1 Kenwood Avenue, Sheffield, Nov. 19th, 1891
Dear {J. S.} Oliphant,
A four-paged tract has lately been put into my hands containing two letters, one of them written by yourself to Mr. Raven, and the other his reply; about which I cannot forbear offering a few remarks for your solemn consideration.
It is well sometimes that writers should be reminded that when the Spirit of God works in us, or by us, He brings the words of the Son of God to our remembrance, testifies of Him, glorifies Him, takes of the things of the Father and of the Son, and shows them unto us, &c. This we are taught in John 14, 15,
16, as you know. Thus clear landmarks are given us, so that we are able to distinguish between the “philosophy” of men, against which He warns us, and “the truth,” into which He guides.
It was the absence of these marks of the Spirit’s operations that first awakened my fears as to Mr. R.’s writings; but it was his irreverent and unsound statements concerning our Lord, and his persistent refusal for a year or more to judge them to be evil (and, as far as I know, they have not been judged to this day), that made separation necessary whatever it might cost. How else could we have a good conscience toward God? Does not He look for our faithful stewardship of the mysteries of His truth which He has committed to our trust, and command us to “contend earnestly for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints?” (Jude 33Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints. (Jude 3); 1 Cor. 4:1-21Let a man so account of us, as of the ministers of Christ, and stewards of the mysteries of God. 2Moreover it is required in stewards, that a man be found faithful. (1 Corinthians 4:1‑2)).
In your printed letter, dated September, 1891, you touch, if I mistake not, the root of R.’s evil doctrines, when you refer to his statement that
“the Son of Man, the Second Man (though not yet revealed) was ever essentially . . . in the Son,” (November 21, 1890),
but you do not appear to see that this statement is necessary to fit in with his oft repeated doctrine, that—
“Eternal life in Scripture always stands in connection with manhood, whether in Christ or in us.”
To justify this, he is obliged to teach what you say—
“that man or humanity existed in some shape or form before the incarnation,”
or, to quote his own words, that—
“The Son of Man, the Second Man, . . . was ever essentially in the Son.”
This is very serious, as everyone knows who is walking in the fear of the Lord, and subject to His word.
It is well you have brought this fundamental error concerning the Person of our Lord before Mr. R., and have plainly intimated to him that one of his statements—
“shows a want of Scripture basis for the thought; or, why not say ‘Scripture teaches,’ and then it has the authority of the word of God?”
But to my mind you spoil all; for what you declare to be “most objectionable,” you excuse by saying, “I am sure you do not hold what it implies.”
How could you pen such a sentence? The point is, what does Scripture say? There we find a teacher is held accountable for what he says. Paul as an apostle delivered two persons to Satan “that they may, learn not to blaspheme.” They had been uttering what was blasphemy. He also refers to some in another epistle, who were “Saying (observe saying) that the resurrection is past already,” and he adds that “their word will eat as doth a canker.” Another Apostle wrote, “If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine (the doctrine of Christ), receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed” (see 1 Tim. 1:2020Of whom is Hymeneus and Alexander; whom I have delivered unto Satan, that they may learn not to blaspheme. (1 Timothy 1:20); 2 Tim. 2:17-1817And their word will eat as doth a canker: of whom is Hymeneus and Philetus; 18Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some. (2 Timothy 2:17‑18); 2 John 1010If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed: (2 John 10), 11). Our Lord’s words also were, “By thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned (Matt. 12:3737For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned. (Matthew 12:37)).
How could anyone then who was walking uprightly before the Lord, either request, or receive “explanations” of words which dishonor Him?
The principle is most demoralizing and unjust. Moreover, does not the Spirit of God teach us to resent any indignity to the Son, anything that depreciates Him, or either adds to or takes from God’s word concerning Him? The Son of God truly said, “I am . . . THE TRUTH”; to advance any thing opposed to Scripture must therefore dishonor Him, whether it be as!to “the’ righteousness of God,” “eternal life,” or even “saying that the resurrection is past already.” This would, more or less, overthrow the faith of some, and perhaps, sooner or later, plunge them into the whirlpool of scepticism and infidelity.
It seems from the second page of your printed letter, by the words “as to which I wrote before,” that you have more than once asked Mr. R. to “withdraw” this “most objectionable” statement. But suppose he had withdrawn it, which he has not, what about many other statements equally “objectionable”?
For example:—
“What characterized the Second Man could not include all that was true of a divine Person, as self-existence, having life in Himself, omnipotence, omniscience, and many other attributes of a divine Person” {F. E. Raven} August 25th, 1890.
I scarcely know how to copy such an irreverent sentence, while I wonder at anyone daring to dissect the great mystery of the Person of God manifested in the flesh.
Here again, instead of at once condemning such utterances, you apologize for him, for what you say he means is the opposite of what he has said. Where is conscience in all this? Your words are,
“I understand you to mean that what the Son always was as a Divine Person, characterized Him as Man when He became a Man.”
Is not this precisely contrary to the statement I have just quoted from Mr. R.? Moreover is nothing more than withdrawal required from Mr. R. for advancing such doctrines concerning our adorable Lord, as if it were merely an inaccurate word, or a word misspelled or misapplied?
