J N Darby, sectarian despot., 1855. what has changed? AMENDED

The paragraph below is taken from a pamphlet titled," a statement of fact [in reference to certain charges made by a Mr D against some of the family of Mr G ],

"Thus have we accomplished oar melancholy task, which, if it be the
recital of a dark story, is to us most so in the evidence that it offers of the
thraldom of superstition, that power which most unnerves and prostrates the
human mind. It is by and through this power that all the details of this
shocking narrative have their existence; for it is certain that no such events
could have taken place, except in a position where there existed that
dreadful and mysterious fascination of sectarian despotism. The relative
position of religious ruler and subject must first be created, the mind must
first be divested of its natural safeguard of common sense and reason—must
first have been broken down into servile obedience and absolute subjugation,
before the possibilities of such occurrences could exist. In what family,
free from this fascination, would such a latitude have been conceded to any
friend, however long tried and established in the confidence of the parents ?
But in cases like this, the answer would be: “ Oh, it was our spiritual
director whom we trusted; our teacher, our prophet, our angel, our oracle,
our man of God.” Then, when it is too late, the evil is discovered, and a
conflagration of mischief is lighted, the end of which no one can foresee."

This relates to events at the home of Mr and Mrs G, in Bath, where J N Darby, while staying as a guest, persuaded his host to allow their sixteen year old daughter to visit his bedroom at 4 am each morning "to be taught French".

The whole may be read by entering the title in Google search box. A link will appear. Click on it and then you will be invited to sign in to, or open an account with,  Google Play
This gives immediate access to thousands of out of print books. Read online. You don't need to download them

I have added a new blog titled Waymarks Back Numbers. It can be found under www.waymarksbacknumbers.blogspot.com or via my complete profile.
Or by the link below
  Waymarks Back Numbers

My 59th New Birth Day

Fiftynine years ago, on this day, 15th October, at approximately 9.15 pm I trusted Christ as my Saviour. I knew it that night, that my sins were all forgiven. I know it today. The night of my conversion remains ever fresh within my soul.
I must have the Saviour with me for I dare not walk alone.

Ron.

Stark Road Gospel Hallers twist words of Christ

Our attention has been drawn to the Stark Road Gospel Hall, Michigan, website.

A proclamation is made on this website: "We believe the Bible is God's Word".
This appears to give a measure of legitimacy to their statement of belief. But what bible they refer to is unknown.  Quotes they make are foreign to the word of God.

quote 1. (The Lord answers the question, art Thou the Son of God?)
Stark: "you are right in saying I am,"
This is a lie.  The Lord replied, Ye say that I am.  Luke 22: 70

quote 2. Stark:  "Before Abraham was born, I am"
Another lie. The Lord said , before Abraham was, I am. John 8: 56


quote 3. Stark. "He that heareth my word and believeth Him that sent me..."
Third lie. The  Lord said, ....and believeth on him....       John 5: 24
Stark also alters the tense in this verse. Shall not come into condemnation is changed to "does not come into judgment.

These people are not Bible believers.
RS

Assembly dictates. "Obey God? Not while I run the oversight!"

With regard to my blog of yesterday, seen below:

 A further answer to the fallacious scriblings of Marvin Derksen who thinks he sits in Moses' seat

Act 5:27  And when they had brought them, they set them before the council: and the high priest asked them,
Act 5:28  Saying, Did not we straitly command you that ye should not teach in this name? and, behold, ye have filled Jerusalem with your doctrine, and intend to bring this man's blood upon us.
Act 5:29  Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men. 


rs

Clerisy and Cultism rule in Canadian Gospel Halls

Marvin Derksen, writing in Truth and Tidings, October 2014, answers the question,

 “What are sheep to do when the shepherds fail or refuse to obey Scripture and are being lords over God’s heritage? (1 Peter 5: 3)

Derken’s response is to abuse  Scripture and  mock Christ’s teaching. He promotes the cult view of blind submission to those who have gained control of the local church, whether they are good or evil men.

