1505 Scotland Street
Calgary, Alberta
October 5, 1959
Dr. C.D. Cole
746 W. Noel
Rt. 2
Madisonville, Kentucky
My Dear Dr. Cole:
Although
I am a total stranger to you, my parents have known Dr. Shields over the
years and take "The Witness" regularly. As a result of an article of yours
which I read therein several years ago, I feel that I must write you to
seek further light on this matter of Election.
Your
article opened up a completely new line of thought for me; like most people,
I did not subscribe to it at all (at first) but was challenged by it, even
though much disturbed. Since then, I have reverted to it time and again
and finally this autumn got down to studying it in dead earnest!
I read what I could of Spurgeon on the subject, Dr. Shields, and also borrowed
a copy of Strong’s Theology which I found rather heavy going! All
in all, I have become so obsessed with this doctrine that I can scarcely
think of anything else. And yet there is so much that I do not understand.
I know that the "heart is deceitful above all things" and perhaps mine
is deceiving me when I say that I really think the questions that arise
in my mind do not stem so much from a reluctance to admit total depravity
as they do from my inability to reconcile the doctrine with other passages
of Scripture.
I had
always thought that election and predestination was something that the
Presbyterians were a little "off" on (excuse the bad grammar!). It
never occurred to me that there was so much Scriptural evidence for it,
or that Baptists believe it! However, I did feel that if this doctrine
was taught in the Scripture, as it seemed to be, than I should know more
about it and should believe it, whether I liked it or not and whether I
fully understood it or not.
My mind
goes round and round like a squirrel in a cage, until I am really exhausted.
About the time I think I understand it and accept it, Satan seems to raise
fresh doubts to plague me. It leaves one almost breathless.
As after a close brush with death, to think that one might not have been
elected! Truly, as never before, I can see that our salvation is
all of grace. I always thought, when we spoke of salvation as being
wholly of God’s grace, that it meant that His plan or idea to save us was
unmerited favour, since nothing in us merited His ever desiring to save
us; and also, that it was a gift for which we could never possibly
work or acquire sufficient righteousness to merit. But obviously
grace embodies more even than this. When you realize that a person
wouldn’t even want salvation unless he were elected, then you realize how
tremendously indebted we are to grace - for it is grace through and through.
I have
wondered sometimes if the objections which we feel towards Election are
directed more towards the idea of God’s complete sovereignty than towards
total depravity. It seems to go against human nature to think that
God can do what He likes with us and we are powerless to do anything about
it.
I almost
hesitate to put into words some of the objections which have come to my
mind lest I should be guilty of blasphemy or sacrilege; for I have always
been taught that it is a very serious thing to criticize God. And
yet, in the interests of clarifying my thinking, I feel that I must confess
to you some of the points about election that are troubling me and which
seem to contradict other Scriptures and other doctrines.
Also,
I teach a Young Women’s Bible Class and we have been studying this subject
(the blind leading the blind, I am afraid). We are to have an evening
discussion of it on November 5th so I should like to clear up some points
in my own mind before that time.
Perhaps
the easiest way for you to answer would be for me to put my questions in
point form:
1.)
Most people feel right away that Election is unjust. I realize, from
your pamphlet, as well as from Scripture, that God doesn’t owe it to us
to save anyone and further, that He has a right to bestow the gift of salvation
on whom He will. But somehow the feeling persists that if a person
doesn’t even get a chance to accept or reject salvation, he "goes to bat
with two strikes against him" so to speak.
Before studying Election, I always thought that if anyone were even remotely
interested in being saved, then, in response to prayer by interested relatives
or friends, the Holy Spirit would operate on that person’s heart and bring
him under conviction to the place where he would decide for or against
Christ.
But, if the only people who are going to accept Christ are those who have
been "ear-marked" for salvation ahead of time, then, one feels that the
rest of the race haven’t had a chance, even of refusing. To what
extent are they responsible for being lost?
One woman in my class, from the southern states as a matter of fact, said
to me afterwards, "If this teaching is right, it makes everything seem
so hopeless. I thought anyone could be saved; that the decision was
theirs. But if God has decided ahead of time, they haven’t a chance,
no matter how much we pray for them".
I tried to point out that the whole race was lost anyway, regardless of
Election. That Election of some did not mean that the others were
any worse off than they would have been without Election. And yet
- with a part of me - I know how she feels, because periodically, in spite
of all my praying for light, I have the same feeling; that if you are not
elected, you just don’t stand a chance. You feel as if the whole
matter has been taken out of your hands and you aren’t given an equal chance
with others.
I understand all the argument about the governor of a prison, too, and
agree with it with my head! But my heart keeps saying that while
it is true a man is not in prison because the governor hasn’t pardoned
him, but rather because of his own wrongdoing, nevertheless, the lack of
a pardon keeps him there!
Is there Scripture to support the interpretation that if we were not elected,
we would never have the faintest interest in salvation? I know from
Romans
8:7,8 as well as other passages, that in our natural state we are at
enmity with God. But I always thought that if the Holy Spirit operated
on a human heart, say of someone who was showing interest in becoming a
Christian, that that person then had a chance to decide whether or not
to be saved. But evidently, the Holy Spirit doesn’t even work on
the heart of anyone who has not been elected ahead of time. Is there
Scripture for that?
2.)
If God chooses only certain people for salvation, or enables only certain
people to avail themselves of salvation, then what do you do with verses
like John 3:16? I thought Christ died "for the sins of the
whole world" (I John 2:2) not just for the elect. Spurgeon seem
to think that He died only for the elect.
And what about such verses as "He is not willing that any should perish
but that all should come to repentance" and again "but now commandeth all
men everywhere to repent". If man is powerless to repent unless he
is elected, and God does not elect him, how is man responsible for not
obeying God’s command to repent; and, furthermore, how can it be said that
God is not willing for any to perish if He doesn’t enable all to be saved?
3.)
How do you explain the fact that sometimes a person is under great conviction
but decides against salvation? Were they or were they not elected?
My father, who passed away in July, was a great Christian layman and doctor
and led many souls to Christ in his offices and through lay preaching.
He told me a story which he either read or witnessed himself - I have forgotten
which. But a young woman attended some revival meetings night after
night and appeared to be deeply moved. In fact, it was apparent to
the preacher that she was under deep conviction. The last night,
when the call was given, she slipped from her place and left the building.
