I WAS THINKING 2

When I was young all adults were Victorians. They reared me and taught me. We had less comforts and conveniences, but 100 times less crime than today because children went to Sunday school and learned Scripture at day school. Church and chapel were barriers against the lawlessness which is now an uncontrollable flood. Civilised decency then did not need today's detailed legislation or Politically Correct fanatics policing our family affairs and legislating how to be 'sensitive' with what words we used.

I lived with grandparents, non-religious but who accepted Christian ideas of right and wrong as a law of nature and also the Sabbath with no working, buying, shopping, shows, gardening, cleaning, knitting, sewing, card playing, dominoes or children's games. We honoured a remote God by wearing our best boots.

At 12 I became a Christian in a church of grown-ups all born in the 19th century. Additionally they also followed the 19th century holiness culture. "Spirituality", meant separation from all worldliness. I first met the pastor at a church tea and saw him put his hand to his face shocked when a woman helper wore a sleeveless dress. Flesh-coloured stockings and lipstick would have shocked him more. Some disapproved of the church tea, saying "When the cups begin to rattle the devil begins to prattle."

"Separation" was mostly against things, rightly so sometimes, smoking, drinking, betting, pubs and clubs, horse-race and dog tracks, bad language and it extended into the fields of jazz music, cinemas, Sunday travel , the 'wireless', shows etc. Theatres had been sinful since the Globe Theatre of Shakespeare's days. A Press card authorised me to gather sports reports for the local newspaper until I realised my church did not favour professional matches. I read only religious books and played only religious music. Later I signed up in a symphony orchestra but after a while resigned, feeling I was 'sitting in the seat of the scornful'. It lost me the opportunity to play under the baton of famous Sir Henry Wood.

Maybe it is early training and my separation-conditioned conscience, but a bell still tinkles against crossing the old well-marked lines of demarcation. Once I did cross and went to a West End cinema. After 10 minutes I had savoured the world and walked out protesting at the infuriating blasphemy on the screen. In music 'pop', is simply beyond my comprehension. As for fiction - well I have even written some.

So there you are, my personal confession and recollections of formidable "separation"! But I was thinking about it, because it struck me how long it is since I heard the word separation.

First. I know it made Christian witness difficult. I could not answer arguments against my austerity where I worked with qualified men. To them it was quaint, eccentric and made Christianity unattractive. My argument was that 'Jesus satisfies'. Yes, but hardly in the way I went about it! In my teens I had no truck with girls except lift my hat as I walked on past them in the street leaving church.

'Separation' is outward profession, not an inward virtue, but there should be outward profession for all that, though not as a sacrament to trigger God's approval. 'Do's and don'ts' may breed only an illusion of spirituality. The devil's temptations are more subtle than not going to the pictures. Real godliness is concerned with character weaknesses and ghastly imperfections. Outwardly separated people keeping the strict rules with an appearance of godliness, (and there's no law against that), may yet be guilty of other kinds of sins, even the most gross failures. Outstanding leaders have exemplified this tragic fact.

Some weaknesses are very strong! Scripture declares the heart of man is desperately wicked. We are never anything else really but sinners walking on the brink of the abyss, kept by the hand of Christ. Wriggle out of His grasp and like even great Bible characters, fall. Moses gave the world its basic laws of civilised behaviour but died because of indiscretion. Scripture even warns 'they that are spiritual among you' that while restoring the lapsed they themselves are vulnerable. But, thank God, if we crash, by His mercy we can get up, find forgiveness and restoration, and then like David in Psalm 51 determine to honour God and tell the world of God's mercy and forgiveness.

Outward piety may be easy but integrity a struggle, with absolute purity of motivation, goodness, and bringing every thought into the captivity of the Holy Spirit. To 'love not the world' means not loving what the world loves - money, fame and power. Godliness has ten thousand qualities and they are all spelled l-o-v-e. We live only as much as we love.

One vital thing must be said. We may fault Victorian rules but has separation no meaning at all nowadays? Is un-worldliness outmoded, old school? Can we now live like non-Christians. be born-again without it being noticeable and indulge in the same pleasures like Israel adopted the idolatry of their neighbouring Canaanites? 'Separation' perhaps had indefensible interpretations, but are there no off-limits to Christians today?