Derken suggests that Diotrephes in 3 John was merely an “overbearing elder” and Gaius “hadn’t left the assembly or mutinied”.  John lets us know Diotrephes was a man of malicious words and was evil.

We understand that Gaius had been kicked out of the church. But by suggesting he had not “mutinied” Derksen implies that Diotrephes was the official oversight and needed to be obeyed.

Diotrephes was casting out of the church any who entertained the Lord’s servants.

Gaius did entertain the Lord’s servants and was commended for it by John. Here is apostolic authority for standing against the dictates of despots.

Derksen has seriously twisted the Scriptures here. But there is worse; he blasphemes Christ.

He says the Lord did not retaliate or threaten. Certainly not, but He called the Pharisees vipers, overturned the tables of the money changers, and called king Herod  that fox.

Derksen wrote that the Lord taught the disciples to submit (to the Pharisees, because they sat in Moses’ seat. This is blasphemous representation of the Lord’s words.

Sitting in Moses’ seat, the Pharisees were responsible for the maintenance of the Mosaic law. Where they taught the observance of such they were to be heeded. Otherwise they were to be ignored. But is Derksen sitting in Moses’ seat? No doubt he would like to think so.

We are disappointed that the editor of Truth and Tidings, A J Higgins,  should allow this monstrous heresy to go to print. But things will get worse yet.

I recommend bellievers to read my blog on elders, below.

RS

The Golden calf of Oversight Lordship

Unquestioning loyalty to oversight is the mark of a cult.

The statement, the oversight must be obeyed, right or wrong, characterises almost every assembly and unifies them all. It negates the view that assemblies are autonomous. I have been told that discipline exercised in one assembly should be recognised by all.

I left the RAF in August,1961 and in October of that year I was commended to the grace of God for the work of the gospel. From 1961 to 1980 I visited more than 200 assemblies and might have thought the vast majority were cloned from the first J N Darby assembly. It was not only seen in the

way they met and the way they conducted their meetings that revealed their sameness. It was foremost in the fact that the oversight were not to be challenged on any ground.

The result is the Brethren Movement (this term is used by Ritchie ltd., so I feel free to use it), now not much more than a cult. It can be no better while carnal men rule assemblies. They are self-reproducing, selecting men of similar vein to join them on the oversight. “The oversight” is another term not found in Scripture.

I add therefore an article on the recognition of elders, written by me some ten years ago.

****

On the Recognition of Elders, being mainly an exposition of 1 Thess 5: 12,13

V.12 And we beseech you, brethren, to know them which labour among you, and are over you in the Lord, and admonish you;

V.13 And to esteem them very highly in love for their work’s sake. And be at peace among yourselves.

The plea “KNOW THEM” is directed to the brethren by the apostle Paul. We do not read, “KNOW US”! The responsibility for recognition lies with the saints. That is, they are to use discernment and understanding as to who their leaders are.

Alas, there have always been men who, in the spirit of Diotrephes, have demanded recognition. They desire the pre-eminence in the assembly of God’s people. No spiritual man will need to make such a demand, for his own life and work will be his commendation and will bring him recognition in the assembly.

Thus the responsibility rests with the saints to give recognition where it is due, rather than with a body of elders seeking to enforce it, for such action is NICOLAITISM (Rev. 2: 6, 15). Nicolaitism ―Victory of the people― is the very root of clerisy from which there was a marked turning away in the latter half of the 19^th century. Now we find a turning back again with men ready to “Lord it” over the saints and many ready to let them.

At Thessalonica the leaders were at first not obvious for it was a new work. They emerged under the leading of the Holy Spirit and so to facilitate their ministry, and for the spiritual health of the assembly Paul besought the brethren to give attention in observing who were actually guiding the assembly. Paul did not supply them with a list of names to be read out at the Lord’s Supper.