A worker followed her and heard her say, looking up to the stars, "I do
not want to be a Christian. Why can’t You leave me alone? I
am enjoying life and my good times and I am not prepared to change my way
of living. Holy Spirit, please leave me alone and don’t bother me
again". And, with a chilling laugh, she walked off into the night.
She was killed in an accident a few hours later, if I remember rightly.
Now, what I want to know is this: was she elected, and if she were not,
how did she get under conviction in the first place? Would the Holy
Spirit waste time, so to speak, convicting someone of sin whom God had
not even elected? If she were elected, why didn’t she come?
I thought election meant that you had to come whether you realized it or
not. Is it possible for certain people to be chosen for salvation
but for them, in the exercise of their free wills, to reject it?
4.)
Also, please explain the verse "many are called, but few are chosen".
If that verse said "many are called but few accept" I could understand
it. But I do not distinguish between "calling" and "choosing".
I would have thought they were the same.
5.)
Finally, in spite of all the arguments to the contrary, I find myself caught
up in a sort of fatalistic attitude - that what is to be will be.
Perhaps this stems more from my reading on the sovereignty of God than
from Election.
But I find myself arguing thus, "If God has a plan for every individual
and every nation, if He ordains the powers that be, and sets up kings and
disposes of them, etc., if He is completely sovereign, then He is going
to work out His will regardless of Satan’s efforts to thwart Him or man’s
failure to his part".
You say that because Election is a secret matter, we must witness anyway
and leave the results to God. True. But on the other hand,
I can’t see that it matters whether we know or whether we don’t since God
knows who is elected and will save a person whether we do our bit or not.
Just because I fail to witness, God is not going to be thwarted in His
design to save certain people. The very fact that God has chosen
them is sufficient to ensure that they will be saved whether we witness
or not, for the simple reason that God is sovereign and has already elected
them for salvation. I agree that I don’t know who is elected and
who is not. But I don’t have to. They are going to be saved anyway
if God wills it.
I read in Strong’s Theology that our prayers never change God’s mind, the
idea being that as we grow in our Christian experience and live closer
to God, we shall learn to pray for those things that are according to God’s
purpose for us; therefore He can answer our prayer.
But again - if He has plans for individuals or nations, they will be brought
to fruition without our prayers. If this is so, then, what we think
have been answers to prayers are only the fulfilment of a divine plan that
would have been accomplished quite as well without our prayer. But,
because we cannot see the future, we think we have prevailed with God and
so we say He has answered our prayer. But, since He planned a certain course
for us, it would have come about that way in any event. Do you see
what I am trying to say?
I always thought that, to a certain extent, we did prevail with God providing
we were not asking for something outside of His will - by that I
mean His pleasure or permissive will rather than a fixed, premeditated
plan. I guess I thought, for instance, that if a loved one were sick
and the Lord didn’t have any actual decision made that that was the time
they were to die, He would spare their life in answer to prayer.
But according to sovereignty, the reason He spared it was simply because
He wasn’t ready for them to die yet, therefore my prayer had nothing to
do with it. They would have recovered in any event. If that
were His foreordained plan, or died if that were His plan.
If prayer doesn’t change God’s mind, then what use was there in Abraham
interceding for Sodom and Gomorrah? God would have saved 50 or 40
or 10 in any event if they had been found. Or Moses interceding for
Israel. God had a plan for Israel that He would carry out regardless
of Moses’ prayer so that Moses and the rest of us just pray for something
that is bound to happen whether or not we pray! To me that defeats
the whole purpose of prayer. It almost makes one feel that we are
deluded into thinking we are accomplishing something by prayer, whereas
in reality it has all been decided upon ahead of time.
Now, for instance, in the case of Mueller’s Orphanage. God had a
plan for that work which would be carried to fruition since He is sovereign.
If prayer doesn’t carry any weight with God, so to speak insofar as influencing
Him, then would that milk truck have broken down in front of the Orphanage
(thereby supplying milk for all those children) whether Mueller had spent
the night on his knees or not? According to theologians, it was not
Mueller’s prayers that resulted in the seemingly miraculous supply of milk
for the orphanage, but just part of a plan that would have come to pass
anyway. Mueller might just as well have spent the night in bed as
on his knees. I don’t understand it. To me, such reasoning
contradicts #Jas 5:16 and others which teach importunate prayer. I wonder
sometimes if the trouble is not with men’s interpretations of Scripture
rather than with Scripture itself.
This
is a terribly long letter and I do apologize for being so wordy.
But this subject is too vast, I guess, to be covered by correspondence.
How I wish I could sit down and talk with you.
I am
keeping a copy of this letter so that I can refer to it when your answer
comes. I do hope you will not think I am imposing on you; but your
pamphlet has really stirred me up. I can see where election is indeed
a wonderful doctrine if only it didn’t seem to contradict other Scriptures.
I hope
and pray that you can give me more light and that you won’t be offended
with such a long letter from a stranger.
With heartfelt thanks in anticipation of your reply, I am
Yours sincerely,
Signed: Marjorie Bond
(Mrs. Marjorie Bond)
746 West Noel
Madisonville, Kentucky
October 20, 1959
Mrs. Marjorie Bond
1505 Scotland Street
Calgary, Alberta
Canada
My Dear Mrs. Bond:
Greetings
in the Name of His whose Name is above every name!
Your good letter under date of the 5th, was duly received. And it could
not have reached me at a busier time, which accounts for my delay in making
reply. I am a clerk of Little Bethel Association, and your letter
came the first day of our annual meeting. There was a lot of work
in preparing for the meeting, and much more work in getting the material
in the hands of the printer. At first, I thought I would write briefly,
stating my situation, and promising to get to it as soon as possible.
And then it occurred to me that I might save this time in the hope of getting
to the matter before the time you mentioned ran out. I trust you
will not take my delay as evidence of indifference on my part. Moreover,
due to infirmities of age, I do not have the capacity for work I once enjoyed.
First
of all, let me commend you for your honest attitude towards the doctrine
of ELECTION and related subjects; and may I also congratulate you on your
grasp of these doctrines. I rarely receive such a well-written letter
on any subject. You put your problems in a clear perspective, which
makes it easier to deal with them. And I can answer sympathetically
because your problems are also my own problems. Much as I would like
to solve them for you, I fear my efforts will be disappointing.
