My Stand: No. 6

To: Peebs,Net
12 Dec, 2006

Re: Restricted Area: Access Denied
Why do I not have access? Gordon Rainbow.

• A thorough and unbiased review of the personal history and ministry of JND, FER, JT and other early leading servants will show that they are not guilty of the charges you make. Indeed all have warned against the pretentious claims that gained currency from 1959 on.

• It is also a serious mistake to impugn the integrity and motives of those who have served the Lord and the brethren in lowliness and faithfuness over so many years. Consider: Numbers 12: 1-10; 1 Samuel 12: 1-6; Acts 20: 32-35; 2 Corinthians 10: 8-12.

• I say this feelingly for, as a young man in the 1970's I went through a period of disillusionment which led me to similar conclusions to those you now express. I wrote of that time as follows:

1972-78 HOPELESS A long period of decline and compromise ensued. A collective testimony to the truth of Christ and the assembly seemed impossible – all seemed hopeless. Bereft of friends – those who remained in the sect, and those we thought had judged it – we were alone. Did we still not have the Lord and the Spirit? Surely; we could not have survived otherwise. Only those who have had such an experience will understand the agony of the isolation and loneliness. Fearing more sorrow, we concluded that we could not identify ourselves with any brethren from our background. What then were we to do? It is clear now that quiet waiting on the Lord was the proper course. But that was then – and this is now. I longed for Christian companionship, and allowed my need to override my responsibility to the Lord – to overwhelm my conscience and the convictions that had first moved me as a young man in 1950, and later in recovery in 1959. I questioned the ministry of the recovery – questioning God's operations in the revival – not to justify leaving but to blame it for the catastrophe that had come upon us, then to ease my conscience as I sought companionship with believers in companies marked by doctrines and practices of which I had once had a judgment. I am ashamed of the way I rationalized – questioning and then surrendering truths that had once been and, thank God, are again, blessed and precious to my soul – speaking against ministry of some beloved servants – ministry I had once cherished as from the Lord, attempting to convince some – with whom I corresponded – to follow my twisted reasoning. onvictions as to truth cannot be lightly cast aside, but the enemy's powerful weapon of disillusionment – against which I had warned others – overcame me. It is difficult to believe that one could thus go so far astray – but it was possible – and it did happen.

May the Lord help you, as He graciously did me, to review your position and see the positive and enduring value of the ministry that He gave through so many early servants.

In the Lord, Gordon.

From: Daniel Soukoreff
24 Dec 2006

Hi Gordon, Thanks for the forwarding of Peebs Net Site Objectives. This brings into focus the minds and assumptions behind the site.

The test of all ministry is scripture and if they really want to discuss a specific principle or practice prior to the "System" I believe in the main they will hold up to examination.

• For example Peebs.Net writes "they started their journey away from Christ and just look at them today!".

• What are the present fruits of a company of believers is generally a good principle to judge past teaching but push this principle to far then one would have to surrender Luther's recovery to the scriptural principle of justification by faith but what is evident of the present state of the the Lutheran (Protestant) Church in Germany.

From: Gordon W. Simmonds
Re: Peebs.Net Clarification
24 Dec 2006

Dear Jeff,
I received the above document a couple of days ago. Rather distressing I find it.

• The Peebs. Net team do not show any respect for our brother's age.

• I notice, incidentally, that they spell Emeritus incorrectly in the way they address Gordon. One could have given Gordon the title of consultant I suppose, as this is often done when a partner in a professional firm retires but still gives advice when asked …

To: Gordon Simmonds
Dec 27, 2006

Dear Gordon,
We appreciate your kind thoughts, Gordon. Thanks for writing.

Yes, I think you're right. Not wanting him to take it personally, I wrote to Gordon Rainbow that the difficulty this person has thinking for himself preceded whatever interaction he had with the EB.

• Perhaps it is a glimpse into the thinking skills of a "private" education … we may never know due to the anonymous nature of the communication, understandable as it is, you think they would take more of an interest in civility.

Page Top   Article Top

EDUCATION FOR  THE  WORK  OF  THE  LORD
Secular versus Spiritual

There can be no doubt that, in these times, young people require a much higher level of formal education than in former years in order to obtain employment that will allow one not only to

• "provide for his own, and specially for those of his house", 1 Timothy 5: 8

  and "that he may have to distribute to him that has need", Ephesians 4: 28

• but also to keep out of the grip of the tentacles of trade unions and other unequal yokes.

