WHEREIN THE DOCTRINE OF PREDESTINATION IS EXPLAINED AS IT RELATES IN GENERAL TO ALL MEN.
Thus much being premised with relation to the Scripture terms commonly made use of in this controversy, we shall now proceed to take a nearer view of this high and mysterious article, and-
II.-We assert that God did from eternity decree to make man in His own image, and also decreed to suffer him to fall from that image in which he should be created, and thereby to forfeit the happiness with which he was invested, which decree and the consequences of it were not limited to Adam only, but included and extended to all his natural posterity.
Something of this was hinted already in the preceding chapter, and we shall now proceed to the proof of it.
(1) That God did make man in His own image is evident from Scripture (Gen 1:27)
(2) That He decreed from eternity so to make man is as evident, since for God to do anything without having decreed it, or fixed a previous plan in His own mind, would be a manifest imputation on His wisdom, and if He decreed that now, or at any time, which He did not always decree, He could not be unchangeable.
(3) That man actually did fall from the Divine image and his original happiness is the undoubted voice of Scripture (Gen 3:), and
(4) That he fell in consequence of the Divine decree* we prove thus: God was either willing that Adam should fall, or unwilling, or indifferent about it. If God was unwilling that Adam should transgress, ho came it to pass that he did? Is man stronger and is Satan wiser than He that made them? Surely no. Again, could not God, had it so pleased Him, have hindered the tempter’s access to paradise? or have created man, as He did the elect angels, with a will invariably determined to good only and incapable of being biassed to evil? or, at least, have made the grace and strength, with which He endued Adam, actually effectual to the resisting of all solicitations to sin? None but atheists would answer these questions in the negative. Surely, if God had not willed the fall, He could, and no doubt would, have prevented it; but He did not prevent it: ergo He willed it. And if He willed it, He certainly decreed it, for the decree of God is nothing else but the seal and ratification of His Will. He does nothing but what He decreed, and He decreed nothing which He did not will, and both will and decree are absolutely eternal, though the execution of both be in time. The only way to evade the force of this reasoning is to say that “God was indifferent and unconcerned whether man stood or fell.” But in what a shameful, unworthy light does this represent the Deity! Is it possible for us to imagine that God could be an idle, careless spectator of one of the most important events that ever came to pass? Are not “the very hairs of our head all numbered”? or does “a sparrow fall to the ground without our heavenly Father”? If, then, things the most trivial and worthless are subject to the appointment of His decree and the control of His providence, how much more is man, the masterpiece of this lower creation? and above all that man Adam, who when recent from his Maker’s hands was the living image of God Himself, and very little inferior to angels! and on whose perseverance was suspended the welfare not of himself only, but likewise that of the whole world. But, so far was God from being indifferent in this matter, that there is nothing whatever about which He is so, for He worketh all things, without exception,” after the counsel of His own will” (Eph 1:11), consequently, if He positively wills whatever is done, He cannot be indifferent with regard to anything. On the whole, if God was not unwilling that Adam should fall, He must have been willing that he should, since between God’s willing and nilling there is no medium. And is it not highly rational as well as Scriptural, nay, is it not absolutely necessary to suppose that the fall was not contrary to the will and determination of God? since, if it was, His will (which the apostle represents as being irresistible, Rom 9:19) was apparently frustrated and His determination rendered of worse than none effect. And how dishonourable to, how inconsistent with, and how notoriously subversive of the dignity of God such a blasphemous supposition would be, and how irreconcilable with every one of His allowed attributes is very easy to observe.
* See this article judiciously stated and nervously asserted by Witsius in his Oecon. 1.1, cap. 8, s.1O-25.
(5) That man by his fall forfeited the happiness with which he was invested is evident as well from Scripture as from experience (Gen 3:7-24; Rom 5:12; Gal 3:10). He first sinned (and the essence of sin lies in disobedience to the command of God) and then immediately became miserable, misery being through the Divine appointment, the natural and inseparable concomitant of sin.
