Dr. H. A. Ironside: Reaffirmation of Dispensational Truth

Previously we enjoyed a biography of Dr. H. A. Ironside.  The following is excerpted from Dr. Ironside's book, The Lamp of Prophecy or Sign of the Times: Chapter Four, Reaffirmation of Dispensational Truth. The errors of Covenant Theology has made inroads into some of our Bible college classrooms. I think we do well to be reminded that the Bible is a Dispensational book.

 

Dr. H. A. Ironside

BY THIS SUBJECT I have in mind certain objections that have lately been taken to the dispensational view of the Word of GOD. It has often been said that the dispensational teachers are quite unable to meet the new position, but I really think that most of us have too profound a regard for one or two of the brethren who are leading the new dispensational departure to like to appear in public against them; at any rate, to take sharp issue with them.

 

We realize that in this age men and women who firmly believe in the inspiration of the Word of GOD ought to stand shoulder to shoulder as far as possible. It is always with greatest regret that I take issue with any who love the Lord JESUS CHRIST, who believe firmly in His true deity, who believe in His virgin birth, His sinlessness, humanity, His atoning work, the work of the Holy Spirit in regeneration and sanctification, and the full inspiration of the Word of GOD. We consider that however we may differ on other lines, if they agree with us on these, on our part we don't like to be found apparently in opposition to them. Therefore, many dispensational teachers have felt it hardly wise to say very much about this issue, but in schools such as this school and similar institutions, it is well to make clear our position on dispensational truth and reaffirm it to the students.

For years I have read carefully and prayerfully nearly all the books written from the other side, and I see no reason to change my point of view. The Scriptures are plain on the subject.

Turn to Ephesians 3:1-11:

"For this cause I Paul, the prisoner of Jesus Christ for you Gentiles, If ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me to you-ward: How that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery; (as I wrote afore in few words, Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ;) Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit; That the Gentiles should be fellow-heirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel; Whereof I was made a minister, according to the gift of the grace of God given unto me by the effectual working of his power. Unto me, who am less than the least of all saints, is this grace given, that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ: And to make all men see, what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ: To the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known, by the church, the manifold wisdom of God, According to the eternal purpose - literally - "according to the purpose of the ages." I call attention to that expression. There is in Scripture a doctrine of the ages-GOD working out a very definite purpose of the ages - and we are now living in one particular age, the age of grace. "According to the eternal purpose which he purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord."

Ephesians 1:8-10: "Wherein he hath abounded toward us in all wisdom and prudence; Having made known unto us the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure, which he hath purposed in himself: That in the dispensation of the fulness of time, he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth, even in him."

I have quoted these Scriptures, to which many more could be added, to show in the first place that the word "dispensation" is an eminently Scriptural term. It comes from a Greek word that is translated in four different ways in the New Testament. In these passages and in several others, it is rendered "dispensation." In the Epistle to the Corinthians, chapter 12, it is translated "administration." It is elsewhere rendered "order," and in the Gospel of Luke it is rendered "stewardship." "Give an account of thy stewardship . . . "

 

The only way really to understand our Bible and get things in their places so that we are not in confusion of mind as we read and study is by noticing the various dispensations or administrations or stewardships or other periods that run through the Scripture. But we have recently been told by some prominent writers that this is all a mistake.

 

There is, they declare, no dispensational plan running through the Scripture, or, if there are any dispensations, there are only two - the dispensation of the Old Testament and the dispensation of the New; and that Dr. Scofield and others who have been glad to learn from him, and many great. men who have learned independently of him, are all wrong in thinking that the Old Testament presents a series of dispensations and that in the New Testament we find people passing out of one dispensation into another, and that there is still ahead of us a glorious dispensation of the "fulness of time."

So when a position like this is challenged, we shall examine the foundations again and see if dispensational teaching rests upon any solid basis.

   

First, let us be very clear as to what we mean by a dispensation.

The word simply means the "ordering of a house." It is a word we have taken over bodily into English. The English word "economy" is but the Greek word oikonomia, anglicized, which is translated "dispensation," "administration," "stewardship," or "order."

We know what that word "economy" means. Our statesmen study political economy. What is that? It is the ordering of the affairs of the nation. If the affairs of all nations were ordered just exactly the same way, then the study of international politics would be very simple, but the affairs of nations differ.

 

Take this great country of ours in contrast with Great Britain. We have largely the same civilization. It isn't the easiest thing to tell a Britisher from an American, yet their fundamental systems of governments are altogether different. We base everything on a Constitution. Great Britain has no Constitution. Here is this great government and it rests on its Constitution, while in Great Britain the government rests on tradition. Their body of law has been built up century after century and changes have come very slowly, for the English people are strong for custom, and it is very hard to bring about a change.

 

With us in America, we just put up an Amendment to the Constitution and have the people vote on it, and if endorsed, it is added to the Constitution. Whether we keep the Amendments or not is another thing!

 

The laws of nations differ. Each nation has its own peculiar economy. Now, I might be well versed in American economy and go over to Great Britain and find myself constantly at outs with the people there and yet be perfectly innocent about it. I have been brought up differently, and I don't understand. I have been taught from boyhood in the United States what to do under certain circumstances, but I find I have to learn a new dispensation over there.

 

Our children go to school, especially our girls, and they study domestic economy, which is the ordering of a house or a home.

 

Sometimes I illustrate domestic economy like this:

Suppose a young girl goes out to learn how to become a housekeeper. She takes a position in a certain home. By and by she becomes thoroughly adept and trustworthy. The mistress can depend upon her under all circumstances and feels that Mary knows just how she wants things run, and with a mere word from her, everything is understood. Well, after a few years, Mary feels that she is so proficient that she can get a better position. She is working in a little home where the people are working people who get up early in the morning, so she has to be up at five, have the breakfast ready at 5:30, on the table by 6:00, lunches prepared for the men by 6:30, etc., and she knows exactly how this house is to be run. But now she learns that the big house up yonder on the heights is in need of a housekeeper. They pay more and Mary wants to earn all she can, so she interviews the mistress, and finally, everything being satisfactory, she leaves the one place and goes to work in the mansion.

 

She comes to the new home, and the mistress takes her into the kitchen and says, "Mary, let me tell you now what to do."

 

"Oh, you don't need to bother. I know exactly how a house should be run. I wouldn't have taken this position if I didn't understand how to run a house."

 

"But, Mary, not all houses are run the same way."

 

"Oh, that's all right; you needn't tell me anything.

 

It isn't necessary. You can leave everything to me."

 

So the first morning Mary is up at five o'clock and the gong is duly rung at 5:30. The man of the house jumps up and calls to his wife, "My dear, whatever is the matter? Is the house on fire?"

 

"Why, I don't know," she replies, and rushes to the head of the stairs and calls down, "Mary, what is it?"

 

"Why, mum, it just means that breakfast will be on the table in half an hour."

 

"Breakfast in half an hour! Why, we don't sit down to breakfast here until nine o'clock. What do you mean?"