Being like the world is no way to change it. Abraham changed the world for ever by steering clear of it. A cartoon showed a swearing, drinking, parson leaving a pub after telling dirty stories. A patron watching him leave remarked "I can't stand these UN-holier than thou types!" Narrow separationism may handicap Christian witness with its hair-shirt image but a pendulum swing to liberalism is worse.

Things once disapproved may change. The old rule was against football, but few think that way today. It seems innocent enough. Except - the world has stamped it as its own religion, a priority 'more than life and death' as one club manager said. For the non-Christian "These be thy gods O Israel!" TV, radio and Press force-feed us with the 'beautiful game'. Every newscast ends with football like a devotional epilogue. If the game can be enjoyed, why not? But should we be more passionate club followers than Jesus followers?

The Gospel is our supremely important business. If it isn't, then perhaps it is time for repentance, renunciation, and revival. Should followers of Jesus know pop songs better than songs of the faith? Or be greater fans of the world's 'stars' than of dedicated men and women serving God? A woman said to be 'the greatest comedienne', said in a TV interview that Christianity was 'rubbish'. Rubbish, yet it commands the devotion of far greater minds than hers! What admiration can we have for people like that?

The world has unworthy passions. "Lovest thou me more than these?". The love of Christ is backed by a million reasons. It ought to infuse all we do, where we go and what we say. It need not be a raucous shout in the market place, but it can be a subtle perfume that everybody notices.

Sanctity is not sanctimonious, not repellent but appealing, not judgemental but understanding. It has grace, not airs and graces. It looks up, but is not uppish, in the world but not of it, comes to save the world, not condemn it, loves the world but only as God loved it.

The thrice holy God, the Wholly Other One, came to earth, so gracious that sinners drew near Him and the common people heard Him gladly. That is our great ideal and example. That's what I've been thinking anyway.

PROPHETS, PAST AND PRESENT

"Too often, modern 'prophets' stream through our churches, fellowships,, and homes giving words almost like fortune tellers. But is God really speaking?" So I read on the back page blurb of John Bevere's book "Thus saith the Lord?" It is American 'comfort writing', small bytes of teaching sugared heavily with tales, but this time the tales are needed as exemplary warnings.

From it I gather that prophesying is the USA has taken off in a big way. John Bevere accepts that everybody could prophesy to everybody else but his concern is the frequent tragic consequences. From my crows' nest I don't see prophets clustering yet on British horizons. However, western winds do blow fashions our way sooner or later, like the awful American litigation culture, British lawyer's now encouraging greedy claims for compensation here.

The Church of God USA is holding a conference on "The Place of Prophets in the church today." In preparation, Chris Thomas, the Church of God Professor of Biblical Studies has drawn together the New Testament references taking in turn each writer. They say surprisingly little and or even nothing about prophecy. For that matter the New Testament says just as little about other spiritual gifts, but prophecy is the most heavily emphasised today.

Preachers coming with a 'prophetic ministry' are usually from overseas. I'll surprise many when I admit I am a little hazy about what their claim means. Donald Gee, that original global patriarch and guide of earlier Pentecostals insisted prophecy often could be preaching. Well, what is higher than the Word? Is the prophecy better than the Word?

In the New Testament the word 'prophet' occurs 15O times but 139 are Old Testament prophets. 'Prophecy' and 'prophesy' come 47times, 16 Old Testament references The total of 42 references are preponderantly warnings about false prophets and prophesying.

Prophets have always been a worry, way back to Balaam. Moses laid down tests for the true and the false. All prophecy needs a cautious approach and safeguards. Self-appointed prophets have brought huge divisions and spawned new religions and sects. Mahomet proclaimed himself a prophet and so have other religious founders. Jesus, by the way, did not. There are allusions to Jesus as a prophet but He was not a prophet in the Old Testament sense. They spoke in the name of the Lord, but Jesus spoke in His own name.

Paul said 'despise not prophesying' so it looks as if they did despise it. It lifts the lid off the early churches. Christ left warnings about prophesy as did His apostles. Commentators say Paul wrote to Corinth to correct the misuse of tongues, but I see less of that than to ensure that prophecies were judged. I've heard one individual in a service prophesy AT another, and no pastoral check. Often 'prophets declaim 'I the Lord do say unto thee" at considerable length but what actually eventually is said is trite and trivial, hardly the hallmark of the Almighty.

