s where the importance of the gospel resides: in transforming what’s possible to what’s promised.

I don’t know of anyone who would not exchange the possibility of receiving a treasure of immeasurable value for the promise of receiving it from Someone who lives and believes in them to spend it wisely and well.

Once they hear about it.

I think it’s time to put to rest the twin but oppositional misconceptions lies of universalism and the damnation of all souls who have never heard of Him.

One leads to an unhealthy disregard for the importance of living to please God and win others’ hearts with Christ’s love.

The other leads to an unhealthy arrogance about one’s salvation and an unhealthy presentation of God’s nature as uncaring toward those He does not choose to bless with messengers of His promise.

Both can sabotage the purity of that message as stated in scripture and its effectiveness, and I am convinced that Satan likes nothing better than doing so by distorting the Word through extremes of interpretation arrived at by great flaws of logic.

What God Wants/Doesn’t Want For Us

/ W. Keith Brenton / 1 Comment

Those of us who believe in God often believe ourselves into one of two categories of faith: that God is perpetually angry and predominantly just or that God is constantly loving and always mercifully forgiving everything.

God number one just gives us laws, and if we don’t deduce them correctly and obey every one of them to the letter, we are eternally-conscious ash on the funeral pyre of hell. He expresses what He wants from us; what He wants for us to do.

God number two wants everyone to be saved, so no matter what we do and how heinous it is He will just mushy-hug us all into His heavenly home anyway. He expresses preferences for us rather than commands, and in the end it doesn’t matter whether we’ve lived up to them or not.

These naive extremes result from the logical fallacy that since these concepts of God seem oppositional to us, only one can be true. Nuh-uh. They could both be false. They could both have roots in truth. They might not be oppositional at all – and they aren’t.

I believe God is both merciful and just — and I’ve blogged about the reasons and the scriptures enough that I’m not going back over than road again here. I believe that what He expresses toward us are not merely commands or preferences … but the loving instructions and promises of what He wants for us.

What He tells us to be and do is what is ultimately best for us, and He tells us because He is righteous (it’s simply the right thing for a parent to do!) and because He loves us.

Angi and I have raised our kids well into teen-age now. If we’ve done our treasured job well, Matt and Laura will continue to make wise decisions that build their future and their relationships with others. The time for mere commandments is over; those were necessary when they were little and unable to make wise decisions yet for lack of experience. We rewarded obedience; we punished disobedience. Now that is becoming unnecessary; as they increasingly shoulder the responsibilities of life, life itself applies discipline. We do not intervene to remove the consequences of their choices because we love them and want them to grow in the directions that they choose.

Let’s pretend.

Let’s pretend that Angi and I had also been the parents of an older child and she had been our first. This child had helped us care for and nurture and teach the younger two, loved them as surely as we did, and in an unfortunate incident whose portent the younger children could not fully understand — a dare, perhaps — she had rescued the two of them from certain death … yet lost her own life in the effort.

What would we want for our remaining children from then on?

I think I’d want them to remember their older sister fondly. I’d want them to understand and appreciate how much she had loved them and was willing to give up for them. I want them to know that I still loved them as dearly as ever; that I did not blame them for her death.

I would want for them to live their own lives reflecting a growing love toward others, love that gives and never looks back. I would want them to be willing to tell stories about her to others; repeat stories that she had told them when they played school and she was their teacher.

I would want them to get to know her friends better and spend some time with them so they would know more about her; to sing her favorite songs when they got together to remember her. I’d want them to know everything I believe about where she is now and how and why.

I would still want them to grow up, find a mate for life they can love, bless, and be blessed by as much as I have and have been with their mom. It’d be great if they had their own kids, too!

There are all kinds of things that I would not want for them; things that would warp and distort and could yet destroy their lives, even after being rescued once before. Every parent knows what those things are.

And, of course, I would want / not want these things for them because I believe they are the things God wants and does not want for His children. He expresses His relationship to us as “Father,” and He did so through His Son. The comparison between the perfectly merciful and just God and the fatally-flawed person that is me is infinitely distant, I know.

But as I have confessed many times, I am an unabashedly simple-minded person. And an analogy like this “let’s pretend” helps me understand a little better His nature, His love, His righteousness, His justice, His mercy.

It helps me understand who He is, and what He wants – and doesn’t want – for me.

What is the Purpose of Preaching?

/ W. Keith Brenton / 17 Comments

That’s it. Just a question. It’s a question that I’m not sure I’ve ever heard posed, or answered. So although I have some thoughts, they are germinal rather than terminal. I have no agenda other than curiosity: I really want to know what you think.

