#on behalf

Prince Harry & MM rubbing his legs

View this post on Instagram

Is this an official Royal Tour? Has Meghan and Harry forgotten that this trip is to represent the Queen? This is what happens when you pick a girl from the hood. #duchessmeghan #dukeofsussex #futureking #3rdinlinetothethrone #prince #charlotte #princewilliam #queenelizabeth #Britain #queen #queenelizabeth #britishroyals #london…

by Samuel P. Tregelles

"For to you it has been granted on behalf of Christ, not only to believe in Him, but also to suffer for His sake." - Philippians 1:29

There is sternness in the truth of God which might almost seem like harsh severity, when it is regarded by those whose thoughts on the subject of revelation have been formed in a great measure from sentiment and emotion. An imaginative feeling may exist, and this may be so cherished that even the Scripture is only used for sentimental purposes. The force of definite truth is by no means felt, because the mind has sunk into a kind of spiritual reverie. Indeed, there is a disposition to avoid definite truth. Thus, when the details of revealed promises and purposes are stated from the Word of God, there is a feeling that there is but little, if anything, in them that is really edifying or that can afford nourishment for spiritual life. Consequently, dreamy indefinite thoughts of God's love are cherished, a view is taken of the person and work of Christ and of His coming glory as may stir up spiritual emotions, or what are supposed to be such. But it must never be forgotten that holiness is not the only thing taught us respecting the Holy Ghost: He is the Spirit of Truth as well as the Holy Spirit of God. We are not to accredit any supposed holiness irrespective of truth.

Emotional religion has always a tendency to make feeling the standard of what should be received or rejected as truth. A certain kind of feeling--approaching to mysticism--is that which is allowed to rule the judgment as to what God has revealed. Sometimes these indefinite claims to spirituality are accepted by others. The doctrines of such teachers are supposed to be worthy of all acceptance, not because they are found in Holy Scripture, but because they are said to be true by such holy and devoted men. But if we would judge according to God, we must test all claims to holiness and devotion by means of truth.

It is very manifest that the doctrine of a secret coming of Christ and a secret removal of the Church to be with Him is peculiarly suited to those who cherish the religion of sentiment. What more cheering (they say) than the thought that the Lord may take His people to Himself at any moment? What more animating than the belief that this may take place this very day? And when anyone brings them to Scripture and tries to point out the revealed hope of the Lord's coming, it seems as if there were nothing but coldness in the teaching. They ask if such chilling doctrines can be consistent with love to the Lord. But know that whatever makes the feelings sit in judgment on Scripture and leads to the avoidance of the force of that Scripture teaching which is not in accordance with such feelings, must, however apparently sanctified and spiritual, be of nature and not of God. Are we to seek to be guided by other hopes than those which animated the Apostolic Church? They knew that days of darkness would set in before Christ's coming. They were instructed respecting the many Antichrists and the final Antichrist. But so far from their hope of the coming of the Lord and of resurrection being thus set aside, they were able to look onward through the darkness to the brightness of the morning.

It may freely be owned that those who think it right to expect the Lord at any moment, and who sternly condemn others who maintain that His appointed signals shall take place first, have often in their hearts much real love to Him. But let such remember the prayers of the Apostle: "That your love may abound yet more and more in knowledge and in all judgment." It is not only of importance that love should be rightly directed as to its object, but there should also be in the soul real spiritual intelligence.

A wife has the promise of her husband's return from a distant country, and she has his written directions for the rule of the house during his absence. Part of these directions includes a statement how his return shall be expected--that a letter will arrive first to say by what ship he will come. There would be no lack of love on her part if she sought to be occupied by-by-day as he directed. She would show that she believed that the promised letter should come and that he would then himself arrive by the appointed vessel. No one could reproach her for lack of love to her husband if she were not on the tiptoe of momentary expectation. But if the wife were to say that the part of her husband's directions related to the servants and not to her, and if she were to be constantly on the shore expecting her husband's landing and refused to simply attend to what her husband had said, she would show that she was a visionary and not one guided by the simple intelligence of her husband's mind. Feeling would have led away from true obedience.

Those who sentimentally make the secret rapture the center of all their thoughts, have habitually shown how utterly their love fails toward any Christians who object to this theory. They often speak of them as if such were devoid of love to Christ. It might seem as if they made that one point (in which they are led by feeling and not by Scripture) the very test of Christian profession. It is remarkable to notice how the sentimental expectation of the Lord's coming has led away from the close and reverential study of Holy Scripture. Indeed, it has been painful to hear of earnest and real desire to study the Word of God regarded as being "occupied with the letter of Scripture." But do those who say this know what they mean? They speak of principles, and of having their minds occupied with Christ, but how can we obtain true principles except from God's revelation in the Word? And how does the Spirit lead the mind to be occupied with Christ except from the definite truth of Holy Scripture?

Of course, with this feeling all critical study of Scripture is denounced. It is deemed a waste of time. Even the study of the Word of God in the original Hebrew and Greek is spoken of as if it were a secular occupation. The English Bible is thought to be enough for teachers. Exact scholarship is deemed superfluous if the original languages are looked at. How different is this from the real study of God's Word; from using and valuing each portion, however minute, as being from Him; as being that of which He can unfold to us the meaning by the teaching of His Spirit. How different is this from the practical application of the most definite rules of grammar which lead to absolute persuasion that apostles and evangelists wrote nothing at random, but that even as to the most delicate shades of thought they used the right cases, moods, and tenses. All diligent and careful inquiry, all laborious examination of authorities so as to know what were the very words in which the inspired writers gave forth the Scripture, is regarded as merely intellectual and secular.

This is not healthy. Should not those who believe in the Divine authority of Holy Scripture know better than to neglect its critical study? And if it be truly inspired, ought they not to feel it is of some importance to inquire what is its true text, and, as far as existing evidence can show, what were the very words in which the Holy Ghost gave it forth? It is most difficult to arouse Christians in general to a sense of the full importance of critical study of Scripture, especially when dreamy apprehensions are cherished and vague idealism has taken the place of truth, and sentimental asceticism is the substitute of Christian holiness.

my dashboard is so fucking hot right now. everyone's blog is looking...