Paul ruled that prophesies should be judged, but I don't see it done too often today. How much is Divine inspiration and how much verbal inebriation? Denominational decisions have been taken following untested prophecies. Subsequent results stripped their away pretentious disguise. Extreme caution must be exercised especially for one-to-one prophesies. Personally I would doubt them unless Biblical checks and balances are applied and they are linked to supernatural validation of some kind. It hurts me too much to recall the ruin I've seen wrought by private prophecy.

I heard a woman tell another that she would enquire of the Lord about a problem she had, and would let her know what the Lord wanted her to do. She spoke as if it was Old Testament times when prophets communicated the mind of the Lord. Today every believer has equal access to God. That fundamentally changes the function of the prophet. I asked some ultra Pentecostals to sell me their redundant church recently, and they said they would 'ask the prophet'. They then sold it to Jehovah Witnesses. Professor Thomas, John Bevere, and many others write as if 'prophet' always means the same thing. But it clearly does not. Christ said "All the prophets prophesied until John". John the Baptist, Jesus said was "more than a prophet". The word changed its meaning from that time. Every true prophet speaks by the Holy Spirit, but the New Testament role is different. For example, Hebrew prophets were sent to the people of God, that is, the whole nation of Israel. Apart from Scripture, no apostle or prophet ever addressed nations, nor even all the people of God at large.

The Corinthian letter indicates that prophecies are normally within the church, where they can be judged by hearers, and only held fast if good. To judge a prophecy it would be necessary to know the prophet and his Divine credentials. Otherwise it needs supernatural authentication. Within the church the speaker of a prophecy is known. Anonymous prophecies are not envisaged in Scripture, and it would be naïve to accept them. Such prophecies arrive by post sometimes, perhaps from a group consensus.

Common sense safeguards are common sense. Prophecies duplicated or printed are circulated wide-cast from a computer list of names. It is hard to think that the Spirit addresses people in anonymous and indiscriminating fashion. Individuals claiming a 'ministry' send 'words from the Lord' to whoever they think. One came to me recently, judgemental, and quite pretentious, so wide of the mark I could not see what it had to do with me at all. Another warned me I was in 'great danger' and could die with cancer like another person he didn't like. I've survived beyond his cheerful anticipations.

Nobody ever prophesied to me face to face, yet more than once a colleague has dropped an apparently casual word as if direct from heaven, correcting and building me up, comforting and encouraging. No prophecy has mandatory force. A leading Pentecostal figure said he also had known a casual remark to bring assurance of God's will, with tremendous and far reaching results. Prophets had come to 'minister' to him but he did not need them as he knew already what God wanted. Prophecy giving explicit direction is unknown in the New Testament. In the book of Acts the apostle Paul refused to be deflected from his course by prophets, saying 'none of these things moved me'.

I wonder if the present popularity of prophesying is to get God to say something? Why must God be always speaking to us if we are already doing His will? How does it serve God for prophets to know about the private lives of members of the congregation? Just to bolster their prophetical ministry? Like John Bevere says, it is like fortune telling. In a current TV programme, subjects are told by psychics about themselves. Didn't they know already! The point escapes me.

Early Israel had no churches or synagogues, few people could read, and few Scripture copies existed. The only way was laid down in Scripture that fathers must memorise the words of God and teach them constantly to their children. Prophets meanwhile came to keep the people in the way of the Lord. The 'schools of the prophets' had the sane purpose, a form of preaching. Lacking regular Bible instruction it is not surprising that Israeli people fell into the idolatrous ways of their next door Canaanites.

The Spirit of the Lord rested only upon individuals, such as Moses. It was regarded as the Spirit of Moses, or the spirit of Elijah, and 'the spirit of the prophets'. The prophets did far more than prophesy by the Spirit of God or just to foretell. Their work was to safeguard the people of God. Samuel kept the whole nation together, an ideal example. David believed He had the Spirit of God to fight Israel's enemies. Prophesying is only one aspect of the Spirit of prophecy.

When Joel said God would pour out His Spirit upon all flesh it was an incredible prediction. Jesus said that if we asked for the Holy Spirit we would receive it. That was revolutionary. The disciples spoke with tongues on the day of Pentecost but Joel did not mention tongues, Nevertheless Peter said tongues fulfilled the promise that 'your sons and daughters will prophesy'. They had received the Spirit of the ancient prophets, The Spirit rested on Moses, the greatest of the prophets, empowering him for his delivering and world changing work.

