Peebs.Net is a successor to Dick Wyman's site, 'Exclusive Brethren Information', and Daniel Little's 'Withdrawnfrom.com' – both closed under legal pressure.
I am not a 'member' of Peebs.Net, as it would compromise the independence, integrity and principles of 'My Brethren'. However, I do monitor its 'public' forums for news items and any mention of old friends.
Unexpectedly, the following correspondence revealed Peebs.Net's objectives as to the whole history of the 'brethren', not only the departure from 1959 on.
In accordance with MB's Site Standards policy below there would normally be no acknowledgment of, or reply to, Peebs.Nets 'clarification'.
- However, in view of the need of clarifying the objectives and policy of Peebs. Net, we have decided to post the correspondence, along with my comments and those of some valued guests.
SITE STANDARDS
Messages – and Guest Book entries – will not be posted nor will they be acknowledged if they
- are disrespectful of Divine Persons, or the brethren or servants – of whatever persuasion – caustic, sarcastic or otherwise offensive,
- seem to be merely promoting personal prejudices or partisan views rather than an objective view of the Holy Scriptures and the history of the assembly,
- promote anti-scriptural or anti-christian views.
|
To: Peebs,Net
12 Dec, 2006
Re: Restricted Area: Access Denied
Why do I not have access? Gordon Rainbow.
From: Peebs,Net
12 Dec, 2006
Hi Oh Editor Emiritus [sic]!
Please don't be so paranoid!* Life is too short ... :-)
[* paranoia: a mental disorder marked by systematized delusions, especially of grandeur or persecution.]
We may entirely disagree with your seeming doctrinal "sympathetic" support of a blatantly heretical system, but we would never stoop to blocking you!
It was a technical glitch which we will explain to our members once we know the details. We have people deciphering the logs as we write.
Regards, The Peebs.Net Team
"The Truth will set you Free"
Web: http://peebs.net
Email: infoATpeebs.net
To: Peebs,Net
22 Dec, 2006
To Peebs.Net Team,
All I asked was "Why do I not have access?" But thanks anyway for the free diagnosis!
You are quite mistaken however if you think I support the current aberrant EB system.
In the Lord, Gordon.
From: Peebs,Net
22 Dec, 2006
Subject: Clarification
Hi...
(We really DO love the 'Emiritus' [sic] Title you have given yourself! We must dream up some for ourselves sometime! Mind you BDH has called us 'The Opposers' and we rather like that...)
No Gordon, we obviously were not referring to the blatant evil of Jtjr and his successors.
We were referring to the heresy of even dreaming that any assembly holds 'the position'. It is utter rubbish and has hurt thousands of people. The EB started their journey into disaster via JND who was clearly in error. His legacy was simply amplified by those who came after - FER, JT, AEG [AEM or AJG ?], PL ... the 'Seperate [sic] from the world' and 'we are the church' brigade.
That is the heresy of which we spoke. It has bred disaster and that is sufficient evidence of its true origin - rather hot and smoky!
We are grateful for you having retained all the material you have - we will be featuring the full panoply [sic] of historical error in a major doctrinal expose sometime in the future. It's time that the full extent of Darby's error and its consequences was made fully public.
Of course each of the men we mention were not completely in error. JND remains a wonderful and respected scholar. FER has a more 'poetic' spiritual legacy ... but JT opened a doorway into the Pit [ ??? ] and by tempting [sic] the EB to become physically seperate [sic], they started their journey away from Christ and just look at them today!
It would seem that most ministry was tainted by the 1930's. Since then, the EB slide has simply gathered momentum.
We shall enjoy [!] ripping the covers off. We hope that it might help more than just the Taylorite EB.
Regards, The Peebs.Net Team
To: Peebs.Net
29 Dec, 2006
Subject; Clarification and Comments
To Peebs.Net Team
Regarding your replies, first some clarification:
'Emeritus' is not, as you suppose, a title I have given myself. It is used on 'My Brethren' and in my email address to distinguish from MB's successor Editor.
- It is merely a well-known common designation. [ L = having served one's time. Retired from active service but retaining honorary rank and title, as 'professor emeritus'.]
As to your reference to my "seemingly 'sympathetic' doctrinal support", the "sympathetic" appears to have been culled from the description of 'My Brethren' in the links on the 'Christian Brethren Archives' site, and is their judgment.
- You seem to be somewhat familiar with MB which has been referred to several times in your public forums by mutual guests but – doubtless in view of your 'unsympathetic' objectives – it has not been given a place in your 'Useful Links'.
While it is quite unlikely that anything I say will deter you from your proposed "major doctrinal expose", I can only hope and pray that you will realize that this would be a serious blunder.
- 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.
Greetings to you both, Daniel.
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 …
As I expect you know, I put some criticisms regarding the E.B. website on
the Peebs.Net website in August 2005. The words "Status: To be Forwarded" still
appear even after such a long time interval.
- Some of the criticisms are now out of date and I sent Peebs.Net some further comments to cover the changes and additions that have been made to the site. I sent these to Peebs.Net, but had no response to my E-mail or my follow up one. …
- I have sought to avoid making sarcastic comments which would boost spiritual pride by making people think they are being persecuted for the name of Christ. I have rather sought
to show that Exclusives have departed from the fundamentals that JND and others espoused, effectively saying they are apostate. This will minister to no one's pride.
- Exclusives like to think they are the main line going through - that they are maintaining the teachings of JND and other leading men among the Brethren. Attacking these teachings will only divert attention from the aberrations of the Exclusives at the present time.