• However they usually feel unable to deal with it. Unwill­ing to walk alone in protest, or to accept the reproach of separation, they suppress their conscience and acquiesce.*
  [* See Our Responsibility in the Present State of the Church.]

A serious and objective examination of the Scriptures will clarify the above mentioned matters, but our present interest is the secular style seminary training which conventional wisdom deems indis­pensable for any who seek to serve the Lord in a specific and dedicated manner.

What follows may seem irrelevant but, as the Scriptures are reviewed, in humility of mind and dependence on the Spirit, may there be the beginning of looking at all things from the divine view­point rather than the pervasive short sighted secular standpoint which colours and clouds the minds of many true believers

• May this be the dawn of a com­pletely altered viewpoint on all things which the death of Christ and the presence of the Holy Spirit demands.

Moses makes no mention of his education, but Stephen tells us that

• "Moses was instructed in all the wisdom of the Egyptians, and he was mighty in his words and deeds", Acts 7: 22.

  But "by faith Moses, when he had become great, refused to be called son of Phar­aoh's daughter; choosing rather to suffer affliction along with the people of God than to have the temporary pleasure of sin; esteeming the reproach of the Christ greater riches than the treasures of Egypt, for he had respect to the recompense", Hebrews 11: 24-26.

• He so valued God's interests and so little valued the honour and respect due to his position and education that he gave it all up willingly.

Solomon, made king by Jehovah after the death of David, says

• "I am but a little child" and asks for "an understanding heart, to judge thy people, to discern between good and bad; for who is able to judge this thy numerous people?", 1 Kings 3: 7, 9.

  God answered him and "Solomon's wisdom excelled the wis­dom of all the sons of the east, and all the wisdom of Egypt. For he was wiser than all men; than Ethan the Ezrahite, and Heman, and Calcol, and Darda, the sons of Mahol;" [names which have all perished] "and his fame was in all the nations round about", 1 Kings 4: 30-31.

The leaders of the Jews, "seeing the boldness of Peter and John, and perceiving that they were unlettered and uninstructed men," [i.e., without the formal higher education of the time] "they wondered; and they recognised them that they were with Jesus", Acts 4: 13.

Earlier "The officers therefore came to the chief priests and Pharisees, and they said to them, Why have ye not brought him?" [i.e., Jesus]

• "The officers answered, Never man spoke thus, as this man speaks. The Pharisees therefore answered them, Are ye also de­ceived? Has any one of the rulers believed on him, or of the Phari­sees? But this crowd, which does not know the law, are accursed.

  "Nicodemus says to them (being one of themselves), Does our law judge a man before it have first heard from himself, and know what he does?

  "They answered and said to him, Art thou also of Galilee? Search and look, that no prophet arises out of Galilee", John 7: 45-52.

How ignorant these Pharisees were, who prided themselves in their knowledge of the Scriptures! If they had taken their own advice

• "Search and look"

• they would have learned that an earlier prophet had indeed arisen out of Galilee – Jonah.*  How fitting that the only sign that they would be given was
  • "the sign of Jonas the prophet", Matthew 12: 39; 16: 4; Luke 11: 29.

  [* Compare Jonah 1: 1; 2 Kings 14: 25; Joshua 19: 10, 13; and also Isaiah 9: 1-2; Matthew 4: 12-16.]

Paul, was one of the most highly educated Jews of the day in religious matters. He could say

• "I am a Jew, born in Tarsus of Cilicia, but brought up in this city, at the feet of Gamaliel,*  educated according to the exactness of the law of our fathers, being zealous for God, as ye are all this day", Acts 22: 3.

[* “a certain man, a Pharisee, named Gamaliel, a teacher of the law, held in honour of all the people”, Acts 5: 34.]

• But he could go on to say,
  • "Though I have my trust even in flesh; if any other think to trust in flesh, I rather … as to the law, a Pharisee … as to righteousness which is in the law, found blameless; but what things were gain to me these I counted, on account of Christ, loss

    " But surely I count also all things to be loss on account of the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord, on account of whom I have suffered the loss of all, and count them to be filth, that I may gain Christ", Philippians 3: 4-8.

The Corinthians had had the benefit of Paul's presence

• "a year and six months, teaching among them the word of God" Acts 18: 1-11.

  He says of them: "in everything ye have been enriched in Him, in all word of doctrine, and all knowledge", 1 Corinthians 1: 5.