What is the purpose of preaching?

When Is A Sermon Not A Sermon?

/ W. Keith Brenton / 13 Comments

I am not normally this combative. In fact, I’ve taken a bit of a sabbatical from blogging because the combative nature of the comments section has become increasingly repulsive and seductive to me. I can’t explain the contradiction; it’s just there.

But yesterday I managed to get myself in up to my neck on the microblogging platform Facebook. There, a simple question from Wade Hodges turned into a bit of a go-round.

Wade just asked:

True or False: Cutting 5 minutes of content from most sermons would improve them greatly.

And I answered:

I think if the objective is a better sermon, then the greatest improvement to most sermons would be to draw them to a close on the subject of Jesus, the Christ. I don’t really care if there’s an altar call/invitation or not – if the message doesn’t have some pertinent connection to Christ, it’s not a sermon; it’s just another lecture. And the speaker has wasted his/her own time and that of the audience.

Another reader responded:

There is more to preaching than just Christ…. as silly as that sounds. What about teaching? What if a sermon was on the 3rd person of the Godhead? Do you conclude talking about Christ? Some things can be taught separate from Christ to give perspective on the matter. Other things, (Adam/Eve, Grace, Life, and redemption) cannot be explain completely without Christ. But to explain sin and the ramification of sin, I wouldn’t have to talk about Christ.

I answered,

Respectfully, H—–, I disagree. If you talk about sin, you must talk about grace and redemption, and you can’t really talk about grace and redemption without talking about Jesus. If you talk about the Godhead, you can’t avoid talking about Jesus. If you talk about the first Adam, there’s no good reason you should leave out the last Adam. If the purpose of preaching is to bring others closer to God through Christ, you cannot leave out Christ.

He returned with:

W. Keith Brenton- I could preach a 2 hour sermon on the origins of sin, without any fluff whatsoever, and never say a word about Christ. Moses knew a LOT abo…ut sin, but knew nothing of the Christ (very little that was foretold, but nothing specific- just the promises) So I am confident in saying that I you do not always have to go back to Christ.

I posed this question:

Again, respectfully, H—–: How would that be different from ant lecture that a Jewish history professor might deliver at Hebrew University?

Another reader, K——- added:

You make some good points Howard but I’ve got to agree with W Keith here. Any sermon without Christ is just a lecture, better suited for a class you can take if you’re interested in the subject. As his disciples we are to imitate him and …make new disciples “teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you” (somehow we tend to neglect this second part of Jesus’ command and see conversion/baptism as the end of the process–different conversation) The church is to be about making new disciples and you can’t do that if you don’t talk about him often and with obvious love for him and passion for his glory so we come to love what he loves. This should be expressed from the pulpit. “He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or rulers or authorities–all things were created through him and for him. And he is above all things, and in him all things hold together. And he is the head of the body, the church. He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in everything he might be preeminent. For in him all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell, and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether on earth or in heaven, making peace by the blood of his cross” How can you not preach him, sing him, talk about him, think about him!

Still another, B—, had this to say:

Jesus’ sermons rarely talked about Jesus.

I responded:

Well, if I were Jesus, I could teach with authority and wouldn’t need to quote him. In fact, I could do miracles and would live sinlessly. I would talk about God and, oh, I’d say things like “Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day” and “Whoever lives and believes in me will never die.” I’m sorry; what was the point you were making, B—?

Wade tried to defuse my antagonism:

Wow. I guess sermons aren’t the only things that sometimes go a bit longer than necessary. 🙂

B— responded:

Keith, my point, though I love to preach about Jesus, is that you are overstating your case. I think we get your point, but not all sermons have to be about Jesus to be connected to Him or to point people to Him. It’s all connected to Him because it’s from Him. But according to your statements here, the sermon on the mount was a waste of time for Jesus and His hearers.

