Someone was talking about revival in the context of the current events at Asbury. The person made the statement that they're not preaching repentance like Jonah preached repentance. Regardless of what's going on at Asbury – I'm skeptical – , I'm having trouble understanding how someone can read the book of Jonah and conclude that Jonah preached repentance.
Jonah is a remarkable book both because of what it says and because of what it doesn't say. If you read Jonah in a KJV or Darby Translation or even the ASV, you'll be surprised to find that the only Person who is said to repent in the book of Jonah is God (Jonah 3:9–10, Jonah 4:2). Newer translations (NASB, ESV, NKJV, etc.) use the word "relent" instead.
But the point remains that the text doesn't say that either Jonah or the people of Nineveh repented. It's true that the king of Nineveh commanded all the people to "every one turn from his evil way" (Jonah 3:8), so we might see that as repentance, but Scripture doesn't use that word.
It's even harder to make the case that Jonah preached repentance. Scripture tells us explicitly what Jonah preached – "Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown!" (Jonah 3:4, ESV). There's no call to repentance in that, it's only a proclamation of judgment. In fact, it's difficult to put a message of repentance in Jonah's words given in Jonah 3:5–10. The king's words in particular are difficult to reconcile with the notion that Jonah was preaching repentance: he explicitly says they should all turn from their evils ways so that perhaps God might see it and change His mind (Jonah 3:9). That's not someone who believed a message of repentance, it's someone who believed a message of judgment.
So no, Jonah did not preach repentance.
This wouldn't perhaps be worth comment, except that it's a trend I'm seeing in a whole lot of places: the tendency to appeal to Scripture, while not apparently paying attention to what Scripture actually says. And I think the Jonah example is one of the clearest.
On the whole, I think referring to Jonah with respect to so-called revivals is wise. There is a good deal of value in contrasting the repentance of Nineveh with modern "revivals" that don't seem to involve encounters with the holy God, or with one's own need of the Savior. I think this is a good use of Scripture.
And I can't miss the irony that so many preachers I have heard expound on how Eve got into trouble by misquoting God's words (Genesis 3:3) do the very same thing. I was commenting to my wife recently, that there's a preacher I have found very helpful; but I have never – never – heard him quote Scripture correctly. Every single time, without fail, he slightly misquotes the verse.
It is good and right that we should judge ourselves by the word of God. It is only proper that we should appeal to its authority and submit ourselves to it. And it should absolutely be the standard that we use to judge what we see and hear. But when we're not careful to say only the words God has said – when we misquote God – that's not evidence that we hold His words in awe. That's not respect, it's merely trying to put the authority of Scripture on our own ideas.
Of course we don't want to make a man a transgressor for a word. Especially when we have so many Bible translations to use, quoting Scripture gets complicated.
At the same time, if we're going to claim to be speaking the words God spoke, we need to be sure we're quoting them correctly. And when misquoting Scripture is a habit, not something remarkable, then we need to carefully judge whether we really respect what God has said.
Maybe we need to learn to fear God more.
13 comments:
Mark, concerning Asbury - I am also skeptical.
I have been looking at what is known as Hezekiah’s revival in 2 Chronicles 29-31. The word ‘revival’ doesn’t really cover what happened in that short time. It was to me a recovery, and all revival needs to be measured against what is recovered.
I believe an important starting principle in considering events like Asbury is found in 2 John 9: “whosoever transgresseth and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ hath not God”. So we are not left with peoples ‘lived experience’ - we assess all events like this by the doctrine of Christ. The KJV translation ‘transgresseth’ is unfortunate. JND translates ‘goes forward’. It is the idea that at the end of the Apostolic age men were wanting to move the testimony forward from the foundation established by the apostles. I submit that going forward is Satan’s language to the churches. The Lord’s words to the churches are found in Revelation 2&3: ‘remember’,‘repent’, ‘hold fast’ and ‘strengthen’.
True revival and recovery involves us assessing how far we have moved from the foundation which is already laid, which is Jesus Christ. What is of Him is to be held fast and strengthened. Everything else is to be repented of and removed.
Hezekiah found at the age of 25 that previous generations had filled the house of God with rubbish. He instructed it all to be removed as an act of repentance. Then he remembered what David did in the house, and then went back to what Moses did and finally he went back to what Abraham, Isaac and Jacob did. He understood that, paradoxically, revival comes not by going forward, but by going backwards. And it involves the sanctuary not the street. Worship is at the centre of it all - the burnt offering and the Passover - appreciation of Christ. Gibson, Fender, Yamaha, Korg and all the other instrument makers cannot produce worship to the Father ‘in Spirit and truth’.
“The tree planted by the rivers of water loaded with fruit needs not excite our anxiety for its revival, for its fruitfulness and beauty charm every one. Such should be the constant condition of the sons of God. Feeding and lying down in green pastures and led by the still waters they ought not always to be crying, "my leanness, my leanness, woe unto me." Sustained by gracious promises and enriched out of the fullness which God has treasured up in his dear Son, their souls should prosper and be in health, and their piety ought to need no reviving. They should aspire to a higher blessing, a richer mercy, than a mere revival. They have the nether springs already; they should earnestly cover the upper springs. They should be asking for growth in grace, for increase of strength, for greater success; they should have out-climbed and out-soared the period in which they need to be constantly crying, "Wilt thou not revive us again?" For a church to be constantly needing revival is the indication of much sin, for if it were sound before the Lord it would remain in the condition into which a revival would uplift its members. A church should be a camp of soldiers, not an hospital of invalids.” C.H. Spurgeon
Amen and Amen! Thanks for that, Robert.