(6) That the fall and its sad consequences did not terminate solely in Adam, but affected his whole posterity, is the doctrine of the sacred oracles (Psalm li. 5; Rom 5:12-19; 1Co 15:22; Eph 2:3). Besides, not only spiritual and eternal, but likewise temporal death is the wages of sin (Rom 6:23; James 1:15), and yet we see that millions of infants, who never in their own persons either did or could commit sin, die continually. It follows that either God must be unjust in punishing the innocent, or that these infants are some way or the other guilty creatures; if they are not so in themselves (I mean actually so by their own commission of sin), they must be so in some other person, and who that person is let Scripture say (Rom 5:12,18; 1Co 15:22). And, I ask, how can these be with equity sharers in Adam’s punishment unless they are chargeable with his sin? and how can they be fairly chargeable with his sin unless he was their federal head and representative, and acted in their name, and sustained their persons, when he fell?
Jerome Zanchius-The Doctrine of Absolute Predestination Stated and Asserted-Translated by Augustus Montague Toplady
Reprobation Asserted; Or, The Doctrine Of Eternal Election And Reprobation Promiscuously Handled: In Eleven Chapters Wherein The Most Material Objections Made By The Opposers Of This Doctrine Are Fully Answered, Several Doubts Removed, And Sundry Cases Removed Conscience Resolved.
What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and therest were blinded —Romans 11:7.
Chapter 1 That there is a Reprobation.
Chapter 2 What Reprobation is.
Chapter 3 Of the Antiquity of Reprobation
Chapter 4 Of the Causes of Reprobation.
Chapter 5 Of the Unchangeableness of Eternal Reprobation.
Chapter 6 Whether to be Reprobated be the same with being Appointed beforehand unto Eternal Condemnation? If not, how do they Differ? Also whether Reprobation be the Cause of Condemnation?
Chapter 7 Whether any under Eternal Reprobation have Just Cause to Quarrel with God for not Electing of them?
Chapter 8 Whether Eternal Reprobation in itself, or in its Doctrine, be in very deed an Hindrance to any Man in seeking the Salvation of his Soul?
Chapter 9 Whether God would in deed and in truth that the Gospel, with the Grace thereof, should be tendered to those that yet he hath bound up under Eternal Reprobation?
Chapter 10 Seeing, then, that the Grace of God in the Gospel is by that to be Proffered to Sinners as Sinners, as well to the Reprobate as the Elect, is it possible for those who indeed are not Elect to Receive it and be Saved?
Chapter 11 Seeing it is not possible that the Reprobate should receive this Grace and live, and also seeing this is infallibly Foreseen of God, and again, seeing God hath – Fore. determined to suffer it so to be, why doth he yet Will and Command that the Gospel, and so Grace in the general tenders thereof, should be proffered unto them!
A. The First Reason
B. The Second Reason
C. The Third Reason
D. The Fourth Reason
E. The Fifth Reason
John Bunyan-Reprobation Asserted; Or, The Doctrine Of Eternal Election And Reprobation Promiscuously Handled: In Eleven Chapters Wherein The Most Material Objections Made By The Opposers Of This Doctrine Are Fully Answered, Several Doubts Removed, And Sundry Cases Removed Conscience Resolved.
1. Does not the title “Son of God” indicate to us that Jesus in not the only person that is God?
Yes; it suggests to us the Father.
2. What other person is also called God?
The Holy Spirit
3. Does this imply that there is more than one God?
No, the Bible teaches that the Father is God, that the Son is God, and that the Spirit is God, and yet that there is but one God.
4. Can we understand the nature of God as thus revealed to us?
We cannot; but we can believe and know that it is such as God teaches us.
5. Why can we not understand the nature of God?
Because our minds are limited in power, and the glorious mystery of the nature of God is boundless.
6. Is it in His nature only that God is beyond our knowledge?
No, He is mysterious also in all His works and ways.
7. What should we learn from this?
To trust Him, both in what He does and what He teaches.
James P. Boyce-A Brief Catechism of Bible Doctrine
A. The third commandment requires the holy and reverent use of God’s names, (Psalm 29:2) titles, attributes, (Revelation 15:3,4) ordinances, (Ecclesiastes 5:1) Word, (Psalm 138:2) and works. (Job 36:24; Deuteronomy 28:58,59)
Charles Haddon Spurgeon-A Puritan Catechism
The Wednesday Word: Peace Made Through the Blood Pt 4
And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, (Colossians 1:20)
Peace with God has already been made. In fact, peace with God was accomplished by the blood of Christ 2000 years ago. Because of the blood, we have peace with God (Romans 5:1) and we also enjoy its child, the peace of God (Colossians 3:15).