 

"Why, I mean that they always had breakfast at six o'clock where I have been working."

 

"That's all right, Mary, but I tried to explain to you yesterday that you must learn how to run things in this house. I can't have this sort of thing! Now, do your best until nine o'clock. Ring a rising bell at eight-thirty if you like."

 

Poor Mary bursts into tears because her thriftiness is not appreciated. She learns the importance of dispensational truth.

 

How do we apply this? Some of us remember the time when we read the Bible fervently and devoutly prayed to understand it; but we were always in confusion of mind. Why? Because we were trying to apply the order that prevailed in the house of Israel to the church, the house of GOD, in this dispensation. Then we took the passages that apply to the dispensation of the "fulness of time," when CHRIST will come and "in his own times, show who is that blessed and only potentate, the King of kings and the Lord of lords," and we applied all those passages to the present dispensation, and we couldn't make them fit.

 

I am reminded of the Scotch Covenanters, those good old people among whom were some of my own ancestors. The Scotch Covenanters took their swords and were ready to fight for their religion. They entered into a solemn covenant to oppose Episcopacy and establish Presbyterianism, which they conceived as the only divine religion on earth. They did this with good conscience because they believed that GOD had set up His kingdom now, that JESUS CHRIST is King, and that those who neglected Presbyterianism were the enemies of the kingdom of GOD on earth. They did not understand dispensational truth. Then take Roman Catholicism in the Middle Ages. The church fought with sword and fire to destroy heresy because they did not understand the present age of grace.

 

When you come to the Word of GOD and you recognize this dispensational principle running through the Scriptures, everything opens up in a perfectly marvelous way.

In Ephesians, we have read of "the purpose of the ages." Augustine said, "Distinguish the ages and the Scriptures are plain." I saw a sentence in a book the other day that all this dispensational teaching has come about within the last fifty years. There was never a greater mistake and blunder. Godly men in all the Christian centuries have taught it, but in our day, this light is shining brighter and brighter.
 

DISPENSATION OF INNOCENCE

Going back to the creation of man, we see that GOD placed Adam and Eve in the garden of delight. You can see that the economy under which our first parents were placed in the Garden of Eden was altogether different to the economy under which we are placed in this present day. What was the stewardship committed to Adam and Eve? They were to dress and keep the garden and have authority over all creation. The beasts were brought to Adam and whatever he called them, they were named. All was subject to them, but there was one stipulation - they were not to eat of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

 

That was their stewardship. That was the dispensation of innocence. Who would say for a moment that that dispensation, that stewardship, that administration fits with ours? They failed in their stewardship and were turned out. "Give an account of thy stewardship," the master says to the servant. "Give an account of thy dispensational responsibility." So they were turned out and that dispensation ended.
 

DISPENSATION OF CONSCIENCE

Take them outside of the garden - from the garden to the flood. Who would dare to say that the same dispensation, the same stewardship, the same administration was committed to the patriarchs in those so far distant millenniums as to us? For instance, we have no record of a Bible, a written revelation, though there may have been one. We are told by Jude that Enoch prophesied concerning the second coming, so there may have been some written record, but as far as we know, writing was not invented before the flood. We have no record of any inspired Bible of any kind before the writings of Moses. The Book of Job may or may not have been written before Moses. Enoch's prophecy may simply have been spoken.

 

It is certain that they had no body of rules and regulations in regard to conduct as we have in the law. The great thing that seems to stand out in that dispensation is that men now had conscience. They were able to discern between good and evil, and they were held responsible by GOD to choose the good and reject the evil. If men sought consistently after the good, GOD revealed Himself to them.

 

Abel, bringing his lamb of sacrifice, we are told in Hebrews, offered it by faith. GOD from time to time revealed Himself to them, but they had no written law, no body of doctrine, no organized church. The line of Seth chose the ways of GOD and the line of Cain chose the path of evil, and the two were separated. One called upon the name of the Lord; the other refused obedience to the revealed will of GOD.

 

We often hear it said by people who don't think things through that we don't need a Bible; men need only to obey the dictates of their consciences. For a period of sixteen hundred years by the Hebrew Version, but nearly two thousand years by the Septuagint, men were left largely to the dictates of conscience. What was the result? Corruption and violence filled the earth. GOD said,

"The only thing to do is to wipe it out with a flood." Thus that dispensation came to an end.
 

DISPENSATION OF HUMAN GOVERNMENT

A dispensation is a period of time, long or short, in which GOD is dealing with men in a different way than He has ever dealt with them before. He dealt with them one way in the garden. He dealt with them differently from the expulsion until the flood. Now, consider the period from the flood to the calling out of Abraham.

 

What difference have we in GOD's way of dealing with men in this period ? We do not yet have a written Bible. We do not yet have a called-out nation nor a called-out church, but we do have something added to check man's natural propensities and hold him in subjection. We now have the principle of human government.

 

GOD constituted Noah the first magistrate, so far as records show, that the world ever knew. We have no word whatever of magistracy before the flood - no divinely given form of government. GOD, Himself, out of love for His creatures, seeing their need of Him, instituted human government. Brutal and wicked men carne into the place of power, but the Apostle tells us that the institution was a divine one. GOD appointed a magistrate, and a new principle came into operation.

 

With all the experience of the past and with the fearful warning of the flood, surely this little company coming out from the ark will remember the past and will be grateful to GOD for the new provision He has made, and will be in subjection to Him, and the authority He has instituted. What is the result? Follow it down, and again if you take the Septuagint, about one thousand years go by and at the end of the first millennium after the flood the whole human race has gone into idolatry. Instead of men obeying conscience and being subject to government and authority, the governors themselves have become apostate.

 

Nimrod, the mighty hunter before the Lord, the hunter of the souls of men, is the first despot and first apostate. We find that men need more than conscience, need more than corrective power of environment and government to turn them to GOD. Of course, in all dispensations, GOD has undoubtedly saved thousands of men for Heaven of whom we have no record in Scripture. I do not suppose that all of the people who lived before the flood were lost eternally. Wherever men in any dispensation have obeyed the light GOD has given them, He has revealed Himself to them so that they could believe and be saved. But the dispensation of government closed in the darkness of idolatry.
 

DISPENSATION OF PROMISE

With the call of Abraham we have the beginning of another dispensation, GOD calling Abraham out from an idolatrous people and revealing Himself and giving the promise of the coming Saviour.

 

Up to that time there had been only one promise given - the primeval promise made in the garden that the serpent should bruise the seed of the woman and He should bruise its head. Men could look forward, as they did undoubtedly, to the coming Seed of the woman, who was eventually to make propitiation for sin.

 

When GOD calls Abraham and tells him, "In thee and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed," He gives Abraham the promise of the coming Saviour. What we may call the dispensation of promise began with Abraham. We have something we have not had before. The old dispensation changes and the new dispensation comes in. GOD is dealing with men in a different way.