So how were they to be known? The answer is plain; they “which labour AMONG you”. So how are they to be known today? One might watch to see who goes along to the oversight meeting but some might go in who were never appointed by the Holy Spirit. They have been voted in or have been selected by some leading brother. Also there may be true elders, labouring among the saints who would be unwelcome at the oversight meeting. A man who asks for or demands a place on the oversight should be regarded with the utmost suspicion. He wants the office without the work ― a mere position seeker. The man who is seen labouring among the saints is the man to recognize.

What is it then to “LABOUR AMONG” the saints? Labour is that toil which requires effort and produces weariness. It is at a premium among the saints today and where it does exist, it goes largely unnoticed. But the labouring elder goes on serving the saints anyway. He does not cry out to be noticed, but his work is assisted by those who, appreciating his labour in the word, give him their full support.

An example of such labour is seen in 1 Cor. 16: 15. It is ministry. Essentially it is serving the saints, supplying first of all to their spiritual needs. Thus an aptitude for teaching will be revealed in their labour (1 Tim. 3: 2, Titus 1:9). How strange that some expect to lead the saints but are never heard giving a word of ministry. Much of the labour will also be spent in visiting the sick, the elderly, and any straying sheep. So an elder will be known by what he does and also by his personal character as outlined in 1 Tim. 3.

The next phrase “and are over you in the Lord” has been much misunderstood and abused. Many have used the phrase to justify a hierarchy and to mark off two distinct classes in the assembly, viz; the oversight and the members (laity). That there is no thought of dominion in the phrase is seen in that they labour AMONG (not over) you. The Greek word is proisteemi and is used for one who is a Protector or Guardian;one who oversees, one who gives aid. It is not used in the sense of PRESIDING OVER. It is in the former sense also that the word is used in 1 Tim. 3: 5, “If a man know not how to rule his own house...” (Not in a sense of a rigid authoritarian or despotic approach but in caring, guiding, protecting, feeding, etc) “how shall he take care of the church of God?” And this is what rule is all about in the church of God. So again, a man is recognized as an elder because he is seen to be guiding the church. It goes without saying that he is guiding the assembly in the truth of God’s word.

Titus 3: 8,14 shows us also that proisteemi  is a matter of maintenance and not dominance. The guides maintain the assembly as they would their own families.  

The man whose own children mix freely with the world and with Christendom is hardly in a position to maintain the local assembly. Indeed, we should consider him a fraud, especially if he shared or encouraged his children’s activities.

The final thing in this verse concerning elders is that they “ADMONISH YOU”. The same Greek word is translated “WARN” in v.14. That is, they are to be continually “PUTTING YOU IN MIND” ― of what? The Scriptures! For says Paul, “these things are written for our admonition.” So the elders are men of the Book who know the Book. A mark of false men is that they give appearance of knowing the Book but they falsely interpret it and often publicly criticise it. We are not required to recognize such despite what pretentious claims they may make for themselves. We are not expected to recognize the unrecognizable.

We note also from v. 14 that the unruly brother (defined in 2 Thess 3: 6 as the one whose life is contrary to the apostolic tradition) is to be warned (admonished, reminded of the Scriptures) by the BRETHREN. It is not merely a function of the elders to do this. The brethren are exhorted to do this whenever necessary and their authority is the word of God.

Then, and only then, if such a person will not respond to specific appeals of Scripture, the saints are to withdraw from him. This is not the same kind of discipline mentioned in 1 Cor. 5.

Having take n note as to whom the Spirit of God would have us recognize as leaders in the assembly (By their fruits ye shall know them), they are to be esteemed very highly in love. And note this, it is FOR THEIR WORK’S SAKE, It is not for their sake, not so that they won’t feel slighted, but for what they are actually doing in the assembly. We see that recognition has to be earned. It cannot be demanded. It is for  that labour of love that the saints need and so those who are supplying it are themselves esteemed very highly in love because of it.