Faith sees the fullness of Christ’s sacrifice and embraces the fact that peace with God has already been declared. “Perhaps,” says someone, “I need to get some more faith for, as I examine my level of faith, I find it is not too high.” Oh no … you are on the wrong track altogether. Faith does not examine itself. Let me ask you, does your eye look in or out? Well of course it looks out, it does not examine itself. Faith is like this– it is always looking outward to the exalted Christ and His finished work.
Dr. F. B. Myer was once speaking to a lady about receiving salvation by faith. She couldn’t understand his message and told him so. At tea with her a day later, he suddenly turned and said, “Madam, may I please have a cup of tea?” She looked at his table and said, “Why, Dr. Meyer, you already have a cup of tea.” A little later he said again, “Will you please give me a cup of tea?” She replied, “Why, Dr. Meyer, don’t you see, you have a cup of tea right there at your plate.” In a few moments, he said again, “Please give me a cup of tea! I’m so tired, and I need it.” Utterly bewildered, his hostess started to speak, then caught her breath. After a moment she said, “Oh, Dr. Meyer, I see it all now. What you mean is that the Lord’s blessing, power, and forgiveness are right here before me, yet I am asking and asking for it, instead of taking it and finding peace through the shed blood of our Lord Jesus Christ.”
If Christ has died in your place, if He has poured out His blood for you, if He has risen and ascended into heaven, there to sit as your representative, then you are at peace. The war between you and God is over! No amount of you trying to feel this will improve your standing with God.
There is no one else to trust … faith sees this. Christ Jesus is our salvation. He is the One who poured out His blood. To deal with God, we must, therefore, deal with the Lord Jesus. Since Christ has been sacrificed for us, we are invited to draw near in full assurance of faith (Hebrews 10:22). Even though we are flawed, it is safe for us to draw near to God. There is no war because of the blood.
Some years ago, a gospel minister called in to see an aged lady, Grandma Murray. She told the minister that she had been trying to ‘make her peace’ with God and had devoted her life to religious duties and righteous living. In spite of all this, she had no peace. The minister sat down with her, and read our text, Colossians 1:20, “And, having made peace through the blood of his cross.” He then looked at her and said with a kindly voice, “My dear Mrs Murray, you are trying to perform a hopeless task. You are trying to do what has already been done.” The aged woman seemed amazed and said, “Let me read that for myself.” The preacher sat in silence while she slowly read the text. “Aye,” she said, “It’s strange how I never saw that before, and it was there all the time. I’ve been trying to do what Christ has already done long, long ago. What a stupid mistake! I might as well have tried to make another universe. But blessed be His name, I see that He has done it so I am satisfied with Him and His work, and I rest my soul upon it.”
And that’s the Gospel Truth
Please feel free to forward, blog or post the Wednesday Word.
Miles McKee Ministries,
7235 Bonneval Rd.
Or the UK and Ireland
8 Ard Beg,
Newbawn, County Wexford, Ireland.
Chapter 1-The Science of Theology
THE word Theology means literally a discourse concerning God but in analogy with other words, as geology, chronology and biology, it means the science which treats of God.
It naturally concerns itself with such questions as these: Is there a God; can he be known; what is his nature, and character; what are the relations he sustains to the universe, particularly to intelligent beings possessed of spiritual natures, and above all, as most important to us, to men; in what ways has he made himself known; and especially in what aspect does he reveal himself to them as sinner. This is Theology proper.
In connection with this last relation it treats, particularly, of man as a creature of God placed under the government of his moral law. It inquires into his original condition of innocence, and happiness; the manner in which he fell there from; and his present state of sinfulness, and condemnation and inability for self-rescue. This is Anthropology.
It is thus led, also, to discuss the nature of the salvation which God has provided as seen in the person and character of Jesus Christ, through whom it has come, and in the works of active and passive obedience, by which he has wrought out reconciliation to God. This is Soteriology.
In like manner, also, does it consider the nature and work of to Holy Spirit, through whom man is led to accept the provisions of God’s grace, and to attain through penitence and faith unto a salvation in Christ, which consists in freedom, not from condemnation only, but also from the dominion and defilement of sin, and in attainment of the holiness and happiness of children of the Heavenly Father. This is Pneumatology.
It follows man also beyond the death of the body, and makes known the future state of both the righteous and the wicked, as we before as after the resurrection of the body, together with the final judgment of both these classes, and the heaven and hell which shall be their respective abodes forever. This is Eschatology.