 

How were men to be saved now? "Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him for righteousness." "Abraham rejoiced to see my day. He saw it and was glad," said our blessed Lord. He looked forward in faith to the coming Saviour. That dispensation was a brief one. Our definition says "a period of time either long or short."

 

Now, the people of Israel go down into Egypt. They have the promise and are sure of it, and that promise is so well known even in Egypt that the time comes when the man looked upon as the heir to the throne of Egypt, the adopted son of Pharaoh's daughter, considers that promise. I suppose it had been told him by his own mother; we read, "He chose rather to suffer affliction with the people of God than to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season." Why? Because he was ready to assume the reproach of CHRIST. What did Moses know about the reproach of CHRIST? He knew that CHRIST was to come through the despised people, the seed of Abraham, and he said, "I will identify myself with them."
 

DISPENSATION OF LAW

Then we come to the scene on Mount Sinai. Now what? A new dispensation altogether, that of law. The moment the Law is given, GOD has committed an altogether different administration to them. Yet we are told there is only one dispensation in the Old Testament. What did Abraham know about the provision of Law? What did Noah know about the Law before the flood? Nothing whatsoever. They were given something they had never had before.

 

Was the Law given in order that men might be saved? The Law was given even at the very first in order to prove to man his helplessness. GOD always casts man upon His own infinite mercy and grace for salvation.

 

I attended a little church in a country village one Sunday and got there just as Sunday school was convening. I was asked to go into the Bible class. I do not remember the particular chapter they were studying, but the leader put this question: "Class, how were people saved before CHRIST came into the world?"

 

Someone answered, "By keeping the Law."

 

"Exactly," said the leader. He was going on, and I did not, as a stranger, want to interrupt, but I said, "I beg your pardon, but did I understand that correctly? Did you say that people were saved by keeping the Law before CHRIST came into the world?"

 

"Certainly, until CHRIST came that was the only way."

 

"Well, then, what do you do with this verse in Galatians, 'If there had been a law given which could have given life, then verily righteousness would have been by the law'?"

 

"Oh, yes, I hadn't thought of that. Well, class, we were wrong. What other suggestions have you?"

 

Finally a woman spoke up, "Why, by offering animal sacrifices."

 

"Exactly; I think the woman is right. Now, is that satisfactory?"

 

"It would be but for a verse here, 'It is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should put away sin.'

 

"Oh, yes, that's true isn't it? Well, then how do you think that people were saved before CHRIST came into the world?"

 

"Why, exactly as Abraham. He rejoiced to see the salvation of the Lord. He saw it and was glad. They looked on in faith to the Seed of Abraham."

 

Wherever men will honestly judge themselves and repent, GOD will give them light enough to be saved. They were saved through the same sacrifice as that which saved us; they were saved through the coming Saviour as we are through the risen Saviour.

 

David lived in the dispensation of law. David committed a fearful sin, and he cried aloud, "Against thee and thee only have I sinned and done this evil in thy sight." Why did he not hurry down to the temple and offer a sacrifice? "In burnt offerings and sacrifice [for sin] thou hast no pleasure. Purge me with hyssop, and I shall be clean: wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow." He depended upon the infinite sacrifice of the Lord JESUS CHRIST yet to be offered.

 

The dispensation of law did not propose the Law as a means of salvation but proposed the Law as the expression of integrity of heart toward GOD. People honest toward GOD would seek to keep that Law, and failing to keep it, it would impress upon. them their own sinfulness and the need of a Saviour. Paul said, "The law is a schoolmaster to bring us to Christ."

 

Our blessed Lord, when He died on Calvary, cried, "It is finished." What was finished? The work of saving poor sinners was finished. The dispensation of law was finished. On the Cross, He bore in His own body all the penalty of that outraged Law.
 

DISPENSATION OF GRACE

There is a verse in Colossians that is rarely ever explained in a way that seems at all clear, and yet I believe it is a most striking picture. Colossians 2:14: "Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross."

 

In this connection we often hear the illustration used of the old-fashioned way of keeping books.

 

There were nails on the wall, and when you bought something, the grocery man made out a slip and placed it on the nail. Then when you paid your bill, you presented your slips and he put them on another nail. They were nailed to the wall. But we learn from history that it was customary under the Roman law if a man were to be hanged on a tree for some crime, to write out the indictment, the law, the particular crime of which he was guilty and nail it on the Cross above his head. Pilate did that. He placed a placard over the head of JESUS CHRIST, which read, "Jesus of Nazareth the King of the Jews," which meant that He was a traitor to Caesar. He had dared to set Himself up as King of the Jews. That was the crime for which He hung on the tree. Over each of the robbers' heads a placard was nailed upon which was written the crime of which they were guilty, the laws they had broken. They were suffering for having broken those laws.

 

So our blessed CHRIST, hanging upon the tree, with Pilate's statement over His head, was supposed to die because He had declared Himself King of the Jews! But, although His hands were nailed to that cross, yet in a spiritual sense they were free to nail His own accusation to that Cross. He, as it were, nailed over His own head, the Law; the ten words given at Mount Sinai. He died because of the violation of that holy Law. Who broke it? Did He? No. He took it out of the way for us, nailing it to His Cross.

 

Now the penalty is paid. Everything is settled. So far as we are concerned, we are under grace, and that brings us to the present glorious dispensation the Apostle Paul calls the dispensation of the grace of GOD, and the dispensation of the mystery, the dispensation of the grace of GOD because He is making known His free grace in CHRIST JESUS to all who believe. "By grace are ye saved through faith and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of GOD. Not of works, lest any man should boast.' "

 

I remember some years ago preaching in Salt Lake City. I was younger then and had a little more fire and energy. Every night I would stand out in the snow and preach - it was during the winter time - and although I had a place with an awning where the people were protected, I was standing in the snow and preaching to them. One night I was preaching the Gospel to about three hundred Mormons, when a surly man came along and said, "Look here, may I ask you a question?"

 

"Yes, if you will be prompt, please."

 

"I am an elder in the Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter Day Saints. I understood you to say that we could be saved by grace apart from human merit. I deny that, and I challenge you to show me a place in the Bible that says that anybody can be saved by grace without works."

 

I opened my Bible and read Romans 4:4·5: "But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness. Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt." I also read in Ephesians (chapter 2), "By grace are ye saved through faith, and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God. Not of works, lest any man should boast."

 

"Let me see that," he said, and I handed him my Bible. "This is not in my Bible."

 

"What kind of a Bible have you? I think it is."

 

"I have read my Bible a good many times, but I never saw that."

 

"Well, when you go home tonight, you just look it up."

 

"What kind of a Bible have you?"

 

"This is the Authorized Version."

 

"Oh, well, that explains it all. I use the King James Version."

 

"Well," I said, "you know perhaps that the Authorized Version and the King James are the same."

 

"Is that so? I never knew that. Does yours have the letter to King James in the front of it?"

 

"Yes."

 

"Well, all I have got to say is that I have never seen that in my Bible, and if that is in the Bible, I would rather have the Book of Mormon any day," and he ripped out a fearful oath and cursed and damned the Bible.

