The last time we quoted the twenty-sixth article in full and will, therefore, not repeat it here. The reader may consult his church order or The Standard Bearerof July 1, 1956. The original rendering of this article as taken from Jansen’s “Korte Verklaring” reads: “De Diakenen zullen, ter plaatse waar huiszitten-meesters of andere aalmoezeniers zijn, van deze begeeren goede correspondentie met hen te willen houden, ten einde de aalmoezen te beter uitgedeeld mogen worden onder degenen “die meest gebrek hebben.”
We take our suggestion for our remarks on this subject from a well-written and informative article appearing in the August issue of the Readers Digest. In it a Mr. Lester Velie writes under the title: “Labor’s Dreaded Squeeze Play: The Secondary Boycott.”
No two parables in Holy Writ are more nearly alike than these to which, reference is made in our subject. Little wonder, that they are frequently identified. Both parables, that of the pounds and that of the talents, the former recorded in Luke 19:11-28, the latter taken from Matthew 25:14-30, have in view the second advent of our Lord Jesus Christ.
“Not my will but Thy will be done.” He who prays in His fear not only says this to God in prayer but also means every word of it. So, we wrote last time. We wish to discuss this important element of prayer in His fear further at this time.
This beautiful and instructive passage to which we would call your attention in this essay reads in part as follows: “According to grace of God which is given me, as a wise master-builder, I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereupon. For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ. Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble; every man’s work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man’s work...
Election and Reprobation In his chapter on the above mentioned subject, Berkouwer presents a caricature of my view on the relation between election and reprobation, in order thereupon to criticize his own caricature. Perhaps, in a later connection, I may call the attention of the reader to this. In the present article, however, I am rather concerned with his own presentation of the subject.