I believe
you are unduly disturbed over your inability to harmonize all that is in
the Bible. This Book is the revelation of the Infinite and the finite
mind cannot understand to perfection all that God has revealed. To
be able to do so would be an argument against the Bible as God-breathed,
and reduce it to a mere human production. Moreover, the determination to
harmonize apparent contradictions is sure to result in one of three things,
found in actual life. One will either ignore Sovereignty on the one
hand, or human responsibility on the other hand, or else be plagued with
a disturbed mind as you confess to having. On the one side are the
so-called Primitive Baptist (Hardshells), who cannot reconcile human inability
with responsibility in the matter of repentance and faith. And so
they emphasize the doctrines of sovereignty, the Divine decrees, and human
inability, and ignore the Scriptures which command sinners to repent and
believe the gospel, hence they have no gospel for the lost. On the
other hand there are those who preach the doctrines of human responsibility
and the command to repent and believe, and have nothing to say about human
inability, the Divine decrees, and sovereignty. Here in my own church
and association, as well as throughout the South generally, there is little
heard of Election, Depravity, and Sovereignty in salvation. It is
because the brethren feel they cannot preach both; that the two are beyond
reconciliation - the one being true, the other must be false. Now,
in your case there is both the determination to accept all Scripture and
to harmonize them, resulting in a confused and disturbed mind. Let
us, at the risk of being called inconsistent, take all the Scriptures whether
we can harmonize them or not. Dr. J.B. Moody ( one of my fathers
in the faith) used to say, that if one waited to accept the doctrines until
he could harmonize them, he would never accept them; the way to harmonize
them is to receive them without question, and they will harmonize on the
inside of the soul. This may not be exactly true, but it will be
of help. I am not saying that we should make no effort to harmonize
seeming contradictory doctrines, but I do warn against a persistent determination
to do so. With this introduction, I will now take up your questions
in their order.
1.)
It is true that most (I would say all) people feel that election is unjust.
This is not strange since the carnal mind is enmity against God.
People may love a god of their own invention, but only born-again believers
can love a Sovereign God who does what He will with His own (I John
4:7). God’s rights with the sinful human race are the rights of a potter
over the clay. We can readily see that the criminal has no claims
upon the human court, and it is just as true that the sinner has no claims
upon an offended God. Moreover, to say that election is unjust is to put
salvation on the basis of justice, thus robbing every sinner of any hope.
When we find people who seem to be interested in salvation, we are encouraged
to think they are of the elect, for the elect are not saved without becoming
interested in salvation. When we pray for their salvation, we are
not asking the Holy Spirit to put them on the fence where they may fall
off on either side. They are already on the wrong side—the attitude
of ignorant rejection of Christ —and we pray that He may translate them
from the Kingdom of darkness into the Kingdom of His dear Son (Colossians
1:13). We pray for their conversion to faith in Christ, that
they may not be left to the choice of a depraved nature. Why He does
not convict and convert everybody we preach to and pray for is due to His
sovereignty and not to His weakness. We do not pray to a weak God.
However, we must distinguish between the desire to be saved from sin and
the desire to be saved from Hell. Nobody wants to burn, but the desire
to be saved from sin is a holy desire created by the Holy Spirit.
When He creates such a desire His further work of conversion will follow,
but we cannot assuredly determine the motive of the desire.
You ask to what extent are they (the non-elect) responsible for being lost?
They are responsible for all the sins they commit and for their sinful
nature also. What one does is a revelation of what he is. This
is not apparent to our sense of justice. I cannot see how God can
justly hold me responsible for the exercise of a sinful nature inherited—for
a nature I had nothing to do with acquiring—for a nature I was born with.
If I were to sit in judgment on God (perish the thought) I would say that
it is not right to punish me for an inherited sinful nature. I accept
my responsibility for sin even though I cannot understand the justice of
it. Those who have not been "ear-marked" for salvation fall into
two groups—those who have the gospel preached to them, and those who never
hear of Christ as Saviour. Those who have the gospel preached to
them are responsible for all their sins, including the sin of rejecting
Christ, while those who never hear of Him are free from the sin of rejecting
Him, although they are guilty of other sins for which they are held responsible.
The heathen who have never heard the gospel will not have to answer for
the sin of unbelief. Whether we can understand it or not, the sinner
in all his depravity and helplessness is accountable to God.
The woman in your class who remarked that the doctrine of election makes
everything so hopeless, adding that she thought anyone could be saved;
that the decision was "theirs", might be answered this way. Anyone
can be saved who is willing to be saved God’s way through faith in Christ,
but nobody, left to himself, wants to be saved this way. God’s way
is foolishness to him I Corinthians 2:14 II Corinthians 4:3-6 Romans
10:1-3
The decision is "theirs" but the decision to trust Christ is the result
of a renewed mind - the result of grace in the soul. Paul speaks
of the time when he thought he ought to do many things contrary to the
name of Jesus of Nazareth (Acts 26:9). In the telling of his
conversion he ascribes it to the grace of God I Corinthians 15:10, Galatians
1:14-16 There is no self-salvation, either in providing it or applying
it. The work of the Spirit in us is as essential as the work of Christ
for us. Paul says that the Jews were asking for a sign (they wanted
him to perform a miracle) and that the Greeks were clamouring for wisdom
(they wanted him to philosophize), but without catering to the wishes of
either, he preached Christ crucified. Salvation through faith in
a crucified Christ was to the natural Jew a scandal, and to the Greek it
was foolishness. Those effectually called by the Holy Spirit were
able to see the power and wisdom of God in such a plan of salvation I
Corinthians 1:22-31 Why God does not effectually call more than He
does is not due to inability but to sovereignty. As I say in my article
on election, we must either limit God’s power or His mercy, or go over
boots and baggage to universalism. If God is trying to save everybody
and does not succeed, He is not almighty; if He is not trying to save everybody
His mercy is not universal. Romans 9:18 makes it clear that His
mercy is limited and is sovereignly bestowed. Deserving mercy is
a contradiction of terms. The flesh in us - remnants of depravity
- rebels at this aspect of Divine sovereignty. The writer is aware
of this, just as you seem to be.
2.)
There are passages like John 3:16, I John 2:2 which seem to teach
that Christ died for every individual. However, the word "world"
rarely ever means every individual of the human race. The word "world"
is sometimes used to distinguish between the saved and the lost (I John
5:19); between the Jew and the Gentile (Romans 11:11-15) and
between the few and the many (John 12:19). I believe John
3:16, I John 2:2 teach that Christ died for Gentiles as well as Jews.
He died for men as sinners and not as any class or kind of sinners.