 

I saw my advantage, and I said, "Look here, this is a practical demonstration of the thing that I have been preaching. Here is an elder of the Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter Day Saints, and he tells us that he is saved by his own works. We have just had a sample of his works-cursing and swearing. Now, I come to you as a younger in the church of JESUS CHRIST of the formerday saints, telling you that I am saved by grace alone, without works, and I challenge you to put a detective on my tracks, and if you can find one unholy thing that I am saying or one wicked thing that I am doing, you can proclaim it from the housetops." Grace makes us righteous.

 

This is also called the dispensation of mystery.

 

This is the age when GOD had made known His eternal purpose to take out of Jew and Gentile a people and unite them into one body; His Body and His Bride. When He reigns, He will not reign alone. This secret was never revealed in the Old Testament period - that the church, brought out of Jew and Gentile, united by the Holy Ghost during this present dispensation, should some day reign with Him.

 

When this dispensation is ended, are there any others to follow? According to some of our recent writers, there are not. The next great event will be, they say, the coming of the Lord; that the rapture and the appearing will all take place at the same time and that GOD is then through with Israel; that the promises to Israel are now being fulfilled spiritually in the church; that we are to be called up to Heaven and the earth is to be destroyed by fire; that there is no dispensation to follow this. They are telling us that we have been misled during all these years of dispensational teaching; that they don't know when the Lord may come; that all the things and signs of the times leading on to the end amount to nothing; that there will not be a millennium; that we may be here a few thousand years or less, that they don't know, but when this dispensation is ended, we shall enter immediately into our eternal state.
 

THE MILLENNIUM

What do we find when we come to this old Book?

 

Paul points out to the Ephesians another dispensation. I shall not touch on the brief dispensation of judgment. Some think that hardly deserves the dignified name of a dispensation. I am thinking of this glorious dispensation of the "fulness of time," commonly called the millennium. The time will come when our Lord JESUS will be King over all the world, and He will show the world a happy potentate. Shakespeare says, "Unhappy lies the head that wears the crown," but when JESUS comes, He will be a happy King. When He comes He will show us who is that blessed ( or happy) and only potentate; there will be no other. JESUS alone will be King in that day. There will be no one to dispute His sway.

 

We are told that the term "millennium" is never found in Scripture. It is true that the Latin word is not found, but we have the English equivalent, "a thousand years," and this is found six times in the twentieth chapter of Revelation.

 

We read that the serpent is bound for one thousand years. When did the binding of Satan take place? If this is all in the past, we have never known the time when Satan was really bound. He has always seemed active so far as our own day is concerned. He is to be bound for one thousand years and is not to deceive the nations any more until the thousand-year period is over.

 

Revelation 20:4: "And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years."

 

This refers to the church and the martyred tribulation saints. Verse 5: "But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished." This is the fourth time this is mentioned. "Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection, on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years." Verse 7: "And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison." And this is what we mean by "the millennium."

 

This term has been used in the church from the very earliest ages, but now men rise up who profess to have increased light and suddenly discover that there is never to be a millennium. But this Scripture stands as a bulwark in the way of all who would deny that CHRIST is yet to reign for a thousand glorious years.

Biographies of Great Men: Dr. Harry A. Ironside

The following appeared in The Hufhand Report, which is sent via email weekly by Dr. Lawrence Hufhand.

Dr. H. A. Ironside

Harry Allen Ironside was Born on October 14, 1876, in Toronto, Canada and died on January 15, 1951, in Cambridge, New Zealand.   His life spanned almost three quarters of a century, living 74 years, 3 months, and 1 day.  Without dispute, Dr. Ironside was the greatest Bible teacher, since the days of the Apostle Paul.  He was a great pastor, a renowned teacher and an author of scores of books.  He pastored the Moody Memorial Church in Chicago for 18 memorable years, beginning in 1930 and closing it out in 1948.  Outside of Billy Sunday whose funeral he preached. He was affectionately known as "the archbishop of fundamental-ism."

Harry was the son of John and Sophia Ironside who were godly parents.   His father spent evenings at street meetings, in halls and in theaters, and on Sundays held services in the park.  He was known as "The Eternity Man," because every time he met someone he asked them, "Where will you spend eternity?  They were identified with the Plymouth Brethren.  Before Harry was converted, he had memorized hundreds of Scripture verses and read the Bible through 14 times by his 14th birthday.  At the age of ten, his widowed mother, along with an infant child, moved to Los Angels, California in 1886.  The next three years of his life was spent doing Bible clubs, preaching, and winning souls, yet he himself had not yet been converted.  It wasn’t until a Scottish Evangelist by the name of Donald Munro came to visit the family, that Harry was confronted for his need of a clear cut salvation experience, and so in February of 1890, at midnight, he got out of bed, got on his knees and invited Jesus Christ into his life.  Harry basically grew with a holiness background, owing much to the Salvation Army.

Later he joined the Salvation Army, and advanced to being a Lieutenant.  Working through sinless perfection and the “second blessing,” he came to realize that he was doing more harm than good.  At the age of 19, in the year of 1896, he broke away from the Salvation Army and identified himself with the Plymouth Brethren, where he became one of its licensed preachers.  While helping in an evangelistic endeavor in San Francisco, California, he met another ex-Salvation Army member, by the name of Helen Schofield, the daughter of a Presbyterian pastor in Oakland. Love blossomed and on January 5, 1898, Harry and Helen were married. He was 21 at the time.                             

His lack of education was never a hindrance to him.1  After he finished the 8^th grade, he never went back to school.  All of his biblical training came while studying the Scriptures day after day.  What was so amazing is that he became the greatest Bible teacher of his day and years beyond, with no formal ministerial training.  It’s also interesting to note that his greatest legacy was in authoring 80 volumes of commentaries on the Bible, along with one of his most famous books:  “Holiness, the False and the True”, which came out in 1912, It was a book much maligned by the holiness crowd, but it was a book that sealed his departure from that crowd. 

His preaching ministry took him far and wide, preaching to thousands, and for a while he ministered under the auspicious of the Moody Bible Institue.  In 1926 he was invited to teach at the famed Dallas Theological for several months a year, but declined, because it would take him away from his preaching ministry.  Perhaps the greatest thrill of his life took place on March 5, when he receive a unanimous call to be the Pastor of the Moody Memorial Church in Chicago and on March16,1930 he preached his first sermon.  He continued his itinerate ministry, often leaving after church on Sunday night and not return until Saturday to preach at Moody Memorial.  After his wife’s death in 1948, he retired to Winona Lake, Indiana.                         
      