• But the Corinthi­ans, as all the Greeks, were enamoured of worldly "wisdom" which – as it can and does today – could co-exist comfortably with parti­sanship, divided conditions, lack of spiritual­ity, immorality and doctrinal error. They had not learned this from Paul for he had preached the cross which sets aside human wisdom.
  • "For the word of the cross is to them that perish foolishness, but to us that are saved it is God's power. For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and set aside the understanding of the understanding ones.

    "Where is the wise? Where scribe? Where disputer of this world? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? For since, in the wisdom of God, the world by wisdom has not known God, God has been pleased by the foolishness of the preach­ing to save those that believe.

    "Since Jews indeed ask for signs, and Greeks seek wisdom; but we preach Christ crucified, to Jews an offence, and to nations foolishness; but to those that are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ God's power and God's wisdom. Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.

    "For consider your calling, brethren, that there are not many wise according to flesh, not many powerful, not many high-born. But God has chosen the foolish things of the world, that he may put to shame the wise; and God has chosen the weak things of the world, that he may put to shame the strong things; and the ignoble things of the world, and the despised, has God chosen, and things that are not, that he may annul the things that are; so that no flesh should boast before God.

    "But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who has been made to us wisdom from God, and righteousness, and holiness, and redemp­tion; that according as it is written, He that boasts, let him boast in the Lord", 1 Corinthians 1: 18-31.

    "Let no one deceive himself: if any one thinks himself to be wise among you in this world, let him become foolish, that he may be wise. For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God; for it is written, He who takes the wise in their craftiness. And again, The Lord knows the reasonings of the wise that they are vain", 1 Corinthians­ 3: 18-20.

It is not being suggested that there is no need at all for a spiritual education,

• but that a secular style of education for the work of the Lord is neither Scriptural nor desirable. There are many instances and examples of Scriptural teaching and instruction of believers in general as well as servants of the Lord in the book of Acts.
  • "And they persevered in the teaching and fellowship of the apostles, in breaking of bread and prayers", Acts 2: 42.

    "At Antioch, Barnabas "went away to Tarsus to seek out Saul. And having found him, he brought him to Antioch. And so it was with them that for a whole year they were gathered together in the assem­bly and taught a large crowd: and the disciples were first called Christians in Antioch", Acts 11: 25-26.

    • Later there are three others designated besides Barnabas and Saul who are designated as being among "prophets and teachers", Acts 13: 1-3.

    Paul "came to Derbe and Lystra: and behold, a certain disciple was there, by name Timotheus, son of a Jewish believing woman … who had a good testimony of the brethren in Lystra and Iconium. Him would Paul have go forth with him", Acts 16: 1-3.

• Who can but believe that Timothy would have received instruction from Paul in view of Paul's exhortation?
  • "And the things thou hast heard of me in the presence of many witnesses, these entrust to faithful men, such as shall be competent to instruct others also", 2 Timothy 2: 2.

    It is said of the Bereans that "these were more noble than those in Thessalonica, receiving the word with all readiness of mind, daily searching the scriptures if these things were so", Acts 17: 11.

• Even an eloquent man like Apollos learned from a humble tent­maker and his wife:
  • "But a certain Jew, Apollos by name, an Alex­andrian by race, an eloquent man, who was mighty in the Scriptures, arrived at Ephesus. He was instructed in the way of the Lord, and being fervent in his spirit, he spoke and taught exactly the things concerning Jesus, knowing only the baptism of John. And he began to speak boldly in the synagogue.

    "And Aquila and Priscilla, having heard him, took him to them and unfolded to him the way of God more exactly. And when he purposed to go into Achaia, the brethren wrote to the disciples engaging them to receive him, who, being come, contributed much to those who believed through grace. For he with great force convinced the Jews publicly, shewing by the scriptures that Jesus was the Christ", Acts 18: 24-28.

• In Ephesus "when some were hardened and disbelieved, speaking evil of the way before the multitude, he" [Paul]
  • "left them and separated the disciples, reasoning daily in the school of Tyrannus. And this took place for two years, so that all that inhabited Asia heard the word of the Lord, both Jews and Greeks", Acts 19: 9-10.

    "And there accompanied him" [Paul] "as far as Asia, Sopater son of Pyrrhus, a Berean; and of Thessalonians, Aristarchus and Secun­dus, and Gaius and Timotheus of Derbe, and of Asia, Tychicus and Trophimus", Acts 20: 4.