The Jews thought their Messiah, when He came, would deliver them and destroy
the Gentiles. John says that He is the propitiation or Mercy-seat
for all believers regardless of class or colour. In other words,
Christ is no tribal Saviour. If we think of Christ’s death as substitutionary,
then I agree with Spurgeon, that He died for the elect only. If he
died as the substitute for every individual, then every individual would
be saved, else His death was in vain. Now I believe there is a sense
in which Christ’s death affects every person. By His death He bought
the human race, not to save every individual, but in order to dispose of
every individual. The right to judge this world is Christ’s reward
for His suffering. All judgment has been committed unto the Son (John
5:22). In the parable of the hid treasure, Christ is the man
who bought the field (world) for the sake of the treasure (the elect) for
the sake of those given Him by the Father (Matthew 13:44). See also
John
17:6-11, II Peter 2:1. Incidentally, the word for Lord in II
Peter 2:1 is Despot (Greek despotes), and indicates more authority
than Kurios (Lord).
In II Peter 3:9, the apostle is explaining why the Lord has not
returned to this earth, the reason being, that He is not willing that any
should perish, but that all should come to repentance. This refers to His
will of purpose. It is God’s purpose that all should come to repentance
and be saved. In longsuffering He waits until all the "us-ward" have
been brought to repentance. The "us-ward" are described as those
who had obtained the like precious faith (II Peter 1:2); who had
ben given all things that pertain to life and godliness (II Peter 1:3);
and who had escaped the corruption that is in the world (II Peter 1:4).
In II Peter 3:15, the apostle tells the same "us-ward", that they
are to account the longsuffering of the Lord as salvation. Christ’s
longsuffering towards the elect keeps Him on His mediatorial throne until
all have been saved. Had He come sooner than planned, many of the
elect would not have been saved. I have been a Christian for 51 years,
and if He had come before my conversion, I would have perished in my sins.
It is not His will of purpose that any of those given to Him by the Father
shall perish. The words "all" and "every" are hardly ever used in
the absolute sense Matthew 3:5-7, I Corinthians 4:5 The "all" of
II
Peter 3:9 are all of the "us-ward" who shall be brought to repentance.
This is not good grammar, but it is good theology and necessary to plainness.
Christ will not come in judgment until all those given Him by the Father
have come to repentance. When He comes He will usher in the new era
of the "New heavens and a new earth", wherein dwelleth righteousness.
3.)
The story told you by your dear father has been duplicated in many cases
of people who seem to be under deep conviction, and yet oppose those who
try to lead them to Christ. Such conviction is not of the Holy Spirit,
who convicts of the sin of unbelief and leads to faith in Christ.
Such cases do reveal the fact of the enmity of the carnal mind towards
God, and not a mind wrought upon by the Holy Spirit. A case in point
is that of Felix who trembled at the preaching of Paul and then dismissed
him until a more convenient season (Acts 24:25).
There is a natural conviction of sin which may be felt by everybody when
confronted by his sin (John 8:9), and there is evangelical conviction
by the Holy Spirit, and leading to repentance and faith. God never abandons
the good work He begins in the soul (Philippians 1:6). The Holy
Spirit, in my judgment, never tries to regenerate one of the non-elect.
There is much Scripture for this. The New Testament speaks often
of those given to the Son by the Father and their salvation is assured.
These are called "sheep" and "elect" before they come to Christ. John
6:37-44, 10:14-16,25-28, II Timothy 2:10 You ask whether or not the
woman referred to was an "elect"? I do not know. I can only
say that at the time she gave no evidence of being an elect. However,
later she may have been convicted by the Holy Spirit of the sin of unbelief
and brought to repentance. We can only judge whether a person is
an elect or not by his attitude toward the gospel of Christ. If she
were a sheep of Christ, she did come to His at some later date, for Christ
says, "My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me".
4.)
"Many are called, but few are chosen" (Matthew 20:16, 22:14). Calling
in the New Testament usually means the effectual call to salvation - saints
are made by a Divine call, but it cannot mean that many hear the invitation
to accept Christ who have not been chosen by God to salvation (I Thessalonians
1:4-7, II Thessalonians 2:13). Calling and choosing are not the
same. The choosing or electing took place in eternity past; calling
takes place in time and brings about conversion to faith in Christ.
There is a general call given to every sinner in gospel preaching, and
there is the special call of the Holy Spirit, inducing acceptance of the
general call. The general call in gospel preaching is to men as sinners;
the special call by the Holy Spirit is to the elect and results in salvation.
Romans
8:28 refers to this effectual call. I Corinthians 1:26, Galatians
1:15,16
5.)
You complain of being "caught up in a sort of fatalistic attitude - that
what is to be will be". There is a vast difference between cold,
impersonal something called "fate", and the providential workings of a
great and wise God. Things do not come to pass by cold fate, but
by God, "Who worketh all things after the counsel of His own will" (Ephesians
1:11). Dr. Charles Hodge was once asked if he believed what is
to be will be. He replies, "Why yes I do; would you have me believe
that what is to be won’t be?" Prophecy is the Divine prediction of
many things which are to be, and these predictions have been or will yet
come to pass.
The second paragraph of your letter on this subject expresses a glorious
truth. God is ruling this world, making even the wrath of man to
praise Him; the remainder of wrath men might do, He restrains. Psalms
76:10, Proverbs 21:1
Referring to the 1st paragraph of your letter on page 27 it is true that
the elect will be saved, and that my failure to witness will not thwart
God’s purpose to save them. God uses me, but He is not dependent
upon me. I dare not think that God is helpless without me; if I fail
He can use someone else. I am not to witness because of any assured results,
but in obedience to His will of command. I cannot know His will of
purpose concerning those to whom I bear testimony, We are to witness
to people as sinners and not as elect sinners. Election has nothing
to do with our obligation to witness. Isaiah preached when he was
told there would be no good results in the way of response from the people.
Isaiah
6:8-13
Your letter closes with questions concerning prayer. I have no hope
of giving much help here, but will make some observations. Prayer is one
of the means by which God brings to pass what He has decreed. Answered
prayer is indited by the Holy Spirit. He knows the mind and will
(purpose of God) and makes intercession for us according to the will of
God (Romans 8:26,27). How one may know that his prayer is
indited by the Holy Spirit, I cannot tell. But the Holy Spirit leads
us to pray for that which is within the circle of the Divine will, and
if we ask anything according to His will He heareth us (I John 5:14).