His books poured forth through the years, too numerous to mention here. Over 80 volumes have come from his pen. A Dr. of Letters degree [1930] had come from Wheaton2 in June of 1930, and on June 3, 1942 Bob Jones University3 granted him an honorary Doctor of Divinity degree [1942]. His writings on the entire New Testament, as well as all of the prophetic books of the Old Testament, and a great many volumes on specific Bible themes and subjects came from his pen.  Some of his later titles include Things Seen and Heard in Bible Lands, Lamp of Prophecy, Changed by Beholding, The Way of Peace, and The Great Parenthesis.  Almost lost in the seemingly more important phases of his ministry is the fact that he is the author of the well known hymn, Overshadowed.

Harry Ironside became great, because he dedicated himself to the study of God’s Word.  It was God who made him great.

Footnotes:
1) Kevin Bauder: Required Theological Pedigree to Gain a Hearing

2) HA Ironside's Legacy

“Ironside was appointed to the board at Wheaton College, and was also on the board of Bob Jones University. The present faculty of Wheaton includes names of prominent critics of …Dispensationalism. Many of the interpretations of prophecy that Ironside believed have been set aside, and abandoned at Wheaton and even at Dallas Theological Seminary. Ironically, some of Ironside’s teachings are now actively opposed by professors at the College where he was once honored….”

3) Biographies of Great Men: Dr. Bob Jones, Sr.

Site Publisher Addendum:

As noted above Bob Jones University in 1952 conferred upon Harry Ironside a Doctor of Divinity degree. In 2011 the University to honor the man's legacy renamed one of its dormitories to “H. A. Ironside Residence Hall.”

Dr. Ironside wrote, “The only way really to understand our Bible and get things in their places so that we are not in confusion of mind as we read and study is by noticing the various dispensations or administrations or stewardships or other periods that run through the Scripture. But we have recently been told by some prominent writers that this is all a mistake.” (The Lamp of Prophecy or Sign of the Times: Reaffirmation of Dispensational Truth)
 

Biographies of Great Men: Dr. Bob Jones, Sr.

The following appeared in The Hufhand Report, which is sent via email weekly by Dr. Lawrence Hufhand. See The Friday Report, June 28, 2019 for the complete report.

Dr. Bob Jones, Sr.

Apart from my brother Lee [Hufhand], who led me to Christ and was my constant mentor, the most influential person in my life was Dr. Bob Jones Sr. While a student at BJU, I was called into his office and he quizzed me about a letter he had gotten concerning my relationship with a particular girl back home.  He asked me if I loved her.  (He really did.)  I said, “I love her very much.”  He looked at the letter and then at me and said, “then marry her”, so I did.  I am indebted to him for that, along with my being called into the ministry.  That being said, let me tell you about him.  I apologize for its length, but no man in my recollection, has done more for Christianity than this man, other than the Apostle Paul.  Much of this comes from the biography by R.K. Johnson.   Robert Reynolds Jones:  Born: October 30, 1883 in Skipperville, in Southeast Alabama, and died on January 16, 1968 in Greenville, South Carolina.                

One cannot think about Dr. Bob, apart from having founded Bob Jones University in 1927. (While I was there in 1953 thru 1957, without equivocation, it was the greatest “preachers school” on the planet.  There were 1100 Ministerial Student enrolled at that time.) What produces such a school? Many things, but the indefatigable work of its founder, Bob Jones, Sr., must surely be considered as the key ingredient. One of the greatest evangelists of all times--a man who preached in 30 different countries, and by age 40 he had preached 12,000 sermons to some 15,000,000 people, with 300,000 converts.

Dr. Jones was the son of William Alexander and Georgia (Cree) Jones. The parents were farmers of Calvinistic convictions. He was the eleventh of twelve children, having eight sisters and three brothers. The family moved to the Dothan, Alabama, area shortly after his birth. Christian convictions were instilled in him by his parents and hard work on the farm gave him a challenge early in life to work. He was converted at age eleven in a country Methodist church outside Dothan. From the time of his conversion he began preaching publicly and was known as "the Alabama boy preacher." He preached to anyone who would listen. He became a good debater. He developed strong convictions and undaunted courage. Like Billy Sunday, his preaching was to be received because it would be on the level of the people.

When he reached 13 years of age, he built a brush arbor where he preached on Sundays, which later became a church of 54 members. By age 15 he was licensed and ordained by the Alabama Methodist Conference. Bob was now preaching all over southeast Alabama. He finished his formal education 1904.  He was fully ordained to the Gospel ministry by the Methodist Church in 1903.  Shortly after he began to have some serious throat problems which was healed by the age of 21.  In October 24, 1905, he married Bernice Sheffield, only to have her die ten months later in August, 1906, of tuberculosis. Some time January, 1907, in Uniontown, Alabama, he met Mary Gaston Stollenwerck, who was converted in one of his meetings. On June 17, 1908, they were married. Their only child, Bob Jones, Jr., was born October 19, 1911. Marriage and family did not change his life style, as Mrs. Jones traveled with him, taking a maid along to care for the child until he was six years old, when he entered a school in Montgomery,                                                                                                                        

I wish I had the space to tell you all about Dr. Bob as an evangelist and all the great crusades he held across this country of ours.  One of his great crusades was held right here in Noblesville, IN and another one was held in Peru, just 50 miles north of Noblesville.  Literally thousands, upon thousands of souls were saved and brought into the Kingdom through his evangelistic endeavors.  He was a world class evangelist, after the manner of his friends, Sam Jones and Billy Sunday.

In 1927 he founded Bob Jones college, which later became Bob Jones University.  It was by far his greatest and most enduring contribution to old time fundamental Christianity.  His reason for starting a Christian college came about because of the encroachment of European liberalism in the colleges and seminaries across America.  He was sitting in a drug store in Kissimmee, Florida in 1926, and he said to his wife, "I'm going to start a school!" A site was picked out and on December 1, 1926, ground was broken, and on September 12, in 1927, the school opened with 88 students. The financial crash of 1929 nearly closed them down, but the vision was re-energized at an old college that had been closed for years, in Cleveland, TN.   And so on Sept. 1, 1933 Bob Jones College formally opened in Cleveland and a new school year began.

By 1946 the school had expanded as much as it could in Cleveland, and so it was agreed upon to move the college campus to Greenville, South Carolina, where, on Thanksgiving Day, November 27, 1947, it was dedicated, with approximately 2,900 students attending. Through the years, the school continued to grow, with Bob Jones, Sr., playing an active role until his resignation as chairman of the board of trustees in April, 1964.

The last two years of his life was spent mostly in the campus hospital. His last words, on January 16, 1968, were, "Mary Gaston, get my shoes; I must go to preach." He was buried on campus in a beautiful little island in a fountain of cascading pools, just across the street from the Rodeheaver Auditorium.  Dr. Bob: The greatest man of accomplishments that I have ever personally known.

For Related Reading See:
Bob Jones, Sr. Chapel Sayings

 

Site Publisher Addendum:

It is with regret and sadness that many BJU alumni, ministerial graduates in particular, see the University now as having drifted far from the doctrinal foundations it once staunchly held to for many decades. A departure from the moorings that accelerated significantly in 2014.



