I may have posted on this before, but today's quote by Bonnke on Facebook is worth requoting, with this side-note:
David Martyn Lloyd-Jones once made a similar remark, to the effect that "right doctrine" IS essential; it's equivalent to us building the altar. But we must ALSO call on God to send the FIRE from heaven! Thank you, Lord! ~L
Evangelist Reinhard Bonnke:
"Unless we are burning we can never set anybody else on fire. We can be so orderly, doing everything with dignity and decorum but … without fire! Correct but cold. On Mount Carmel the pagans laid everything correctly on the altar ready for the sacrifice but the devil could not bring a spark from hell to light it. Elijah then rebuilt the altar, stones, wood, sacrifice, everything according to the book, and called down fire from heaven. And it came! And it comes!"
Showing posts with label D. Lloyd-Jones. Show all posts
Showing posts with label D. Lloyd-Jones. Show all posts
19 December, 2011
28 January, 2010
LCM ~ A couple questions answered - followup to last night's class (re ch. 3)
Submitted by Leah Page on Thu, 01/28/2010 - 9:35am humility LCM010 Luke 7 Poor in Spirit
Good morning, ladies!
Last night, I double checked on a couple of the questions that were asked, and thought I'd share with you what I found (I'll post on the blog, too):
Q: Was the woman in Luke 7 Mary Magdalene?
A: The text doesn't say so, and I have heard from several sources that it is widely believed to be Mary Magdalene. But we don't know for sure. There are other Gospel accounts of a similar event, (such as Mark 14), but the details are different, and we know that the woman there mentioned was Mary, the sister of Martha and Lazarus. Luke 7 seems to be a different event altogether - though possibly the fact that the other accounts mention a "Mary" and there is even another "Simon" present (Simon the Leper), perhaps these similarities help inform the speculation about the women in the text with which we have concerned ourselves, here?
(We DO know this was a woman who washed Jesus' feet out of love for him and a "weeping joy" for his grace! Would that we were all such women!)
Q: Was "Simon" in the Luke 7 account the name of the Pharisee hosting the gathering? Or referring to Simon/Peter, Jesus' disciple, who may also have been present at this event?
A: In v. 44, Jesus addresses Simon directly and accuses him of not having welcomed him even half as well as this so-called "sinner" woman. So Simon is contextually understood, here, to be the name of the Pharisee hosting the gathering.
Q: In Ezekiel 9:8, we speculated that perhaps this phrase (as worded in the NASB), "I alone was left," meant that Ezekiel was in fact the only one to survive the divine execution of the idol-worshippers in Jerusalem, the only one who was "marked" to be saved?
A: However, the opening phrase of the verse helps to clarify - and looking further at the context, ch. 10 is where "God's glory departs from the temple" and ch. 11 is where Ezekiel is called upon to give greater rebuke to the people (I don't know if such "order of writing" is meant to be explicitely chronological, but that seems to be the "plain meaning" of the text).
The ESV helpfully translates this verse this way: "And while they were striking, and I was left alone, I fell upon my face, and cried, 'Ah, Lord GOD! Will you destroy all the remnant of Israel in the outpouring of your wrath on Jerusalem?'" <-- a great case of finding help in other reliable translations of the text, and interpreting on the basis of context! ;) It seems Ezekiel is saying simply that while this horror (!) was being carried out, he remained in the presence of the Lord and - like Moses and others before him had done - was pleading with God on behalf of this rebelious people.
This is an event that is intended to "mirror" the Passover events in Exodus - though it is interesting, as we noted, that where in the Exodus account the faithful put the blood over their own doorposts, in this event, the Lord chose angelic messengers to somehow "mark" the foreheads of those who had "sighed and moaned" over the abominations committed in God's city. (Reminded me of how Peter in the NT [2 Peter ch. 2] describes Lot, Abraham's nephew who willingly lived in Sodom and Gomorrah and even rose to some prominence in the city!, and nevertheless was "vexed in his righteous soul" over their collective wickedness....)
Q: And finally, regarding good ol' Uriah Heep?