We are taught to pray for His will to be done. This shows we are
not to try to change His will by our praying. This would take control
out of His hands and put us in charge.
Whether we can harmonize our praying with His decrees or not; It is our
duty to pray because He commands it (Luke 18:1). Prayer implies
two things: our inability and His ability. Prayer is an act of dependence
upon God who is "able to do exceeding abundantly above all that we ask
or think" Ephesians 3:20.
I do not presume to be able to reconcile the doctrine of Divine decrees
with such passages as James 4:2,3; 5:16. But I can see how
prayer can prevail without changing God, when I think of it as one of the
means by which His will of purpose is effected. In Mueller’s case,
I can think that he was led by the Holy Spirit to spend the night on his
knees as the means of getting milk for the children. We have the
same difficulty in the case of Paul’s ship-wreck as recorded in Acts
27. When all hope of being saved was gone (Acts 27:20),
the angel of God told Paul there would be no loss of life. He then
comforts the despairing sailors, soldiers, and prisoners, saying, Be of
good cheer; for I believe God, that it shall be even as it was told me
(Acts 27:25). Then later when the sailors were about to abandon
the ship, Paul said to the centurion and soldiers "Except these abide in
the ship, ye cannot be saved" (Acts 27:31). God had declared
there would be no loss of life, and Paul believed Him, and yet he believed
their safety depended upon the sailors staying with the ship. We
might charge Paul with inconsistency but there it is.
As to praying for the sick, we must always pray without knowing what the
Divine will is in every particular case. It is appointed unto men
once to die, and when the appointed time comes our praying will not cancel
the Divine will. David recognized this in praying for his sick child.
He fasted and prayed while the child was alive, but when the child died,
he bowed to the manifest will of God and said, "While the child was yet
alive, I fasted and wept; for I said, Who can tell whether God will be
gracious to me that the child may live?" II Samuel 12:22.
Paul’s prayer for the thorn to be removed is another case of asking for
something outside the circle of God’s will of purpose. Paul prayed
without knowing the will of God, and when it was made known to him, that
sustaining grace would be given rather than the removal of the thorn, he
bowed in sweet submission and said, "Most gladly therefore will I rather
glory in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me" (II
Corinthians 12:9).
My mind often reverts to the terrible war between our North and our South
- the so-called "Civil War". There were men of God on both sides
- men of piety and prayer - who pleaded with God for victory. I believe
it is conceded that the most outstanding men of God belonged to the Southern
Army - such men as Robert E. Lee, Stonewall Jackson, and Robert E. Johnston.
And now all of us rejoice that it was God’s will for the Union to be saved.
It is becoming in all of us to seek our Father’s face and pray for His
blessings, and then bow in reconciliation to His mysterious providence
in our lives.
"God holds the key of all unknown,We are all poor sinners in the need of an adequate Saviour. This Saviour is the Lord Jesus Christ Who says, "Him that cometh to Me I will in no wise cast out". If Christ is the Saviour of sinners, this poor sinner can qualify for salvation. I praise Him for dying for me, and I praise the Holy Spirit for making me to realize my helplessness and for taking the things of Christ and showing them to me (John 16:14,15).
and I am Glad;
If other hands should hold the key,
Or if He trusted it to me,
I might be sad"What if tomorrow’s cares were here
Without its rest!
I’d rather He unlocked the day;
And as the hours swing open, say,
‘My will is best.’"The very dimness of my sight
Makes me secure;
For groping in my misty way,
I feel His hand; I hear Him say
‘My help is sure.’I cannot read his future plans;
But this I know;
I have the smiling of His face,
And all the refuge of His grace,
While here below."Enough! this covers all my wants,
And so I rest!
For where I cannot He can see,
And in His care I safe shall be,
Forever blest."
LETTER TWO BY MRS. MARJORIE BOND
1505 Scotland Street
Calgary, Alberta
November 6, 1959
Dear Dr. Cole:
Do you
think you can stand another letter from me? I shall try not to be
so verbose this time!
Your
wonderful and most helpful letter came two weeks ago tomorrow, so you can
see it was in plenty of time for our meeting last night. I was going
to acknowledge it immediately; then it occurred to me that if I waited
till after the meeting, I could "kill two birds with one stone", so to
speak - thank you for the letter and report on the meeting as well.
I cannot
begin to tell you how much I appreciate the time and trouble you have taken
to help a complete stranger - and yet, perhaps, we are not such strangers
after all, as we are related through the bonds of the gospel. But
you went to a great deal of work, I am afraid, to answer my letter at such
length and in such detail and I appreciate it more than I can say.
But above all, I feel I owe you a debt of boundless gratitude for your
article on Election which sparked off my interest in it and subsequent
study of it. I feel as if a completely new world has opened up to
me; I get almost excited over it all, Dr. Cole. I do hope it is not
wrong to attach so much importance to it, but somehow, I feel as if it
is the most significant and personal doctrine in the whole Bible. Nothing
should eclipse the Atonement I know; but I feel that even my conversion,
somehow, never made the impression on me that Election has. When
you have been brought up in a Christian family, heard the Scriptures from
childhood and been active in the Church, there isn’t the marked cleavage,
somehow, when one becomes a Christian that there is if you have been turned
from a life of vice. Is it because we don’t feel, in the innermost
recesses of our being, that we need Christ as badly as the other type does?
I don’t
know; but I have often felt that I didn’t have the joy in my Christian
life that I should. It seemed stale and flat, so often; one did things
for the Lord from a sense of duty. Sometimes I have even wondered
if I were saved at all. Now all that is changed. The very fact that
my salvation is all of grace - in the application of it as well as the
provision of it—has transformed everything for me. And I have you
to thank for it. Oh, how wonderful it must be to a minister to be
so used of God.
When
I first read your pamphlet, in addition to all my other objections to Election,
I didn’t like the idea that (in a sense) I had nothing to do with becoming
a Christian. I had always supposed that, with the Spirit’s help,
I had had sense enough and intelligence enough to recognize something worthwhile
and take it! It didn’t appeal to me at all to think that if I had
been elected, I really had nothing to do with my salvation at all—even
in the accepting of it. But now that is almost the best part of it!
It is humbling and breath-taking and frightening and thrilling all at once.
I just can’t get over it, Dr. Cole. To think that all these years
(I am 41), I have missed this tremendous teaching and the thrill and joy
of it.