Finally it teaches the great end which God is accomplishing through all his works, in the manifestation to all his creatures of his own glory, as seen in its twofold aspect of mercy and justice in his dealings with this fallen race of man. This is Teleology.
The term “theology” is applied, not only to the science itself, but to any treatise on that science. This is true, not only of a discourse upon the one true God, but even of one upon the many false gods of the heathen. It is also true, though the treatise be not a scientific discussion, but simply an imaginative narrative or poem. Thus “Orpheus and Homer were called theologians among the Greek, because their poems treated of the nature of the gods.” (Charles Hodge Sys. Theol. Vol. 1, p. 19.) Even the poems of Ossian, though probably written in England within the past century, is a book of theology. Mythology is not less theology because it treats of false gods, and in works of the imagination.
The term “theology” is, however, especially applicable to learned and scientific works upon God, or the gods. Of these, many are to be found connected with Heathenism. Such are the Vedas, the most ancient of the sacred books of the Hindoos. Such is the Zendavesta of the ancient Persians. The Edda, which sets forth the Scandinavian mythology, consists of poetic songs, and also of dialogues on the origin of the gods, on the creation of the world, and other like topics. [See Gardner's Faiths of the World, Vol. 1, p. 795.]
The most valuable discussions among the heathen, however, are to be found in the works of the Greek philosophers, the greater part of which, when not directly upon the nature of the gods, involve questions as to the origin, of the world, and the presence therein of a divine controlling Spirit, as well as upon the nature of the soul, and its duties, and its immortality. Of their works many have come down to us in fragments only, while a large portion of what they taught is found only in the records and reports made by others; but there are also many complete works which profess to have been written by the authors of these speculations. Confessedly the most important of these Greek writings are Xenophon’s Memorabilia of Socrates, and the works of Plato, and Aristotle. But from the beginning of Grecian philosophy in Thales and Pythagoras to its culmination in Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle, was not quite two hundred years, while its whole history covers a period of six centuries and a half before, and five centuries after the coming of Christ. No human mind can estimate the value of these contributions, nor the influence they have exerted even over those possessed of the Christian Revelation.
The Latin writers also produced several works of a theological character, pre-eminent among which is that of Cicero “Concerning the nature of the Gods.”
Theology is, also, frequently used for the set of opinions exhibited by a writer, or class of writers, in any one or more productions. Thus we have the theology of Calvin, or of Arminius, or of Baxter, that of the Reformation, Princeton theology, and New England theology. Men also speak of the theology of the Old, or of the New Testament, the theology of the Psalms, of the various Evangelists, especially of John, and Petrine, and Pauline theology.
Theology is defined as a science. It is eminently worthy of that name. It lacks nothing that constitutes a science. It is concerned in the investigation of facts. It inquires into their existence, their relations to each other, their systematic arrangement, the laws which govern them, and the great principles which are the basis of this existence, and these relations.
As in other sciences, there is much that is absolutely known, much beyond this that is little questioned, much that is still matter of speculation, and much as to which there is decided difference of opinion. New facts are constantly developing in this science, as in others, which enable us to verify the facts and principles heretofore accepted, when true, and to modify them when erroneous. New theories present themselves for the better explanation of facts already known, and are tested by these, and by others subsequently discovered, and are received or rejected, according to their ascertained correctness. The knowledge of the past is built upon for progression towards the future.
The discovery of the facts is conducted, as in all other sciences, by study of what the field affords. Geology examines the earth, and derives its facts from the structure of that earth. Astronomy investigates the stars. Theology, likewise, studies the sources of its knowledge. Each science seeks to arrive at the truth. The votaries of each are certain that it is to be found in their fields, either partially, or completely. The perfect attainment of all facts prepares for the exactness of scientific knowledge. The absence of any must make the knowledge incomplete. The proper generalization of all is essential in this, as in all other kinds of science. A full knowledge of all the facts, and a perfect generalization of them, will constitute theology an exact science.
Theology is also as sensitive to the absence of facts as is any other science. The astronomer finds that his calculations, based upon correct theories, are not exactly verified, and at once suspects the presence of some disturbing body as the cause of this variation. So, also, in theology. The omission of a single fact, however small, must affect the whole universe of doctrine. The common mind does not perceive this, and hence is not prepared to value the discovery of the new fact. But the theologian finds in the new and more exact adjustment, thus made possible, the proof of the truth of his whole system, and therefore prizes it, even sometimes beyond what he ought.