An example of such labour we noted in 1 Cor. 16: 15 where a whole family had addicted itself to the ministry of the saints. What an addiction! They couldn’t give it up. Many today are addicted to their TV sets or their secular employment and are rarely seen at the meetings unless it should be an oversight meeting (for which there is no Scripture). But those of Stephanus’s house were true shepherds. The evidence was there ―the needs of the saints took priority in their lives.

Paul says “that ye submit yourselves to such”. Here only, incidentally, is the word “submit” (or as it may be rendered, OBEY) used in an authoritarian sense towards SUCH (those who exhibit like character as Stephanus’s family) who are true elders.

To all this we add our AMEN. How gladly and how wholeheartedly will we surrender to those who love us, caring for our souls. and placing our interests before their own, teaching us the word of Truth.

Great News
The Javelin of Phinehas by William Lincoln is now availabe on Google Books.
Google it and read it.

I was first told of this book by T Garrett, an elder in the Onslow Road Assembly, in the '60,s and have waited until today to read it! Tom never read it.
RS

Again, beware Contemporary Worship Music

We posted an article in June this year, warning against Contemporary Worship Music as represented by the Gettys.

R Cargill, in his article “A Goodly Heritage”, Believer’s Magazine, September 2014, writes

“many beautiful, expressive, and Scriptural hymns have been written recently and sung widely.”

He mentions “How deep the Father’s love for us” and “In Christ alone my hope is found”

These are indeed beautiful Scriptural hymns, but R Cargill does not give a warning against them. He claims they are widely sung which we presume will include his own circle of fellowship.

The fish in the river sees the fly but does not see the hook! We attach therefore the comments found on David Cloud’s website:

Stuart Townend is charismatic in theology and radically ecumenical in philosophy, supporting the Alpha program which bridges charismatic, Protestant, and Roman Catholic churches. He is a member of the charismatic Church of Christ the King in Brighton, U.K. and supports the “extraordinary manifestations of the Spirit,” which refers to the demonic/fleshly charismatic mysticism such as meaningless gibberish, spirit slaying, holy laughter, and shaking.

Townend is at the forefront of producing TRANSITION SONGS and BRIDGE SONGS designed to move traditional churches along the contemporary path toward Christian rock. From the perspective of the CCM artists involved in this, they aren’t doing anything sinister. They are simply and sincerely trying to “feed” the “broader church.” But from a fundamentalist Bible-believing position, the effect is to draw “old-fashioned” Bible churches into the contemporary orb, and that is most sinister.

Bridge songs include Townend’s “How Deep the Father's Love for Us” and “In Christ Alone” by Townend and Keith Getty. ̶  David Cloud; wayoflife.org

It may be that R Cargill is an Ecumenist, or just plain ignorant. In any case discerning believers will be very wary of anything published in Believer’s Magazine.

RS

New Blog

I have created a new blog for conversion stories.

See www.uswhicharesaved.blogspot.com

the title is Redeemed of the Lord say so

You are welcome to submit your story for publication.
I don't promise all will be published.

Email to waymarks@ntlworld.com

Hebrews 6: 2

Hebrews 6: 2 updated

Of the doctrine of baptisms (baptismos)

“of the doctrine of washings”    JND

“instruction about cleansing rites”    NIV

“and of instruction about washings”    ESV

The writer to the Hebrew Christians is establishing the importance of not having to return to teaching again the first principles of the faith. The first steps are repentance toward God, faith in Christ, followed by water baptism. The once and for all baptism of the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost is also a basic teaching.

Cleansing rites and washings have nothing to do with the Christian faith. They belong to Judaism.

The Judaizers, warned about by Paul in his epistles, were having a devastating effect on many Jewish converts Thus we see that J N Darby, himself opposed to Christian baptism, continued in the work of the Jadaizers, along with the producers of the modern perversions and parodies of Scripture.

The AV translators were well aware of the alternative translation of baptismos as is revealed in Hebrews 9: 10, which stood , only in meats and drinks, and divers washings (baptismos), and carnal ordinances, imposed on them, only until the time of reformation.

Washings, etc. ceased at Pentecost and therefore could not constitute first principles.