Unfortunately, I could not let that pass unanswered:

Forgive me, Wade, for chewing up more pixels, but Brad’s charges demand a response. I never said every sermon has to be about Jesus to point people to Him. But you can’t make His name known among those listening who may not know it by failing to even mention it. Virtually all of scripture points to Him. The evangelist’s challenge is to uncover how for his/her listeners; go a little deeper. Second, no twist of logic can make what I’ve said mean that the sermon on the mount was a waste of time. It was all about Jesus: who He was and what He did and how we can be like Him. I guess what’s really shocking to me is that folks are defending the right to preach a Jesus-free sermon. What’s the blinkin’ point of that, except to leave the audience blinkin’ and wonderin’ why they came to listen to it? I confess I am frankly jealous of people who have more opportunities to speak. I’m on the ministry support staff of a good-sized church (about 2,000). I’ve been asked to speak twice in the last five years. Every chance I get, I’m going to preach Christ and Him crucified – either directly or indirectly – because people who don’t know Him need to and people who know Him should never tire of hearing more about Him. The length of that message will depend entirely on what needs to be communicated about Him. I’m not going to squander any opportunity. People I listen to who have a burning in their bones about Him — I don’t tire of listening to them. That, I think, was what I was originally trying to say in response to Wade’s question.

I guess it’s just not negotiable with me. A sermon isn’t a sermon if it doesn’t come around to the subject of Jesus Christ. I may well be guilty of overstatement. I don’t think so. I don’t think that Paul, or Peter, or Stephen would think so. But I have no way of knowing that for certain.

So I ask you:

When is a sermon not a sermon?

Granny-Driving

/ W. Keith Brenton / 9 Comments

Okay, I admit it. I have become a shameless granny-driver.

I blame it on The Egg, my Prius hybrid.

Toyota put a heads-up readout on the dashboard that you can set to display your estimated MPG as you drive. It’s like a challenge, and it’s a challenge that I am not too wimpy to back down from.

When I drive, I try to make that readout go as high as I can.

Sometimes, that means some granny-driving. You know: 35 m.p.h. in a 35 m.p.h. zone (because the battery-powered EM mode can get you going that fast). Full stops at stop signs (so the gas motor will cut off). Coasting down hills willy-nilly and braking at speed bumps (it charges the battery array). Slow acceleration to speed rather than jackrabbit starts and anticipating stop signs and red lights by backing off the accelerator immediately (which will improve gas mileage in any car, hybrid or not).

I generally granny-drive on my way to work and on my way home. I take a little-used route through a pleasant housing development with low m.p.h. signage anyway. My route features a nicely-landscaped country club golf course, lots of private gardens, lovely homes, friendly joggers and walkers. I enjoy the drive. I don’t rush. I leave in plenty of time, and I don’t need to rush.

I don’t granny-drive all the time. I don’t granny-drive when there’s traffic pushing from behind. (Oh, all right, maybe the odd Jaguar or Hummer.) And I don’t granny-drive to be obnoxious. (Usually. Hey, there are two lanes, and no center lines!)

I granny-drive to get good mileage. And I succeed!

Coming back to work from lunch today, the readout was 63.5 MPG.

20110727-092831.jpg
Your results may vary.

Reality Bites

/ W. Keith Brenton / 3 Comments

I don’t mean to be flippant with this title, but there are moments in life when reality hits you between the eyes — sometimes between the lips — and those moments often impact me during communion.

When that morsel of bread contacts the tongue, yields to being pierced and broken and crushed, the reality of what it represents can be almost too much to bear.

Then it goes inside and becomes a part of us, giving energy and life … it’s bread, the staff of life, you know … and it gives us life to remind us that Jesus wants to live within us and give us life. Not just stingy morsels of life, but abundant life; eternal life. Life to be fully lived, by turning it over to Him.

He serves us this bread, which is Himself. He reminds us that to live life fully, abundantly, you serve others and you serve them yourself.

Then He pours out His blood for us, and we remember it in small measure through the cup. It courses through us and becomes a part of us. It gives us that life, just as it gave Him life when it coursed through His veins, in a way we’ll perhaps never fully understand in this life. But the measure is enough for us to understand that in serving others and serving them ourselves, a small measure may be all we can give but it is never enough; to be like Him, it must be all or nothing at all.

All the body must be given over to service to others; all the blood in the heart; all the will of the mind; all the devotion of the soul. And when we have fed even the least of these, we have fed Him.

It is a reality that bites and gnaws and yearns for us wholly in the tiny morsels of bread and sips from the cup.

But it is His reality.

And it outlasts, outloves and outlives any other.

Almighty God, Traffic Cop

/ W. Keith Brenton / 8 Comments

Yesterday, I read an essay defending the proposition that all who have not heard the gospel are automatically lost and condemned to hell. Its main “Aha!” was the metaphor that God is merely a traffic cop enforcing law, and ignorance of the law is no excuse.

How insulting to the divine nature of the omnipotent, omniscient, loving God, who gave law for the benefit of His creation, then supplanted it with the grace of Christ when we proved ourselves unworthy and incapable of obeying it and treating each other well!