• What conversation there must have been between Paul and these young servants of the Lord!

The greatest instruction of all for those who were to be servants was that given by the Lord Himself. The principles and patterns that marked His instruction have been examined in Mark – The Divine Standard Of Service.

October 1997, Gordon A. Rainbow.

Page Top   Article Top

BANNING  OF  TELEVISION
Background and Various Consideration in answer to Robert Munster.

Sat, 18 Aug 2007
Dear Robert …

You ask about the background to the 'banning' of television among the brethren. To the best of my knowledge this is an outgrowth of the earlier, and still current, ban on radios.

• In his ministry J.T. often warned as to the perceived and real dangers of radio numerous times. See Index Book 2, Subjects.

• The conventional belief is that the radio, and now television, brings the world with its corrupting influences into your home and should therefore not be allowed.

Page Top   Article Top

PRACTICAL  FELLOWSHIP: Serious Considerations
Replies to two friends who shared their exercises

September 2008,

Dear —
Yes, who we may walk with in a practical sense is a great exercise.

• Alas, some seem to have no difficulty about mixing with the systems.

• If they had gone through the deep exercise of coming out originally, as I and others did, they might have a clearer judgment, as did our 'early' brethren.

• GRC saw this as a real danger in 1962. See Ministry: G. R. Cowell: Later 6: Issues Involved in Present Exercises.

• So did AEM near the end, 1967. See Biography: A. E. Myles: Correspondence with I. E. Salvesen.

What you do will obviously affect your children – a vital consideration.

• And what will young ones do as they grow up, not only for fellowship but for marriage? This concerns us greatly as to our own …

As to ourselves, we sorely miss practical fellowship but cannot with a good conscience compromise truth bought at a price, and what we have been taught and learned as divine principles, for the sake of 'fellowship'.

• Another consideration is that we want to be able to continue to serve all our brethren through 'My Brethren' without the restrictions that might be demanded by some in order to have 'fellowship'.

I will be greatly interested to hear how you get on in your exercises and to hear any further thoughts you have on this important but complicated matter.

Affectionately in our Lord Jesus, Gordon.

Page Top   Article Top

October 15, 2008,

Dear ——,

You write;
1. "Where we do not have any doctrinal differences what is in the way of us walking together?

• Whether there are "any doctrinal differences" would have to be determined.

• When separations have been in existence for some, perhaps many, years, often differences, even slight, do come in and if not in doctrine often there are practical differences in administration, and separation from systems.

2. Where Christians are walking a right path surely they should be together?"

• Certainly, but again, this would have to be looked into. Assuming Christians have the same viewpoint as to a "right path" might be misleading and lead to further sorrows.

• See the above reply.

3. "Just out of interest would there be anything hindering us being together?"

• I could not be sure, but there may well be differences in our outlook on our path. Some contacts I have had seem to indicate this. Our stand can generally, on most issues, be fairly determined from statements on the web site.

• We certainly miss a wider fellowship – though glad of contacts and visits from time to time with brethren from several groups.

• While we do not want to be 'independent', we appreciate being able to reach out and embrace other 'brethren' without fear of being censured. The web site has allowed us to do this without being 'sectarian' in any way.

I would be glad to hear from you further on this and appreciate your exercise.

In our Lord Jesus, Gordon.

Page Top   Article Top

CHANGES MADE TO  THE HYMN BOOK

See Guest Book 17 December 19, 2008, Brian Graham writes: … One thing deeply concerns me. It relates to the changes made over the years to the hymn book. Let me explain. I am a qualified and experienced English teacher. If I started deleting and amending – for example – parts of Wordsworth's poetry it would be indefensible morally or intellectually In the same way to cut and paste old hymns just because you do not endorse certain lines in them is also indefensible. The solution – very simply – if you don't like the hymn don't use it. We have no right to interfere with another's work in this way. It strikes me as very high-handed …

Dear Brian,
… We appreciate you letting us know of your concern as to "the changes made over the years to the hymn book". To some degree, we can understand your position and trust you will, give some thought to our viewpoint.

• Obviously we were not involved in the revisions but, in general, we agree with the practice of the successive editors, even if that puts us in the position of defending the "indefensible".