Regarded as a science, theology may be classified in various forms.
1. According to the method of revelation, into natural and supernatural theology.
Natural theology embraces what man may attain by the study of God in Nature. This extends not only to what is beheld of him in the Heavens and the Earth, but also in the intellectual and spiritual nature of man himself.
Supernatural theology is that derived from such special information as God has given by what we commonly call Revelation.
2. According to the purpose which it contemplates, into Systematic Theology, also called Didactic, or Dogmatic; Polemic or Controversial Theology; and Practical or Experimental Theology.
3. According to the main religious idea associated with it, as Pantheistic Theology; Deistic Theology; Rationalistic Theology, &c.
4. According to the name of its founder, or the race in which it originated, or flourishes, as Christian Theology; Judaistic Theology; Mohammedan Theology, &c.
5. According to the sources from which it is derived, into Biblical Theology; Christian Dogmatic Theology; and Ecclesiastical Dogmatics.
Biblical Theology consists in the facts of the Bible, harmonize by scriptural comparison, generalized by scriptural theories, crystalized into scriptural doctrines, and so systematized as to show the system of truth taught, to the full extent that it is a system, and no farther. As in Botany, one gathers all the plants of the world, and arranges them without attempting to introduce new plants, even to fill up manifest gaps, so Biblical Theology, duly presented, show scriptural truth in all the perfection, and in all the imperfection with which God has given it.
True Biblical Theology should recognize the inspired source whence come its teachings. But, as now technically used, Biblical Theology refers to the statement and development of doctrine by the various Biblical writers, or in other words to the development of Jewish religious thought without assuming or denying the inspiration of the Bible.
Christian Dogmatics is not confined, as is Biblical, to the facts and theories and statements of doctrine expressly and formally set forth in the Scriptures. It comprises in addition such philosophical explanations as seem necessary to make a complete and harmonious system. These additions are not necessarily non-scriptural, for they are often the embodiment of the very essence of Bible truth though not of its formal utterances. They may be as much a part of Scripture as the theory of gravitation is of the revelation of nature. They should never be so far unscriptural as not to be either probable inferences from the Word of God or natural explanations of its statements. The more perfectly they accord with that word, and the greater the proportion of its facts which they explain, the more clearly do they establish their own truth, and the more forcibly do they demand universal acceptance. Failure to explain all difficulties or to harmonize all facts does not deprive them of confidence, but only teaches the need of further investigation. Direct opposition, however, to any one scriptural truth is enough to prove the existence of error in any Christian Dogmatic statement.
Ecclesiastical Dogmatics consists of authoritative statements of doctrine put forth by some body of Christians claiming to be a church of Christ. These are to be found in creeds, symbols, decrees, apologies and resolutions. They may also appear in the form of authoritative discussions of the creed or system of doctrine of any church.
It thus appears that a perfect system of theology will combine all of these classes. It must be based upon Biblical dogmatics which shall have so collected and systematized all the teachings of a full revelation as to be concurrent with the facts and doctrines of Christian Dogmatics.
The Ecclesiastical Dogmatics will have gone no farther than fully authorized by the Word of God, and therefore will concur with Biblical Dogmatics, while the fullness of revelation will have left to Christian Dogmatics no speculative questions; but in all its discussions it will have been able to attain unto full knowledge of the facts, and ascertainment of all the doctrines.
But this concurrence can only be when Theology has been reduced to an exact science. This can never be looked for in this life.
The causes of doctrinal variation will therefore be apparent.
If men came to the study of Biblical Theology with minds entirely unprejudiced, capable of examining its truths with the same mental powers, and with the same amount of study, all would agree as to its facts and doctrines. But this cannot be done. Mental capacities vary. All men have their prejudices. All have not equal time for study, and all use not equally the time that they have. Thus variety is certain even in studying Biblical Theology.
The same causes increase this in Christian Dogmatics, because here the human element enters more largely than in Biblical Theology; while reverence for antiquity, opposition to change, and the influence of the learned of the past and the present, prevent the alteration of Ecclesiastical creeds which embody Ecclesiastical Dogmatics, and thus lead men constantly to continuance in error, and refusal to accept truth.