Yes - Amen and Amen!
Very helpful, Robert. On that note, the writings of John seem to have a revivalistic character to them. I’m thinking of the three statements of the purpose of his first epistle:
“these things write we unto you, that your joy may be full” (1:4)
“these things write I unto you, that ye sin not” (2:1)
“These things have I written unto you that believe on the Name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the Name of the Son of God.” (5:13)
At the same time, John is constantly bringing us back:
“That which was from the beginning…” (1:1)
“an old commandment which ye had from the beginning” (2:7)
“ye have known Him that is from the beginning” (2:13)
“this is the message that ye heard from the beginning” (3:11)
John’s gospel also bears this character, as well as the Revelation: “Remember therefore from whence thou art fallen, and repent, and do the first works…”
King Charles' campaign starts next weekend so if the rapture doesn't happen before then he might not be the white rider.
March 23rd is the beginning of the Jewish new year. Nissan which is the month of the passover starts then. The Sunday after the passover is resurrection Sunday. King Charles campaign starts on Sunday the 26th. That might be the true date of resurrection Sunday.
https://www.france24.com/en/europe/20230303-charles-iii-will-travel-to-france-germany-on-first-state-visits-as-king
Charles III will travel to France, Germany on first state visits as king.
The visits will take place from March 26 to March 31, ahead of the king's coronation on May 6.
It's both a royal and victor's crown.
NicW - I wonder if you might consider the possibility that the white horse and its rider does not represent a man but a principle? It is clear that the other horses represent principles - war, famine and death, so why define the first horse as a man? If you then ask what is the bloodless principle that will conquer the world, I would suggest it is ‘deceit’. I would support my view by referring to the Lord’s words in Matthew 24: 4-8. The beginning of sorrows is the first 3.5 years of the tribulation period and it is in those years that the world will be prepared for the events of Revelation 13. How is it possible that the entire world will be conquered? The Lord warns the disciples, ‘Take heed that no man deceive you’. And again He indicates that the period known as the ‘beginning of sorrows’ will commence with many being deceived. He shadows of the future are falling on our world and it does not take much spirituality to see that already the principle of deception pervades governments and organisations like the EU, WEF, and WHO. The current biggest deceit that is promoted in the Western world is climate change, which is a direct Satanic attack on the Lord who ‘upholdeth all things by the word of His power’.
As a UK citizen, I have low expectations for the reign of King Charles and I find it unlikely that he is to play such a major role in future events.
Robert - I agree.
A principle isn't a crowned type of Christ. The tribulation is bookended by two white riders with crowns one at beginning one at end.
King Charles(first beast/white rider) is going to play the false Christ figure who is slain by the real Christ figure Plantard de Saint-Clair (second beast/black rider) at mid tribulation. It's going to play out like the Arthurian legend where king Arthur is slain by Mordred because they are templar occultists.
And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war.
12 His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself. Rev 19
https://watch-unto-prayer.org/macarthur-10-clan-macarthur.html
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mordred
The other part of this is the overthrow of mystery Babylon(catholic church) by the second beast for disbanding the knights templar and burning Jacques de Molay at the stake on March 22nd(322) that's why king Charles' campaign starts at this time of year.
https://watch-unto-prayer.org/new-laws.html#12.D
could that website be conspiracy nonsense?
Like everything take it with a grain of salt. There's still a lot of good info. What is true is that ritual sodomites and secret societies rule everything.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freemasonry
"Throughout history some members of the fraternity have made no secret of their involvement, while others have not made their membership public."
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Freemasons
"Claims were made that during Templar admissions ceremonies, recruits were forced to spit on the Cross, deny Christ, and engage in indecent kissing; brethren were also accused of worshipping idols, and the order was said to have encouraged homosexual practices."
https://www.britannica.com/biography/Jacques-de-Molay
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knights_Templar
@NicW - You'll find we're not always in agreement on everything. I've learned to listen carefully to people who comment here, they've towed me out of more than one ditch. But I know for a fact there's a lot of friendly disagreement. But I can honestly say the disagreement here is friendly.
I don't have a firm opinion on the horsemen (the first four seals). Their presence in the seals points to judgment on the earth, but whether they're in the first 42 months, or whether they're a preview of the Beast/Antichrist/Harlot of chapters 13ff – or whether they're something else entirely – is less clear.
I lean to them being impersonal symbols, representing judgments on the earth (which I think Robert said better above). My suspicion is that the earth-dwellers won't even recognize them as divine judgments. I expect earth-dwellers will see famine and plague and war and violence, but won't likely see them as anything supernatural.
That being said, I suspect they're not limited to the first 42 months. It seems to me they characterize all the judgements on the earth that are described in Revelation 6–18.
Post a Comment