The Spirit of the prophets,, or the Spirit of prophecy, is the Holy Spirit. He has other functions than prophecy, very particularly to empower us witnesses of Christ to fulfil the Great Commission. Mystical messages between church members is a minor operation.

"Prophets" are in the list of five gifts in Ephesians 4, but their precise work is not described, except it was for the founding of the early church. For the first Christians there was no New Testament to read, no words of Christ and the apostles available except by word of mouth. The role of prophet was something like that of the Hebrew schools of the prophets, to bring the Word to remote groups of Christians. They were itinerants. They might come with false teaching, and that was an ever-present anxiety to the apostles with little of the Word available to check.

I suppose preaching when anointed partakes of the character of prophesy. Without the anointing how valid is it? A 'prophetic ministry' I would assume is one aspect of the Spirit coming under the category of the word of wisdom or the word of knowledge. Most people in the ministry have experience of such gifts, though whether we can call up such a 'word' on command is a question to be studied. For me, there are times such 'words' of revelation, and times when I know nothing. I don't guess.

However the Holy Spirit does not need to accommodates Himself to our preconceived ideas, except to witness to Bible truth, especially about Jesus. Jesus is the focus, not supernatural phenomena.

IS BRITAIN UNDER JUDGMENT?

When something unpleasant happens to an unpleasant character we say it was a judgment on him, "he got what he deserved". Well, now a question. If the same misfortune fell on somebody else, did it show they also deserved it, secretly?

That's the question in the book of Job. Were his troubles appropriate? The three 'comforters' said yes, that Job must have sinned to be so greatly afflicted and that the Almighty never chastises without cause. Job indignantly disagreed. Chapter 42 portrays God as saying Job had spoken that which was right.

Jesus handled the same question saying "Do you think that these Galileans (killed by Pilate) were worse sinners because they suffered this way? Or those eighteen who died when the tower in Siloam fell on them - do you think they were more guilty than all others living in Jerusalem?" Job said that man born of woman is of few days and full of trouble as the sparks fly upwards. In other words, don't judge people by what happens to them.

On what grounds is it said that Britain is under judgment? Calamities? Are they evidence? Scripture indicates not. Trouble in our fallen world is indiscriminating. If events are the criteria some believe God has blessed Britain, considering the economy, affluence and general conditions, considerably better than countries in Europe.

Of course the whole sinful world is under judgement for that matter. All nations exist in conditions of permanent catastrophe. But we are living in the age of grace and mercy. But are there special acts of judgement? Scripture shows that we can't take events as grounds so we need New Testament grounds. Where are they? They are not very conspicuous. Rather the Book declares the goodness and mercy of God in the land of the living.

A prophecy of impending national distress circularised 16 years ago by a respected leader I kept on file. The author said he 'stood in the counsel the Lord'. (don't we all now?) Perhaps Britain deserves judgment, but I find it hard to discern any correspondence between the prophecy and subsequent events to this time. This is only one instance.

The Bible teaches us that we reap what we sow, good or bad. Sin is a reproach to any nation and automatically brings evil consequences. In that sense it is God's judgment but not by special Divine edict. The godlessness of people in Britain is wickedly inexcusable and deliberate. Such culpable wrong brings inevitable effects, particularly crime and corruption. The Christian task is not pronouncements of judgment but the Gospel, the Good News, and the call to repent and believe in Christ.

ABOUT 'I WAS THINKING'.

Requests for (free) copies of IWT come to me daily, together with letters of extraordinary comfort to any writer, some telling me that over the years IIWT has been a major influence. Putting forth my thinking is not egotism, I trust. My qualifications are, first that people with my length of Pentecostal activity and experience is a shrinking company. I am with good memory and perfect health. I wasn't born with a silver spoon in my mouth but with a pen in my hand. Having knowledge and experience from really early days of Pentecost, knowing many leaders personally, and being a devouring bookworm with a special taste for theological and historical print, I am investing my own money as an offering and service to God, to inform, inspire and encourage the ten thousand to whom I send this second issue as well as those who made personal requests.