KESWICK—A GOOD WORD OR A BAD ONE? Part Three: Reasons for the Attack

Dr. John Van Gelderen

What lies behind the criticism of Keswick theology? In this article, we will cover some key factors that fuel objections and cause some problems for those seeking the truth.

 

Basic Misinformation
Amazingly, I have been in some settings where a speaker taught the truths of Keswick/Deeper Life theology and immediately followed by saying, “Now, I’m not talking about Keswick; I’m not talking about the Deeper Life.” Such a contradiction indicates that one is largely unaware of the history and the meaning of the labels and likely is functioning from hearsay and charges of unorthodoxy that critics have attached to Keswick and Deeper Life. First impressions are mind-setting. Someone bent their ear. They read or listened to critics of Keswick without reading Keswick authors themselves, and now, joining in the criticism, they unwittingly attack and undermine their own teaching. The damage done is unintentional but is still harmful to that which they believe.

 

Thoroughgoing Calvinism
Though not all Calvinists clash with Keswick, those of a thoroughgoing system often do. Keswick emphasizes man’s responsibility of faith. One of the major descriptions of Keswick is sanctification by faith. Some Calvinists claim that a faith emphasis is a man-centered emphasis, but how can God-dependence be man-centered? Faith is not a work; it is dependence upon the worker—God. The inspired Word says, “But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him” (Rom. 4:5). Therefore, faith is the opposite of works. Faith says, “I can’t, but God can,” and so depends upon God. The focus of true faith is, of necessity, on God, who is the object of faith. This is undeniably God-centered.

The clash is between inevitable faith for thorough-going Calvinism and the responsible faith of Keswick. Does progressive sanctification just happen, inevitably occurring for every true child of God, or can it be hindered by unbelief and accelerated by faith? Keswick insists on the latter. Interestingly, Keswick’s promotion of responsible faith also clashes with the misfocused faith of unfettered choice that is advanced by thoroughgoing Arminianism. Responsible faith means you are responding to the Spirit’s convincing work, based on God’s Word. It is neither unfettered choice nor inevitable. It is a true responsibility.

 

When I hear or read some Calvinists claims regarding Keswick teaching, I’m amazed at the inaccuracy. Certainly, some such commentators have limited their study to criticisms of Keswick without spending significant time with primary sources. Others have indeed read the Keswick authors—albeit, with a crippling bias that blinds them to the clear facts and arguments championed by those authors. Assessments offered from this perspective muddy the waters and perpetuate misrepresentations that obscure important truths made plain in Keswick teaching.

 

Personal Defeat
For some, the refrain is, “Tried it—didn’t work.” But, is an apparent application failure an indictment of Keswick theology, a problem with the provision of the indwelling Christ, or something no more complicated than a misunderstanding of truth or a misapplication of surrender?

First, we must take care to understand faith, what it is and how it operates. Like a triangle with three sides, faith involves all three parts of the soul of man (the mind, affections, and will), otherwise it is not true faith. The mind must understand the foundation of truth revealed in God’s Word. The affections must be affected (convinced) by what is understood. Then, the will must engage in God-dependence based on Spirit-convincement of the reality of God’s words. Regarding sanctification by faith, it seems to me that some may attempt to move from mere intellectual understanding to a choice of the will without being convinced by the Spirit of the truth involved. This short-circuits the process because it would not involve real faith. It would be wishful thinking rather than convinced confidence. When this is the case, one might look back and conclude that trying out Keswick just didn’t work. However, when the Holy Spirit illumines truth, His convincement leads to genuine faith—and that always works.

 

With surrender/faith properly applied, ones give all to Christ, trusting Him to take it. One also takes His all, trusting Christ to give it. A failure to give all or to take all is, therefore, a misapplication that in no wise invalidates accessing the provision of the indwelling Christ by faith. In such a case, maintaining that Keswick doesn’t work merely shifts blame away from the individual. Pinning responsibility on the teaching may be convenient and easy, but masking the truth behind the situation ultimately helps no one.

 

Satanic Attack
Satan hates and attacks revival truth! Keswick revival theology threatens his turf. He is the master deceiver, and much of the controversy is stirred up through his deceptions. Remembering that Keswick-type conferences were used to ignite and fuel revival fires in the early twentieth century, it should not be a surprise then to discover that Satan continues attacks on Keswick theology in order to prevent another great wave of revival blessing.

 

Conclusion
I suggest that you read the Keswick authors and let them speak for themselves. Their writings have been blessed of God to point many to Christ and the Word, and away from self and the world (which gloriously passes the tests of 1 John 4). Where to start? There are many good options:

• G. Campbell Morgan – The Spirit of God
• Evan Hopkins – The Law of Liberty in the Spiritual Life
• J. Elder Cummings – Through the Eternal Spirit
• Handley G. C. Moule – Practicing the Promises (and his commentary on Romans chapters 6-8)
• F. B. Meyer’s many books
• Andrew Murray’s writings
• W. H. Griffith Thomas’ treatment of chapters 6-8 in his commentary on Romans
• A.J. Gordon’s writings
• A.T. Pierson’s works

Steven Barabas quotes many Keswick authors in his book, So Great Salvation: The History and Message of the Keswick Convention. If you want to understand Keswick and the differences from other theologies, this book clearly demonstrates the contrast.

 

So, what about the term Keswick? Is it a good word or a bad one? If you mean sanctification by faith thus accessing the victorious life of Christ, that is gloriously good! Personally, I prefer using the label “revival theology,” mindful that the primary issue is, of course, not a label but truth.

 

The Christian life is not merely a set of doctrines, nor just an array of moral actions. Unsaved moralists have that. The Christian life is a life—a person—and His name is Jesus! Jesus Christ is the Christian Life. Therefore, Jesus Christ is the only one who can live the Christian life. When you were born again, Christ, the Christian life Himself, moved into you to impart His life to you. He lives in you so that you (yet not you, but Christ in you) can live the Christian life. When you got saved, Christ moved in to live His life, not yours! But this is not automatic. As you received Christ by faith, you also must walk by faith one step at a time (Col. 2:6). This is accessing the eternal life of Christ as the abundant life in Christ. This is sanctification by faith. Ultimately, this is revival reality on the individual level.

 

For those who believe the theology of “Christ in you accessed by faith,” derogatory slurs and full-blown attacks against this truth are not small matters. Jesus is the Victorious Life, the Higher Life, the Deeper Life, the Spirit-filled Life, the Revived Life, the Hidden Life—the Christ-Life! When holiness by faith (the Holy Life accessed by faith) is attacked, the attack is ultimately on the indwelling life of Christ.

 

I published this article in a shorter form in Revival magazine, Issue Five, 2006. The only significant changes in this present publication are expansions. Since 2006, the term revival theology has taken hold, and my hope was that using this would avoid unnecessary confusion surrounding the word Keswick. However, I have discovered some cases where attacks simply switched targets, aiming no longer at Keswick but at revival theology instead. This indicates that the issue does not center on terminology, but rather on the truth behind the terms. It is becoming more apparent that the real problem for some is “ye do always resist the Holy Spirit,” and the point of tension is “the offense of the cross.” The cross repudiates self in both justification by works and sanctification by works. Furthermore, not only does the cross repudiate the works of the flesh (self-indulgence), it repudiates the work of the flesh (self-dependence). The cross demands “not I, but Christ” (Gal. 2:20). The heart of Keswick theology is accessing this Holy Life of Jesus by faith—nothing less, nothing more.