We can see a difference between hymns and ministry, oral or written. Regarding the latter, at the 1960 Stow Hill Meeting the following was reported:

• "The question of 'editing' came up, in respect of F.E.R., in a few cases where minor adjustments in doctrine had come in, and after fairly lengthy consideration it was decided that his ministry should be reprinted untouched. Mr. Gardiner confirmed that no 'editing' had been done with J.N.D.'s Collected Writings. Also J.T.'s ministry was not changed either it was printed as he said it, or it was not printed at all".

• The above refers to ministry reprints. Of course all the original publications referred to had been edited.

• Printed ministry can be read and filtered through the mind of the reader, received or rejected.

Hymns are quite different, although most were likely written for personal reasons or use, in a hymn book they become the vehicles for collective praise and worship.

• Many hymns by earlier authors, Cowper, Doddridge, Watts and others are rightly appreciated although some expressions may not be scripturally accurate.
  • Being the valuable product of spiritual experience and exercise it would be a great loss to reject them.

  • However, to use them without amendment would mean knowingly, to say the least, using inaccurate expressions in praise and worship. This could hardly be thought to be pleasing to Divine Persons.

The editors chose to preserve the valuable hymns of earlier authors but in a form that would be in accord with worshipping God "in spirit and truth", John 4: 24.

• The principles guiding the successive editors were set out by Mr. Wigram, the original editor, in the preface to the 1856 hymn book.

• Most hymns in more recent editions were written by brethren walking together in fellowship and submitted with an understanding that changes might be necessary.

We cannot recollect the original form of many older hymns but give one example that comes to mind.

• Isaac's Watts' hymn 272: "When I survey the wondrous cross on which the Lord of glory died" originally said "Prince of glory".

• While perhaps a pious thought, it is not in accord with the scripture nor the personal greatness of Christ.
  • "God's wisdom in a mystery ... which none of the princes of this age knew (for had they known they would not have crucified the Lord of glory:)", 1 Corinthians 2: 7-8.

    The Lord Jesus is more than a prince. Compare Isaiah 32: 1.

In the 'Note' to the 1973 Re-Selection, Robert Stott, who Gordon knew personally and greatly respected, said, "Where appropriate a return is made to the original composition of the authors".

• One change however in that edition is, we believe, "indefensible". Mr. Wigram's hymn 92 "What raised the wondrous thought", had remained unchanged through all previous editions,

  "That we the church to glory brought", 92:1:3 was changed to "The church should be ...". This was probably done because of the 1960-70's pretentious claim "We are the church".

We hope to hear from you again, on this or other matters.

In our Lord Jesus, Gordon Rainbow and Jeff Kuns.

Page Top   Article Top

CRITICISM  OF  MB'S  SELECTION OF  MINISTRY
Rebuttal of complaint on peebs.net

Recently the following appeared on peebs.net public forums. It was posted by "johnw" Member.

"Thank you Renton Anon for this; as someone who knows little about Rentons I find these comments useful. You say that JND, FER and JBS are sometimes quoted. Might I ask if anyone might quote non-EB commentators and church leaders, especially living ones?

One of the rather absurd things I found on Gordon Rainbow's website was that he decried the mainstream church with its form of leadership whilst at the same time using as 'ministry' only a select few sets of initials, albeit a little broader than the 'great men.' I believe, too, that they were all deceased. One possible exception (from the point of view that he was alive) was someone called Andrew Robertson - although I think he too has passed away.

"Something I found interesting about him was that when his business took him to, I think, Brazil, he resigned his company because there was no testimony there. Since that statement is nonsense (there might have been no brethren of any sort there) it suggests the notion that brethren of any kind still tend to believe that they are somehow the only right position."

Page Top   Article Top

PROCEDURE  RE  RECEPTION AND  WITHDRAWAL
Reply to an Inquiry – October 2011

We sympathize deeply with you in all that you and your wife have been through – but cannot agree with your present position of fellowship with "a local non denominational evangelical church".

As to your question:

'Reception', to use a common term, is always of individuals – not husbands and wives, or families – even though two or more naturally related may be received at the same time.

• It follows that 'excommunication' or 'withdrawing from' is always of individuals – even though two or more – related or not – may be withdrawn from at the same time.
  • 1 Corinthians 5: 13 states: "Remove the wicked person from amongst yourselves" – the individual – while nothing is said as to "his father's wife", possibly equally guilty.

• Even though, as you say, "the husband and wife are of 'one mind' ", wisdom might temporarily withhold action against the weaker vessel in view of possible recovery.

Page Top   Article Top

Your guest entries and messages will show that the continuation of My Brethren is important to you.

Page Top