In Good Company?

“(For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works but of him that calleth;) It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger, as it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated. What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid. For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion. So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that showeth mercy . . . Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth. Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will? Nay but, o man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? Hath not the potter power over the clay . . .” (Romans 9:11–21).

To this text and the age-old accusation which it contains our attention directed itself when we read a review of Rev. Hoeksema’s book, “Abundant Mercy” In the “Moody Monthly”. This review by C. N. B. (C. Norman Bartlett?) follows:

“This is the fifth in a series of volumes by Dr. (even though Rev. Hoeksema does not have a doctor’s degree we can understand the reviewer’s mistake if we can compare his writings with much that is written by “doctors”—J.H.) Hoeksema constituting an exhaustive and detailed interpretation of the Heidelberg Confession. In the book under review we have a masterly exposition, lighted up by many a penetrating flash of insight, of such doctrines as the nature of the Church, the future life, justification, and sanctification.

“But along with the many excellent features of the book there is a fundamental flaw fortunately all too characteristic of Dr. Hoeksema’s theological contributions, namely, a hyper-Calvinism (?—J.H.) that stigmatizes as deadly heresy the assumption that man possesses freedom of will wherewith he may either accept or reject salvation offered him in Christ. Surely it is going altogether too far when a writer refers to evangelism in scornful terms as the hawking of Christ in modern preaching, and the attempts to persuade the sinner to come to Christ.’ The doctrines of election and predestination are distorted into a fatalism which if pressed to its logical conclusion, would relieve men of all moral responsibility and would make God an arbitrary despot and the author of evil.

“It ought further to me mentioned that Dr. Hoeksema is an ardent amillennialist, who pours his vials of contempt upon all and sundry forms of premillennialism.”

There you have it!

Canadian Mission Activity.

It is well-known to most of us that the Reformed, Christian Reformed and other groups as well as ourselves are engaged in the spiritual care of the immigrants from Holland.

We were reminded of another group that is active there—the Netherlands Reformed Congregations in America (commonly known among us as Oud-Gereformeerd or Nederduitsch). In their paper “The Banner of Truth” we are told that they now have mission posts at Otterville and Burlington in Ontario and it seems an established church at Lethbridge: “In June we made a trip of a few weeks to Canada and the State of Washington . . . Then friend Bouma traveled with us to Alberta, Canada… On Sunday we preached for some friends about Letbridge (Lethbridge?-J.H.). These friends now have a new church, plain and simple but very inviting. We also enjoyed our visit there and met with various friends.” Another mission station was established in Sardes, British Columbia.

“In Everything Give Thanks”.

“In everything! Certainly . . . Thank God for health, and continue to praise Him in ill-health; for prosperity, and also in adversity; when surrounded by kind friends, and when despised and forsaken; when sheltered beneath a good roof, and when in a hovel. Indeed, it is not the material condition that evokes thanks, but the heart condition. No good thing will He withhold; it is our privilege to realize in our hearts that all things work together for good. And in no other place can we realize this great truth except in the heart . . . We do not give thanks because we realize only the present pain, but always because we know that the end of it all is sweet companionship in the celestial city with Him. All that goes on in this earth is part of the great divine plan that ushers in the ceaseless ages of God’s and our eternity. So, no matter what that part may be, because it enters into the eternal plan, I will in everything give thanks to God.” C. A. Kinder in “Moody Monthly”.

Reminiscent of the Janssen Controversy but Much Worse.

Recently we have pointed out some of the issues in the current struggle going on in the Southern Presbyterian Church. That some of the modernistic teachings which threatened to invade the Christian, Reformed Churches in 1918-22 and against which Rev. Hoeksema took such a leading part have invaded the Southern Presbyterian Church and have been carried much farther becomes evident from a recent article in the “Southern Presbyterian Journal.”

According to the article in one of the Southern Presbyterian Colleges a Certain book “Christian Beginnings” is required reading for those who take their major in Bible. The author of the article quotes at some length from this book in order to show what is being taught in church supported colleges and calls for an end to such teachings. Because this opposition belongs to the fight of the conservative wing of the Southern Presbyterian Church of which the Southern Presbyterian Journal is the spokesman we take over some of the quotations—which show by the way the ultimate outcome of the modernistic teachings condemned in the “Janssen case.”

The author of this article gives us the following: “The preface of Part II, ‘The Beginnings of the Gospel Story,’ begins as follows: ‘The claim for Christianity is often made that it is the ‘faith once for all delivered to the saints.’ To the student of history such a claim is not only false; it is positively absurd.’” To this the answer is given:

“. . . Eliminate the supernatural and deny divine inspiration and the Bible becomes a book of folk lore, of pious frauds, unworthy of the faith and allegiance of intelligent people.”

“Going on from this premise, Dr. Ehslin later says in his preface, ‘Today we recognize that we cannot hope to reconstruct the early days of the Christian beginnings by an uncritical reading of the four gospels and the Book of Acts. The authors, no one of whom was himself an eyewitness of the events he recorded, had to depend upon earlier sources, written or oral, and not upon telepathy for their information!’

“Here, with one grandiose sweep the author says Matthew and John were not eyewitnesses of that about which they wrote, but actually perjurers. Furthermore, inspiration by the Holy Spirit is ruled out . . .

“We quote now at some length to show the absurd lengths to which ‘scholarship’ will go when it casts away the rudder of divine truth and embarks on the endless sea of human speculation:

P. 159—“A careful study of these four accounts leaves but little room for doubt that John the Baptist was thus transformed by Christianity from an independent preacher into the forerunner of Jesus. Nor is it improbable that his message has been similarly edited.

P. 151—“On the basis, then, of this critical sifting of the gospel account and of the testimony of Josephus there would seem to be little support for the modern conjecture that Jesus was started on his career through contact with the Baptist, and that he repeated the latter’s message even after John’s tragic death had sundered the bond of teacher and pupil. It would, accordingly, appear more probable that the paths of Jesus and John did not cross at all and that our gospel accounts preserve little or nothing of the actual history of this enigmatic man.

P. 152—“Accordingly, it appears not unlikely that the incorporation of John into the Christian picture was a deliberate and studied attempt by early Christians to vanquish an embarrassing rival.

P. 340—“II Peter is a superficial highfalutin attempt to write elegantly by one who constantly displays a complete lack of even fundamental honesty.

“Our objection is not that such books are included in courses given in Bible. It is only by knowing the denials which are current and the reasons for our faith that students can go out into the world properly prepared.

“The thing to which we take strong exception is the method of giving students such books without at the same time directing their thinking to combat them …

“Brethren, this is called ‘Christian Education’ but we do not believe it is either Christian, nor is it education in. the true sense.”

With such opposition we can certainly agree and once again would spur this editor on in his fight for the truth of God’s inspired word.

The Christian Reformed Churches in the Netherlands.

From the “Banner” we quote the following:

“The Christian Reformed Church in the Netherlands decided, at its recent Synod, to affiliate with the International Council of Christian Churches though a couple of delegates objected on the ground that the Council membership included Arminians, Baptists, and Dispensationalists. The same Synod declined to send delegates to the Reformed Ecumenical Synod to be held in Edinburgh in 1953, because of the up-to-now uncertain stand of that body with reference to the World Council. The denomination will be represented at Edinburgh by official observers.

“With reference to other denominations in the Netherlands, the Christian Reformed Church will continue conversations with the recently formed Reformed group under the leadership of Dr. Schilder, and it issued a call to the Netherlands Reformed Church ‘to return completely to the true worship of God.’”