 

 

Dr. John Van Gelderen

Revival Focus

 

KESWICK—A GOOD WORD OR A BAD ONE? PART TWO: INACCURATE ACCUSATIONS

We will continue now with Part Two of Dr. John Van Gelderen's series Keswick- A Good Word or a Bad One?

 

Dr. John Van Gelderen

Last week, we discussed the historical background and theology of Keswick. In our day, the orthodoxy that Keswick was once accorded has been replaced in many minds because of misunderstandings and a wealth of misinformation. Several critical charges have been leveled against it, but an examination of the supposed errors will show the inaccuracy of the accusations.

 

Passivity

Some have argued that Keswick promotes passivity, probably because the theology emphasizes resting in Christ. However, this resting is not to be understood as encouragement to sit back and do nothing. It is a call to trust to obey. It is obedient faith, and, therefore, believing obedience. Resting in Jesus involves the due diligence of faith-filled (resting) obedience (labor) as stated by the Apostle, “Whereunto I also labour, striving according to his working, which worketh in me mightily.” This is not mere “labour,” but “labour” that is trusting in “his working.” The emphasis is not idle passivity, but active cooperation—the cooperation of surrendering to the Spirit’s leadership and depending on His enablement. This is walking in the Spirit, which obviously involves steps, not passivity. But the steps are steps of faith, not the mere motions of flesh-dependent activity. This is what brings “rest unto your souls” (Matt. 11:29).

 

Keswick confronts a performance-based sanctification or “struggle theology” that advocates flesh-dependence to live the Christian life. Sanctification by works is just as wrong as justification by works (Gal. 3:1-3). You are not justified by faith and then sanctified through struggle. Sanctification, like justification, is by faith, for “without faith it is impossible to please [God]” (Heb.11:6). Obviously, there are struggles in life, but flesh-dependence for frustrated Christian living is an unnecessary struggle. Faith for victory means you are depending on the victorious life of Christ to enable you to obey. It is not a matter of you trying to live the Christian life (engaging in hollow motions); it is trusting the indwelling Christ to enable you for necessary steps of obedience (making for empowered motions). Victory without trying does not mean victory from doing nothing. It is victory with trusting. True faith is not an inward self-focus, but rather, a focus on Christ, the true object of faith, that He might express His very life through your life. Because an expression of His life is necessarily an active, obedient walk, the accusation of Keswick theology promoting passivity is simply not accurate.

 

Subjectivism
Keswick has also been branded as too subjective, most likely due to the emphasis placed on the reality of the Holy Spirit. However, Keswick theology emphasizes the subjective reality of the Spirit based on the objective boundaries of the Word. The emphasis is by no means the Spirit without the Word, nor is it the Word without the Spirit. Rather, it is the Word and the Spirit. The Spirit without the Word is delusion leading to strange fire; the Word without the Spirit is deadness resulting in no fire. But the Word and the Spirit is dynamic and leads to true Holy Spirit fire.

 

Interestingly, Robert Thomas rightly deals with the dangerous subjectivism of evangelicals in his book Evangelical Hermeneutics. He names many in the evangelical world whom he considers guilty of true subjectivism, but, when highlighting a proper, biblical handling of matters, he regularly quotes J. Robertson McQuilken—author of several helpful books and the Keswick contributor to Stanley N. Gundry’s compilation, Five Views of Sanctification. The teaching of Keswick stresses the subjective reality of the Holy Spirit based on the Word and not the subjectivism that forsakes a scriptural foundation. Thus, to accuse Keswick of subjectivism reveals an inaccurate understanding of Keswick teaching.

 

Second Blessing

Keswick theology is sometimes equated with second blessing theology. This, however, shows great ignorance of both true second blessing theology and Keswick.

 

Second blessing theology speaks of receiving a once-for-all second blessing which puts one on a new stage, never to fall back to one’s former stage. Keswick speaks of alternating between two conditions, walking in the flesh and walking in the Spirit, and does not promote any once-for-all shift. Second blessing theology demands a “second” event. Keswick insists you were given the whole package at salvation and can access the whole blessing immediately. (Note that while some enjoy immediate access to the blessing in its entirety, others have had access deferred due to a lack of understanding.) Receiving something not previously possessed is at the heart of second blessing theology. Keswick teaches that you, by faith, access your first blessing!

 

For one who has yet to access the provision of the indwelling Christ (or who hasn’t done so for quite some time), the point of accessing His provision may seem like a second blessing, though technically it is not. This explains why some early Keswick writers described matters using terms like second blessing. It has proven an unfortunate choice of words that confuses matters today, but clearly these authors sought only to illustrate the situation of believers coming to understand the wealth of their provision. They did not intend to support a second blessing view at odds with their own. What Keswick describes is simply the possibility of being re-vived. For a more extensive treatment of this phrase, please refer to a previous article, Second Blessing or Second Rest.

 

Sinless Perfectionism
I suppose this charge comes because Keswick theology emphasizes the victorious life of Christ. The provision for victory is perfect. It must be—His name is Jesus! But Keswick makes clear that we still live in the “body of sin” (Rom. 6:6). The focus of Keswick is not that you cannot sin, but that you are able not to sin because of the indwelling Christ. Keswick makes clear that, tragically, Christians sin. Yet it teaches that our focus should not be on the defeat, but rather on victory in Christ by faith. The provision of the indwelling Christ is perfect, but our consistent access of that provision is sadly imperfect. To accuse Keswick theology of sinless perfectionism is simply not being honest with the facts of Keswick teaching. The blog article Sinless Perfection versus Sinless Provision offers more information on this point.

 

Let Go and Let God
Sadly, this phraseology has had various aberrant concepts attached to it in recent decades, and therefore, I personally do not use the phrase. However, its original usage in the early Keswick era was simply to “let go” of self-will and self-dependence, and “let God” by yielding to God’s will in God-dependence. This is faith. It represents the words of the Lord Jesus, “Whosoever shall lose his life for my sake, the same shall save it” (Luke 9:24). While the aberrations should be refuted, it is sad that the original God-centered and ultimately Christ-centered meaning of the phrase is denigrated by some as well. More on this matter is available in another article, Let Go and Let God.

 

Next week, we will conclude the series, examining some reasons for the inaccurate accusations.

 

 

John Van Gelderen

Revival Focus



Please continue to the third installment of the series

For Related Reading see, Reformed Theology vs. Keswick Theology

KESWICK—A GOOD WORD OR A BAD ONE? PART ONE: HISTORICAL BACKGROUND AND THEOLOGY

Today we’re beginning a series written and published by Dr. John Van Gelderen.  His series appears at his Revival Focus site and is being happily reprinted here by permission.