IS IT THE CHRIST OF GOD OR A FALSE of which Mr. R, speaks? Is he really speaking of Him who said when He spake of His body, “Destroy this temple and in three days I will raise it up”? or, “Before Abraham was I am”?
Where in Scripture are we taught that the essence of manhood was ever in the Son?. According to Mr. R., the Son was ever something more than Deity, and His perfect humanity, as you put it in the first page of your tract, “existed in some shape or form before the incarnation.” Thus both the Deity and Humanity the Son are perverted by these new doctrines.
Can we conceive a more flagrant error? What is it but to dishonor the Son of God, and to rob souls of the true Christ? It is certainly an invention of the human mind of the worst possible description, because it dishonors the Son of God, concerning whom it is said, “He that honoreth not the Son, honoreth not the Father which hath sent Him” (John 5:2323That all men should honor the Son, even as they honor the Father. He that honoreth not the Son honoreth not the Father which hath sent him. (John 5:23)). How inadequate, therefore, would it be merely to “withdraw” such seriously false doctrines! No true lover of Christ could for a moment entertain it.
Of the soul-restoration of the Corinthian saints, whose errors were incomparably less than what is now before us, we read—
Ye sorrowed after a godly sort; what carefullness it wrought in you, yea, what clearing of yourselves, yea, what indignation, yea, what fear, yea, what vehement desire, yea, what zeal, yea, what revenge! In all things ye have approved yourselves to be clear in this matter 2 Cor. 7:1111For behold this selfsame thing, that ye sorrowed after a godly sort, what carefulness it wrought in you, yea, what clearing of yourselves, yea, what indignation, yea, what fear, yea, what vehement desire, yea, what zeal, yea, what revenge! In all things ye have approved yourselves to be clear in this matter. (2 Corinthians 7:11)).
This is the divinely given path of soul restoration from evil, and there is no other. Is it not something more than the acknowledgment of inaccuracy, or a withdrawal, as you suggest? Ah, my brother, it is as true as ever, that “a little leaven leavens the whole lump.” When I think of cases of restoration many years since, I marvel at where brethren have drifted; and when I call to mind your own faithful testimony nearly thirty years ago as to Bethesda fellowship, and compare it with your present letter, I can scarcely forbear asking, “Is it the same man?” while my heart cries, “Hold Thou me up, and I shall be safe!”
All this, thank God, I can write without the consciousness of a trace of unkind feeling toward you or Mr. R.
Well do I remember, about the year 1849, that a statement was current among us, and found in one of our hymn books, concerning our adorable Savior; which was pointed out, as unsound. The writer of the hymn {J. G. Deck} was an honored servant of our Lord, and had long been highly esteemed by us, and deservedly so, for his work’s sake. He had, for some years, known what it was to have to do with God, and to be before Him. He therefore, became deeply exercised, especially about one word that he had written {in a hymn}. Not long after, several servants of Christ met at Bristol, when the writer of the hymn stood up, and, in the most solemn manner, before us all, said something like this,
I stand convicted of being a liar, and under God’s reproof.
We were all deeply affected and surprised. He then read,
The moment was solemn beyond description, and I remember being strongly impressed with the thought that he was a man speaking before the Lord. He proceeded,
I have written concerning our Lord, ‘Our mortal flesh and blood partake,’ (Hymn 327), and I have lately gone through the Greek Testament to see if I could find any authority for speaking as I have of our Lord’s body having been ‘mortal,’ and I have found none. Thus I have added to His words, and now stand convicted before the Lord, and before my brethren, of being ‘a liar.’
No doubt it was a time of many tears, but afterwards, of the warmest expressions of forgiveness and confidence towards our beloved brother, Mr. J.G.D., now with the Lord.
We may be sure that when the Spirit works in restoring any who have openly dishonored our Lord, He works in a similar fashion to the examples to which I have referred. We should know too, that in Mr. D.’s case, no serious action had been taken against him, but that most of those in fellowship then saw nothing wrong in it, as is almost always the case. Mr. D. felt truly that his failure called for more than withdrawal, which is certainly, a new and demoralizing principle, and only now matched, as far as I know, by “explanations” of what is false and dishonoring to our Lord. How sweet it is in a time like this to hear God saying “No good thing will He withhold from them that walk uprightly”; and again “Them that honor Me I will honor.”
There is another point to which I must briefly call your attention. It is this. It has been published far and wide, that Mr. R.’s doctrines are “heavenly truth,” and the same as Mr. Darby and other leading teachers have always held. I can only say, after watching matters among us during 52 years while preaching and teaching the Lord Jesus, that I believe such a statement to be entirely contrary to fact.
I conclude by saying in the words of another, “If the Lord’s name be used by any as a cover for darkness and evil, and the name of the Church be used as the name of a place where those on earth, who are indifferent to Christ’s honor and to holiness in faith, doctrine, and walk, may congregate, His name is put to shame, and the Holy Spirit dishonored.”
That our gracious God may speedily give to Mr. R. and his supporters that godly sorrow which worketh repentance, is the earnest prayer of
Yours in Christ Jesus our Lord, H. H. SNELL.
(Not published)