It has
made my salvation and conversion much more real and personal. I have
always envied people who spoke with such joy of their conversion and felt
that something had happened, I never could. I couldn’t remember a
time when I didn’t believe, if you know what I mean. And it has worried
me; I’ve had a sneaking fear that maybe all I had was a head or credal
belief because I was brought up in a Christian home and accepted that as
I did other patterns of behaviour and thought. I have prayed off
and on for months that if I were saved the Lord would make me realize it
beyond all shadow of doubt and give me "the joy of His salvation".
Not just a barren orthodoxy.
Never
did I dream of getting the "witness of the spirit" through the doctrine
of Election. I wouldn’t want the Lord to think I’m not grateful for
salvation. I am; but right now, I feel as if I’m more grateful for
Election. Is that wrong?
Over
and over I keep saying to myself, like someone rescued from a sinking vessel,
when others are lost, "Why me? Why me?". When I wake up in the morning,
I used to feel tired and exhausted and wish I didn’t have to go to work
(I am a war widow); now, almost as soon as I am conscious, I have the feeling
that something new and exciting has happened—and then it flashes across
my mind in a wave of remembrance - "you are elected" and I get so excited
I am wide awake instantly and ready to be up and doing.
I cannot
explain it - but somehow as long as you feel that you had the least little
bit to do with your own conversion, it takes away some of the thrill and
bloom of it. But when the full impact of the thought and realization
hits you - that not only the provision of salvation is due to God’s grace
but also His choice of you as recipient, one can only stand back and marvel
- lost in wonder, love and praise.
Now,
I must tell you about last night. There were nearly 30 women out.
Nothing that we have studied in the 7 or 8 years that I have taught that
class has so stirred them as this Doctrine! They came with Bibles
and pens - and objections! I went all over it again very carefully,
reminding them first that:
1.)
The depravity of man required it (election) elaborating on your point that
we are just deceiving ourselves if we think any of us would ever want or
seek God in our unregenerate state apart from the Holy Spirit and election.
(Genesis 6:5, Psalms 14:3, Isaiah 64:3, Romans 3:10, Ephesians 2:1)
I had them look up and read aloud these references).
2.)
The sovereignty of God justifies it—He has the same rights over us as the
potter with the clay, etc., emphasising such qualities of God as His absolute
Righteousness, Holiness, Omniscience, Self-Existence, etc. which
entitles Him to act in a sovereign way.
3.)
The righteousness and Holiness of God safe-guards it; it cannot be unjust
for it is absolutely impossible for God to do anything wrong, be unfair,
unjust, unfaithful... "He cannot deny Himself". Regardless of how it may
appear to us we have this knowledge and comfort that the Judge of all the
earth will do righteously.
Well,
after I had made my points, the members asked questions. I felt really
sorry for one woman in my class. She has come to our church from
the United Church. I think she is saved - but periodically one detects
in her thinking and from her remarks, a throwback to the United Church
doctrine of salvation through works! Evidently she has been really wrought
up over this subject - which I consider a good sign. I told her she
couldn’t have been any more disturbed than I was at first. She cannot
see that it is not unjust of God. I thought your illustration of
being on the fence and God pushing them to one side or the other excellent,
so I elaborated on that. I think, with most of them, they finally
began to see a glimmer of light that if God hadn’t elected some, none would
be saved.
We all
seem to have the same reaction—that if the decision had been left to us,
we had a better chance of getting saved than by having God settle it all
in Eternity; because we don’t or won’t accept that teaching that of ourselves
we are incapable of reaching out for God. I told them that in our
natural state, we are dead in trespasses and sins and a corpse just cannot
flicker even an eyelash! So they were just deceiving themselves if
they thought for one minute that they would ever accept Christ, apart from
God taking certain measures to make them.
Well,
our discussion went on for about 1 1/2 hours! This woman also thought
as did others that Scriptures elsewhere we contradicted by Election - such
as John 3:16, I John 2:2. I was glad to have your explanation
of "all" and "world" rarely being used in the absolute sense.
Also,
John
6:37 - "Him that cometh unto Me I will in no wise cast out" - I told
them to look up the first part of that verse and they would get a shock!
I had! "All that the Father hath given unto me shall come unto me
- etc." Of course Christ wouldn’t cast out any who came because any
who came would be those whom the Father had given! They were simply
stunned! But seemed to react more as if it made sense and were opening
up new worlds of thought.
Afterwards,
while we were waiting for tea, this one particular woman came to me.
I did feel so sorry for her; she was flushed and almost tearful and I said,
"Edythe, is it any clearer?" She hesitated and said, "Yes, in some
respects. But there are other things that I just feel I can’t reconcile
with my ideas of God and the Bible". I said, "Don’t try, Edythe,
Dr. Cole told me not to attempt to reconcile all points of this teaching
with other passages of Scripture because I would only confuse myself, and
I believe he is right". By the way, that was a wonderful help to
me, personally, what you told me about just getting a confused mind.
I just let go all the arguments, after reading your letter, and told the
Lord that I guessed I had struggled long enough trying to crowd the ocean
of His theology into the teacup of my mind and I wasn’t going to fuss anymore
about the points I didn’t understand. He understood them and that
was good enough for me. And it is since then that I have had such
peace.
I tried
to tell something of this to Edythe; she said, "Marjorie, I have nearly
gone out of my mind this week". And her voice broke. She said,
"I can’t think of anything else and I go over and over it until I am nearly
crazy". I just ached with pity for her because I had been through
the same thing until I got your letter back.
It flashed
across my mind that perhaps your letter would help her too. So I
asked her if she would like a copy of my questions to you and your reply.
She was terribly grateful. I had them with me so was able to let
her have them right away. Would you pray with me that she will get
peace and learn, by the help of the Holy Spirit to love this doctrine as
we do?
One other
member, a new-comer to my class although she has been in our church several
years, said to me with the sweetest smile afterwards, "I am like you; I
know now I have been elected and it is simply thrilling. I wish you
could have seen my husband, though. He wanted to come so badly tonight—he
asked me if I thought you would mind if he slipped into a back seat"!
It seems her husband took her pamphlet and read it; was so thrilled and
worked up over it, he read it again and said that never in all his life
had he heard anything like it - why don’t we hear about it? And do
you know, Dr. Cole, person after person has said that to me; "Why don’t
our ministers preach it??"