Dr. John Van Gelderen

Occasionally, I hear people use the label Keswick in a derogatory fashion. Yet others use the term quite positively. Hearing something of these widely ranging opinions, someone unfamiliar with the term might wonder whether this word Keswick denotes something good or something bad. The issue, of course, is not the term but what is meant by the term. This present three-part series is an adaptation of the original article Keswick: A Good Word or a Bad One? and its follow-up Keswick: A Good Word or a Bad One? Revisited. After focusing on the historical background and theology in this first article, we will address inaccurate accusations made against Keswick theology and then conclude the series with a consideration of reasons behind the attacks.

 

Keswick is a beautiful town nestled in the Lake District of England. In 1875, a conference began there which continued annually as “The Keswick Convention.” Its original stated purpose was for the deepening of spiritual life. To accomplish this purpose, a definite theological position was taught—sanctification by faith, sometimes called holiness by faith.

 

Commonly referred to as the Higher Life, Deeper Life, or Victorious Life, the focus of the theology is on Christ as one’s life. In later years, various sub-groups attached other/additional ideas to some of the labels. However, the original intent was Christ-focused, and this singular emphasis is still championed by a majority of those continuing to use these terms.

 

Thus, the Higher Life, Deeper Life, Victorious Life, Spirit-filled Life and Christ-Life do not constitute a new line of teaching and do not stand as a mere set of doctrines or motions. The matter is neither a conference nor convention, and it is not a movement. It is a life—and that life is a person. His name is Jesus! Jesus is the “Higher Life.” Jesus is the “Deeper Life.” Jesus is the “Victorious Life.” How can it be otherwise? Sanctification, or holiness by faith, is simply accessing the “Holy Life” by faith. It is I live, yet not I, but Christ lives in me by faith (Gal. 2:20). Holiness by faith is accessing the holy life of Jesus to empower holy living and serving. It is becoming “partakers of His holiness” through the impartation of His life in the place of any self-dependent attempt to imitate His life (Heb.12:10).

 

Keswick theology teaches that “progressive sanctification” does not mean an inevitable, gradual sanctification, but rather that sanctification is accelerated by faith choices and hindered by choices of unbelief. Obviously, the Holy Spirit keeps working, but believers are responsible to cooperate in faith for sanctification to progress according to God’s will. Keswick teaches that just as justification is by faith, so also is sanctification by faith. “As ye have therefore received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk ye in him” (Col. 2:6).

 

From the convention’s beginnings, a specific theme was emphasized for each of the conference’s five days, and this was designed to help hearers understand how to “progress” in sanctification. In order, the daily addresses covered:

1. Sin (sin is the problem—both outer man sins and especially inner man sins)
2. Provision (Christ is the answer through the cleansing power of His blood and the enabling power of His Spirit)
3. Consecration (the access to Christ’s provision is through surrender to/dependence on Christ’s leadership and surrender to/dependence on Christ’s enablement)
4. Spirit-filled Life (surrender/faith accesses Christ’s Life—the Spirit-filled life for holiness and service)
5. Service (the whole point of sanctification by faith is to then serve by faith, primarily in the declaration of the Gospel).

The Keswick Convention began in 1875 and continues to this day in England. However, as with many movements, the original focus was lost over time, and today the convention no longer truly represents its original purpose. The first two generations of Keswick (roughly eighty years) held to the original theology. In other words, Keswick theology stayed largely true to its beginning through the 1950s. During this time, Keswick guarded itself from the extremes of certain factions within the “Holiness Movement.” Ecclesiastically, however, Keswick began to weaken during the Fundamentalist-Modernist controversy of the 1920s and 1930s. (The convention’s motto of “all one in Christ,” though a blessed truth in biblical proportion, set them up for potential compromise when this controversy came on the scene.) By the 1960s, compromise eventually eroded their theology in significant ways. However, it should be noted that many other Keswick or Keswick-inspired meetings have stayed true to original Keswick theology, even to this day.

 

The first-generation of Keswick included Evan Hopkins (who spoke at the annual convention for 39 years), F.B. Meyer (a regular speaker from 1887 to 1925), Handley G.C. Moule (a participant from the mid-1880s until his death), G. Campbell Morgan, A.T. Pierson, A.J. Gordon, S.D. Gordon, R.A. Torrey, Andrew Murray, Hudson Taylor, Jonathan Goforth, and W.H. Griffith Thomas. Second-generation Keswick was led by W. Graham Scroggie and included Donald Grey Barnhouse and J. Oswald Sanders.

 

Notice the number of familiar names and consider the esteem we have for these men, even to this day. R.A. Torrey was so respected that he was chosen as a leading editor of The Fundamentals, an early 20^th century collection of articles penned by orthodox scholars. Almost 30% of the authors writing for The Fundamentals were speakers associated with Keswick, and their contributions made up more than a fifth of the 90 articles in the series. This is a significant fact and shows that Keswick was mainstream at the beginning of biblical fundamentalism and the countering of theological liberalism. Therefore, Keswick was clearly considered “orthodox” at its inception and in the stand against the rise of liberalism, and to denigrate Keswick is to denigrate the roots of fundamentalism.

 

I prefer to call Keswick theology “revival theology,” although there is a sense in which revival theology is broader than sanctification by faith. When one is awakened to the need to access the indwelling life of Christ by faith and begins to appropriate that life for the steps of obedience, personal revival occurs. Personal revival is a restoration to spiritual life—the life of Christ in you accessed by faith as the animating power to your personality. This doctrine did not begin in 1875 with Keswick. It began in the New Testament (John 10:10, 14-16; Rom. 6-8; II Cor. 3:5,17-18; 9:8; Gal. 2:20; 3:1-5,14; Eph. 3:17; 5:18; Phil. 1:21; Col. 1:27; 3:4) and can be traced throughout church history. Even in corporate revival, this is what occurs to the individuals involved. This is revival theology! In fact, in The Flaming Tongue, J. Edwin Orr’s account of early twentieth-century revivals affecting at least 57 nations, Orr repeatedly documents that Keswick-type conferences were used of God to either ignite revival fire or greatly fuel it.

 

In the work Five Views of Sanctification, J. Robertson McQuilken presents the Keswick view on sanctification, John Walvoord offers an Augustinian-Dispensational approach to the matter, and both men take the opportunity to comment on other views. Essentially, McQuilken maintains there is no real difference between the Keswick and Augustinian-Dispensational views, and similarly, Walvoord maintains no real difference between the Keswick view and his own. Dispensational theology is broader than sanctification (which is Keswick’s primarily concern), but regarding this specific issue, Keswick theology equates to the Dispensational theology embraced by many today.

 

Next week we will address some of the inaccurate accusations that have been leveled against Keswick theology.

 

 

John Van Gelderen

Continue to Part Two: Inaccurate Accusations
For further reading see the original article at Revival Focus.