I had brought up one of the incidents that D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones mentions in his book "Studies in the Sermon on the Mount" and it was a point of interest because he actually names the person with whom he interacted, and it was one "Uriah Heep" and Betty had pointed out that this was the name of a character in a Charles Dickens' novel, so I thought perhaps I had misread the story!
A: I double checked and in fact, the man's name was Uriah Heep, so perhaps he was named after the Dickens character? Or perhaps it was just strange coincidence? Either way, it appears to be a "true story" and not just an illustration to make a point. Here is the quote if you're interested:
"...To be 'poor in spirit,' therefore, does not mean you are born like that. Let us get rid of that idea once and for ever.
Neither does it mean that we are to become what I can best describe as imitators of Uriah Heep. Many, again, have mistaken 'poor in spirit' for that. I remember once having to go to preach at a certain town. When I arrived on the Saturday evening, a man met me at the station and immediately asked for my bag, indeed he almost took it from my hand by force. Then he talked to me like this: 'I am a deacon in the church where you are preaching tomorrow,' he said, and then added, 'You know, I am a mere nobody, a very unimportant man, really. I do not count; I am not a great man in the Church; I am just one of those men who carry the bag for the minister.' He was anxious that I should know what a humble man he was, how 'poor in spirit.' Yet by his anxiety to make it known, he was denying the very thing he was trying to establish. Uriah Heep -- the man who thus, as it were, glories in his poverty of spirit and thereby proves he is not humble. It is an affectation of something which he obviously does not feel...."
(DLJ, SITSOTM, p. 38)
Blessings!
Leah
--
~Growing in grace, and the knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ~
http://grace2grow.blogspot.com
Good morning, ladies!
Last night, I double checked on a couple of the questions that were asked, and thought I'd share with you what I found (I'll post on the blog, too):
Q: Was the woman in Luke 7 Mary Magdalene?
A: The text doesn't say so, and I have heard from several sources that it is widely believed to be Mary Magdalene. But we don't know for sure. There are other Gospel accounts of a similar event, (such as Mark 14), but the details are different, and we know that the woman there mentioned was Mary, the sister of Martha and Lazarus. Luke 7 seems to be a different event altogether - though possibly the fact that the other accounts mention a "Mary" and there is even another "Simon" present (Simon the Leper), perhaps these similarities help inform the speculation about the women in the text with which we have concerned ourselves, here?
(We DO know this was a woman who washed Jesus' feet out of love for him and a "weeping joy" for his grace! Would that we were all such women!)
Q: Was "Simon" in the Luke 7 account the name of the Pharisee hosting the gathering? Or referring to Simon/Peter, Jesus' disciple, who may also have been present at this event?
A: In v. 44, Jesus addresses Simon directly and accuses him of not having welcomed him even half as well as this so-called "sinner" woman. So Simon is contextually understood, here, to be the name of the Pharisee hosting the gathering.
Q: In Ezekiel 9:8, we speculated that perhaps this phrase (as worded in the NASB), "I alone was left," meant that Ezekiel was in fact the only one to survive the divine execution of the idol-worshippers in Jerusalem, the only one who was "marked" to be saved?
A: However, the opening phrase of the verse helps to clarify - and looking further at the context, ch. 10 is where "God's glory departs from the temple" and ch. 11 is where Ezekiel is called upon to give greater rebuke to the people (I don't know if such "order of writing" is meant to be explicitely chronological, but that seems to be the "plain meaning" of the text).
The ESV helpfully translates this verse this way: "And while they were striking, and I was left alone, I fell upon my face, and cried, 'Ah, Lord GOD! Will you destroy all the remnant of Israel in the outpouring of your wrath on Jerusalem?'" <-- a great case of finding help in other reliable translations of the text, and interpreting on the basis of context! ;) It seems Ezekiel is saying simply that while this horror (!) was being carried out, he remained in the presence of the Lord and - like Moses and others before him had done - was pleading with God on behalf of this rebelious people.