One girl,
also from the southern states (Texas - but not the one I mentioned in my
first letter; she wasn’t out last night) has been very keen on this, but
admitted to me on different occasions that it simply upset a lot of her
ideas and understandings! However, last night, as I closed she said,
in front of all the others, almost with a blissful sigh, "Well, it certainly
takes the fear out of dying, doesn’t it"? And you know, that is what
I have felt so strongly. I just stared at her for a minute when she said
it - it was the echo of my own heart. Sometimes I feel I can’t wait
to get to heaven and learn more about Election and all the rest of the
Bible.
A third
woman, mother of a 6 year old boy, said to me, "Marjorie, I don’t know.
It is wonderful. I feel that since this study and the thought I have
given to Election that everything has cleared up in my mind. And
so many passages of Scripture fit in and make sense now when they didn’t
before".
Yet another
girl has talked to me different times and said that at first she felt (when
I taught my first lesson in September) that she was opposed to it.
But the more she read your pamphlet and thought about it, the more she
thought the doctrine really was taught in the Bible and therefore she should
be willing to believe it and leave the parts she didn’t understand until
she got to heaven! Last night, after we were finished, she whispered
to me across the table, "Well, I’m happy too, tonight Marjorie. But
I’m afraid some aren’t. But it’s more a case of won’t with them.
However,
I am praying that the Holy Spirit will do His work in the hearts of those
that are confused or resisting. I feel their very interest is encouraging
and, as you so truly put it, none of us likes this doctrine; it takes the
Holy Spirit to teach a person to love it.
Now,
I promised you I wouldn’t write such a long letter and I have. I do hope
you aren’t bored. But I am so full of it all and so indebted to you
that I felt I had to overflow to you. Have you, by any chance, had
any of your other teachings put up in pamphlet form? I was looking over
some old Witnesses the other day and saw several of yours in serial form,
on Sin, Salvation, etc. I should love to have them complete.
I sent away for 40 copies of your ELECTION pamphlet and distributed them
to my class in September, so they have had them to study and mull over
ever since! I can never thank you enough for your article.
Certainly God must have led you to have it printed.
It would
be so wonderful to sit under that kind of preaching today. Why don’t ministers
preach doctrinal sermons anymore - instead of this milky, predigested,
topical preaching that so many give? No wonder Christians today aren’t
strong and virile and know what they stand for - they have never got off
the milk of the Word onto the strong meat. I heard one Baptist minister
say that we are "snackbar" Christians today when we should be dining-room
Christians. And I think he had something.
Now,
I must go. Again, my heartfelt thanks for all you have done for me.
I pray God’s richest blessings upon you and yours and your ministry for
Him which will be fruitful, I am sure, beyond your deepest imaginings and
hopes.
Yours in Him,
(Mrs.) Marjorie Bond
LETTER THREE BY MRS. MARJORIE BOND
1505 Scotland Street
Calgary, Alberta
December 7, 1959
Dear Dr. Cole:
Since
writing my Christmas card to you, I have received your books, "The Heavenly
Hope" and "Divine Doctrines". Thank you very much indeed. I
am thoroughly enjoying the magnificent study on the doctrine of God.
How it magnifies and exalts Him and restores Him to His rightful position
of King of kings and Lord of lords. I have felt for a long time that
the Christian church needs a fresh vision of the holiness and majesty of
God, and to realize that He is "the high and lofty one that inhabiteth
eternity". There is entirely too much spirit of camaraderie in our
attitude toward God today.
I wish
more of our present-day ministers preached doctrine. It seems to me that
church members would be more firmly rooted and grounded in their faith
if we had more doctrinal teaching and less "snackbar" preaching!
Apropos
of our study on Election, I am still getting repercussions from it from
some of my class members. Nothing that I have ever taught has stirred up
such interest. I also gave a copy of your pamphlet to our minister;
am awaiting his reaction!
We were
visiting with some friends from another Baptist church a few weeks ago
and something came up about my Bible Class and this teaching on election.
Would you believe it— not one person in that room, apart from the members
of my own immediate family who were present, had even heard about Election,
let alone understood it? And yet they are all good Christian people—not
just nominal church members.
We only
got into a preliminary discussion of it when we were interrupted.
But I could see that it was not at all favourably received! (As you
say, we are all Arminians by nature!) One woman and her aged father
who had moved away to Arizona about two years ago, are back in Calgary
and were present that night. About a week ago, I ran into this woman at
the post office in one of our local department stores. She is working
there temporarily and as there were people waiting to be served she didn’t
have too much time to talk to me. But as I was leaving the wicket,
she said, "Oh, Marjorie; I want to have a talk with you some time on that
matter that we were discussing at Thelma’s the other night." For
a minute or two, my mind was a complete blank—I couldn’t remember what
she was referring to. She smiled and said, "You know, we started
a discussion about it". Suddenly light dawned and I said, eagerly,
(this is my favourite subject now) "Oh yes, of course. I’ll
be glad to any time you are free." She nodded and said, "Well, it
has set me thinking. I don’t understand it and don’t say that I agree
but I want to learn more about it". So there is another ripple from
the stone you cast into the pool!
Dr. Cole,
when you are so busy, I do hate to bother you with my questions but I feel
that you are so learned in this subject that you are in a better position
to help me than anyone else. May I trouble you with one or two further
questions:
1.)
What is meant by making "your calling and election sure"? At first
when I was reading II Peter 1:5-10, in the light of my new knowledge
on Election, it seemed to me that Peter spoke as if it were possible to
lose one’s salvation. And yet, because I believe in the eternal security
of the believer (even more so since I understood Election) I didn’t see
how this could be. As I prayed about it, it seemed to me that perhaps
what is meant is rather that a person who does what Peter admonishes is
less likely to backslide rather than be lost? Do you think that is
the meaning of it?
2.)
Is the "all" of Romans 11:32 another example of "all" not being
used in the absolute? I mean the part where it says "that He might
have mercy upon all". Some people argue that verse as being opposed
to Election, saying that if God wanted to have mercy on all, He would not
pick and choose people for salvation as the doctrine of election teaches.
3.)
Also, while we are still in Romans, is it true that even Christians will
be judged for everything they have done since they were saved? Not in the
sense of punishment for their sins, because Judgment on sin was passed
at Calvary. But when the Bible says, "So then we must every one give
an account of ourselves to God; " and again, Romans 2:6
- "who will render to every man according to his deeds"; and I Corinthians
4:5.