These facts show with what spirit we should study Theology:
1. With reverence for truth, and especially for the truth taught in the Word of God.
2. With earnest prayer for Divine help.
3. With careful searching of heart against prejudice.
4. With timidity, as to the reception and propagation of new doctrine.
5. But with a spirit willing and anxious to examine, and to accept whatever we may be convinced is true.
6. With teachable humility, which, knowing that God has not taught us in his word all the truth that exists, not even all the truth on many a single point, accepts with implicit faith all that he has taught, and awaits his own time for that more full revelation which shall remove all our present perplexities.
The advantages of studying theology systematically are several.
1. We thus ascertain all that nature and the Scriptures teach on each point.
2. We compare all these teachings one with another and are enabled to define their mutual limitations.
3. We are brought face to face with the fact that our knowledge is bounded by God’s Revelation, and are led to acknowledge it as its source.
4. We are consequently warned not to omit any of the truth ascertained from any source, nor to add to it anything not properly embraced therein. A departure from this rule will lead into inevitable error.
5. The harmony, and consistency, which will be found in all God’s teachings, from whatever source we may draw them, will become conclusive proof of the divine origin of revelation. This will result, not only from a comparison of what Reason and Nature teach, with the revelations of God’s Word, but of each of the several books of the Bible with the others, and especially of the body of the Old Testament as one book, with that of the New Testament as another.
6. We are thus led to value each of the doctrines of the word or God. Each is true. Each has been revealed that it might be believed. We cannot therefore omit any one, because of its forbidding aspect, or its seeming unimportance, or its mysterious nature, or its demand for great personal sacrifice, or its humiliating assertions, or requirements, or the free terms upon which it assures of life and salvation.
Rev. James Petigru Boyce, D.D., LL. D.,–Abstract of Systematic Theology–First published in 1887
by Tom Nettles
Jesus claimed in John 7: 37-39 that through coming to him one would receive the “living water” synonymous with the presence of the Holy Spirit. By the work of Jesus, the Spirit will come in fullness and power to mark out the people of God by evidence of true belief. In John 4, Jesus had said that this water would “become in him a spring of water welling up to eternal life.” This is a fulfillment of Isaiah 44:1-5, and we find the image reiterated in Revelation 22:17. This ever-flowing stream of living water brings both the present reality and the sure future inheritance of eternal life.
Have any ever received eternal life without this living water? Here in John 7, Jesus speaks of the Spirit’s coming in the fulfillment of the New Covenant, creating a people as a community, not by circumcision but by the new birth, creating a fellowship whose common trait is forgiveness of sins and the sanctifying operations of the Spirit. Israel was not that community, for they were marked off by ceremonies, particularly the ceremony of circumcision of males, not by the moral and spiritual perceptions peculiarly the mark of those called and sanctified by the Spirit.
Read the entire article here.
Introduction: The Apostolic Fathers are those church leaders who wrote between A.D. 90 and 150. Subsequent to that several other church leaders are identified as the Church Fathers. Two things happened in the era of the Apostolic Fathers: 1) the fathers continued the hermeneutical methodology of the New Testament and 2) they introduced a moral usage of Scripture or functional hermeneutic. Dockery explains the moral use of Scripture as “…the readers appl[ying] the text to their own context and situation without attention to its original context and situation.”
Read the rest here.
I should see myself addressed in every precept, included in every promise. But it is greatly to be feared that, through failure to appropriate God’s Word unto their own case and circumstances, there is much Bible reading and study which is of little or no real benefit to the soul. Nothing else will secure us from the infections of this world, deliver from the temptations of Satan, and be so effectual a preservative from sin, as the Word of God received into our affections.
“The law of his God is in his heart; none of his steps shall slide” (Psalm 37:31)
can only be said of the one who has made personal appropriation of that Law, and is able to aver with the Psalmist,
“Thy word have I hid in mine heart, that I might not sin against Thee” (Psalm 119:11).
Just so long as the Truth is actually working in us, influencing us in a practical way, is loved and revered by us, stirs the conscience, are we kept from falling into open sin—as Joseph was preserved when evilly solicited by his master’s wife (Genesis 39:9). And only as we personally go out and daily gather our portion of manna, and feed upon the same, will there be strength provided for the performing of duty and the bringing forth of fruit to the glory of God.
Arthur W. Pink The Application of Scriptures-A Study of Dispensationalism