This is an event that is intended to "mirror" the Passover events in Exodus - though it is interesting, as we noted, that where in the Exodus account the faithful put the blood over their own doorposts, in this event, the Lord chose angelic messengers to somehow "mark" the foreheads of those who had "sighed and moaned" over the abominations committed in God's city. (Reminded me of how Peter in the NT [2 Peter ch. 2] describes Lot, Abraham's nephew who willingly lived in Sodom and Gomorrah and even rose to some prominence in the city!, and nevertheless was "vexed in his righteous soul" over their collective wickedness....)
Q: And finally, regarding good ol' Uriah Heep?
I had brought up one of the incidents that D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones mentions in his book "Studies in the Sermon on the Mount" and it was a point of interest because he actually names the person with whom he interacted, and it was one "Uriah Heep" and Betty had pointed out that this was the name of a character in a Charles Dickens' novel, so I thought perhaps I had misread the story!
A: I double checked and in fact, the man's name was Uriah Heep, so perhaps he was named after the Dickens character? Or perhaps it was just strange coincidence? Either way, it appears to be a "true story" and not just an illustration to make a point. Here is the quote if you're interested:
"...To be 'poor in spirit,' therefore, does not mean you are born like that. Let us get rid of that idea once and for ever.
Neither does it mean that we are to become what I can best describe as imitators of Uriah Heep. Many, again, have mistaken 'poor in spirit' for that. I remember once having to go to preach at a certain town. When I arrived on the Saturday evening, a man met me at the station and immediately asked for my bag, indeed he almost took it from my hand by force. Then he talked to me like this: 'I am a deacon in the church where you are preaching tomorrow,' he said, and then added, 'You know, I am a mere nobody, a very unimportant man, really. I do not count; I am not a great man in the Church; I am just one of those men who carry the bag for the minister.' He was anxious that I should know what a humble man he was, how 'poor in spirit.' Yet by his anxiety to make it known, he was denying the very thing he was trying to establish. Uriah Heep -- the man who thus, as it were, glories in his poverty of spirit and thereby proves he is not humble. It is an affectation of something which he obviously does not feel...."
(DLJ, SITSOTM, p. 38)
Blessings!
Leah
--
~Growing in grace, and the knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ~
http://grace2grow.blogspot.com
27 January, 2010
~How to become Poor In Spirit~ D.M.Lloyd-Jones
"...The way to become poor in spirit is to look at God. Read this Book about Him, read His law, look at what He expects from us, contemplate standing before Him. It is also to look at the Lord Jesus Christ and to view Him as we see Him in the Gospels. The more we do that the more we shall understand the reaction of the apostles when, looking at Him and something He had just done, they said, 'Lord, increase our faith!' Their faith, they felt, was nothing. They felt it was so weak and so poor. 'Lord, increase our faith. We thought we had something because we had cast out devils and preached Thy word, but now we feel we have nothing; increase our faith.'
"Look at Him; and the more we look at Him, the more hopeless shall we feel by ourselves, and in and of ourselves, and the more shall we become 'poor in spirit.' Look at Him, keep looking at Him. Look at the saints, look at the men who have been most filled with the Spirit and used. But above all, look again at Him, and then you will have nothing to do to yourself. It will be done. You cannot truly look at Him without feeling your absolute poverty, and emptiness. Then you say to Him,
'Nothing in my hand I bring,
Simply to Thy cross I cling.'
Empty, hopeless, naked, vile. But HE is the all-sufficient One --
'Yea, all I need, in Thee to find,
O Lamb of God, I come.'"
~David Martyn Lloyd-Jones, from "Studies in the Sermon on the Mount," p. 42
"Look at Him; and the more we look at Him, the more hopeless shall we feel by ourselves, and in and of ourselves, and the more shall we become 'poor in spirit.' Look at Him, keep looking at Him. Look at the saints, look at the men who have been most filled with the Spirit and used. But above all, look again at Him, and then you will have nothing to do to yourself. It will be done. You cannot truly look at Him without feeling your absolute poverty, and emptiness. Then you say to Him,
'Nothing in my hand I bring,
Simply to Thy cross I cling.'
Empty, hopeless, naked, vile. But HE is the all-sufficient One --
'Yea, all I need, in Thee to find,
O Lamb of God, I come.'"
~David Martyn Lloyd-Jones, from "Studies in the Sermon on the Mount," p. 42
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)