I don’t know why it is, but the thought of having all my sins exposed to
view, even though I am not going to be punished for them, robs heaven of
considerable joy. I backslid very badly some years ago and although
the Lord is dearer to me now than He ever was before, I sometimes feel
that nothing can undo the sins of those years. God knows all about
them and has forgiven me; why must they be published for all the world
to see when I get to heaven?
I thought the passages in Psalms that "as far as the east is from the west
so far have I removed thy transgression from thee", meant that once we
were saved God really blotted out our sins and we never had to hear about
them again. But there seems to be several passages in the epistles
which would lead one to think that, although we will not be punished for
our sins in the sense of going to hell, we shall certainly have to account
for them. If this is so, it seems to me that no Christian could die
really at peace, knowing you had that ahead of you. (Why are we more
afraid of man’s opinion than God’s?)
4.)
My last question has to do with pages 7-9 of your pamphlet "The Heavenly
Hope". I had always understood (prior to my study of Election), both
from Scripture and various hymns and sermons that I had heard, that there
is danger in delaying salvation; that a person could be cut off from this
life before they had accepted Christ and be hurled into a Christless eternity.
But according to the doctrine of Election, no one who is elected for salvation
can possibly die without being saved? Isn’t that true? ("All
that the Father hath given to me, will come unto me...") Therefore,
anyone whom God has intended to save will be saved and cannot possibly
be lost so there is no danger in delaying for them; and the non-elect will
not be saved anyway. Isn’t that so?
It seems to me I just get things sorted out in my mind to where I understand
them, when I read something that puts me off again!
As I say, I used to believe too that there was danger in delay. All the
hymn-writers speak of it etc. But since studying Election, I concluded
that I must have been wrong. There is no real urgency, in the sense
of it being a life and death matter, because no one can die before he is
saved, if God intends him to be saved. Therefore, why do ministers (even
those like yourself who believe in Election) urge people to make haste
and accept Christ before it is too late? It can never be too late
for an elected person, can it? I should appreciate being straightened
out on this point.
You will get so you dread to see a letter from me if I always write at
such length. But there is so much I need to ask you about and modern
ministers, like doctors, are so busy they haven’t time for people any more.
Thank
you again for all your help and may God richly bless you in the year ahead.
Sincerely,
Marjorie Bond
REPLY BY DR. C.D. COLE
746 West Noel
Madisonville, Kentucky
December 17th, 1959
My Dear Marjorie:
Greetings
and best wishes for a happy holiday season! When I mailed you the
books, I intended to follow at once with a letter explaining that you would
be under no obligation to pay for them, since you had not ordered them.
But other things took precedence, and I was still planning to write when
your letter arrived with enclosure. Perhaps I should return part
of the money as it was more than enough to pay for what I sent. The supply
of books and tracts I have written is almost exhausted, and this is one
reason why I sent you what I did. The series of SIN and SALVATION have
not been put in book form. I have two or three large scrap books containing
articles published in various magazines. At my age (now in my 75th
year), I do not expect to publish any more books. However, I have
many dear friends among young ministers and some of them may want to publish
some of my writings after I am gone.
With
this brief introduction, I will now attend to your questions in the hope
I may be of some help.
1.)
Peter’s exhortation to "make your calling and election sure", is a warning
against presumption. One must not take his salvation for granted
without proper evidence of it. Of course he means to make it sure
to ourselves, for we can make nothing sure to God. His words have
to do with assurance and not to the fact of salvation. He starts with the
grace of faith as God’s gift, and urges us to build upon that faith so
that our lives may not be barren and unfruitful. No unfruitful believer
can have assurance of salvation as a subjective experience. Apropos
of your own experience while a backslider.
2.)
I believe "all" in Romans 11:32 is used only in a relative and not
absolute sense, else we have universal salvation. Moreover,
Romans
9:18 teaches that God is sovereign in bestowal of mercy. This does
not mean that He refuses mercy to any who trust Christ for it, but that
He does not cause all to look to Him for mercy - some are left to
their own carnal will.
3.)
The Christian will be judged for his works and not for his sins. His sins
have been judged in Christ and will not appear against him in the day of
Judgment. Salvation is of grace; reward is for work. There will be
degrees both in heaven and in hell, for both the saved and lost will be
judged for their deeds—the lost will receive the degree of punishment commensurated
with their evil deeds, and the saved will receive glory according to their
works. I do not expect the reward of Paul, for my works have not equalled
his.
Romans
2 is dealing with principles of judgment under law:
3a.)
It is to be according to truth (Romans 2:2), that is according to
facts;
3b.)
It is to be according to deeds (Romans 2:6);
3c.)
It is to be without respect of persons (Romans 2:11,12). The
chapter is not showing how to be saved, but what one may expect from the
law, whether he be Jew or Gentile.
Romans
14 warns believers against judging one another for various scruples
in regard to eating and observing days on the ground that we shall all
stand before the judgment seat of Christ (Romans 14:10). We
shall give account of ourselves to God and not to one another.
I
Corinthians 4 deals with the judgment of the Christian as a steward
of God. We cannot judge or appraise the works of one another here
and now, for there is much we cannot know, such as motives and hidden things,
but when Christ comes He will know everything about us, and "then shall
every man have praise of God" (I Corinthians 4:5). We are
not qualified to judge so as to determine the place one shall have in glory
- God will look after that.
4.)
We are to address the lost as sinners, and not as elect sinners. We do
not know who the elect are until they manifest it in faith and good works.
And we are to address them as in need of salvation, and urge them to trust
the one and only Saviour-and to trust Him now. Shall we tell them
to trust Him at once or wait until some other time?
It is true that "no one who is elected for salvation can possibly die without
being saved". But this does not mean that they will be saved apart
from faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. And the means of salvation are
as truly elected as are the persons. II Thessalonians 2:13,14 Paul
knew more about the doctrine of election than any other man, and yet he
persuaded people concerning Jesus (Acts 28:23). He knew the
elect would be saved, and yet he prayed and worked for the salvation of
Israel. Romans 9:1-3, 10:1-4 11:14, I Corinthians 9:19-22
We must not allow the doctrine of election to rob us of compassion for
the lost, nor close our eyes to the urgency of salvation. Hebrews 2:3,
II Corinthians 6:2
There will be things we cannot understand and doctrines we shall not be
able to harmonize, but it is plainly His commanding will for us to witness
to all people concerning Christ Jesus. Secret things belong to God,
but the revealed things fix our duty Deuteronomy 29:29
With Christian love,
C.D. Cole