- The enemy is out to discredit the whole idea of separation from iniquity by driving people to such an excess as to make others give it up altogether. I hope I would not enjoy exposing people (see for instance Genesis 9:18-29) …
I fear that the Peebs.Net team are throwing out the baby with the bathwater (the truth with the error) as I often expected many would do.
- Darby and others would never have dreamed of claiming they were the assembly. That idea is a modern aberration and would never have been endorsed by the leaders in the 1800's.
- However, it is just as wrong to teach that it does not matter what church fellowship we are connected with. If a person denies that we should separate from this present evil world then he is clearly at variance with Scripture (Galatians 1:4; James 4:4; 1 John 2:15).
On the positive side Peebs.Net seem to be doing a good job inasmuch as they enable ex E.B.'s to come into contact with one another again after being many years apart. I made such a contact recently with a guest on Peebs.Net.
…
If I can be of help in any way please let me know.
Greetings in Christ, Gordon.
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.
But it seems that personal responsibility takes a back seat to getting even or, as you say, gloating. I also think it is a question of not having judged one's self.
- We followed instead of leading and we looked the other way when wrongdoing was happening in our presence or our hearing … We did not behave as those who were accountable before God individually. Many act as though the organization has a mind of its own.
Yours in Him, Jeff.
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
- but also to keep out of the grip of the tentacles of trade unions and other unequal yokes.
But, even though legitimate, advanced secular education can also be a hindrance in various other ways:
- It can rob one of time that should be devoted to God's interests, including one's family, during the education years – and later in the sometimes excessive demands of the employment secured through it.
- It can puff one up in his estimate of himself for in every endeavour there is always the danger that
- "knowledge puffs up", 1 Corinthians 8: 1. So Paul exhorts
"be not conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is the good and acceptable and perfect will of God. For I say, through the grace which has been given to me, to every one that is among you, not to have high thoughts above what he should think; but to think so as to be wise, as God has dealt to each a measure of faith", Romans 12: 2-3.
- Such knowledge can lead to independence of God, as was sadly proved
- when "the serpent said to the woman, Ye will not certainly die; but God knows that in the day ye eat of it, your eyes will be opened, and ye will be as God, knowing good and evil. And the woman saw that … the tree was to be desired to give intelligence; and she took of its fruit, and ate, and gave also to her husband with her, and he ate", Genesis 3: 4-6.
In the coming years, whatever time may remain until the coming of our Lord, every young believer will have to face the above dangers and go through them with God.
While many may generally agree with the foregoing, the dangers and the unscriptural character of a formal secular style education in regard to the Scriptures and the things of God in general may hardly, if at all, be recognized.
- Many Christians read the Bible only in the light of what they see around them in Christendom. They do not apply the penetrating light of the Scriptures to the present outward state of the church.
- There is an almost universal acceptance of, and apathy as to, the prevailing public state of the church with its
- rampant denominationalism,
- artificial and mischievous division into clergy and laity.
- set forms of worship,
- edifice-complex,
- secular style seminary training,
- business style organization.
These and other unscriptural aberrations are accepted, virtually without question or investigation, as the divinely ordained pattern of the church.
A few enlightened individuals do see the great discrepancy between the present confusion and the inspired description of the early assembly.
- 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.*
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
- 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.
As to "However, I am not quite so sure about making blanket rules about such things or making it a test of fellowship. What is your view?"
- The making of "blanket rules" is simply an evidence of weakness and distrust. The repressive governments of the world are really weak and could not retain power without the enforcement of various rules. The same thing marks religious cults.
There is a great difference between what the Spirit by the Scripture requires of Christians as to their conduct and what men, however personally godly, may consider necessary to protect the brethren from various evils.
- The brethren need to be nourished in the truth and in faithfulness to the Lord so that they can individually stand against the wiles of the devil rather that hide behind rules.
At a critical time in the testimony, the apostles and elders and the wholes assembly at Jerusalem wrote
- "it has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay upon you no greater burden than these" four "necessary things ...", Acts 15: 28-29.
And Paul says, "if ye have died with Christ from the elements of the world, why as if alive in the world do ye subject yourselves to ordinances", Colossians 2: 20.
There are doubtless many lures of the devil on radio and TV, but that is so perhaps to a greater extent on the internet which many of use. There are also dangers in newspapers, shopping malls, and many other situations we face daily.
- I would not minimize these but we have to learn to discriminate,
- "know to refuse the evil, and to choose the good", Isaiah 7: 15.
- However many rules we may have, it is because of our sinful nature that such things attract us. Let us remember that it is what comes out of the heart that defiles. Matthew 15: 18-20.
- "Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall in no way fulfill flesh's lust ... The fruit of the Spirit ... is self-control", Galatians 5: 16, 22-23.
Conformity to a rule should not be "a test of fellowship" but rather the personal conduct and commitment to Christ as measured by the Scriptures.
In our Lord Jesus, Gordon.
Following is an interesting 1962 comment from an older brother who withdrew from the legal sect in 1959-60:
… Is anything evil in itself? Scripture says not. Can its use be evil in the sense that it hinders communion with Christ or grieves the Spirit? Yes! When this electronic device becomes an idol, then there is no place for it in a Christian's home. Can a library card be a hindrance? I believe so. Can a newspaper?
- To me the ministry against the radio is a repetition of the early objections to telephones, street cars, airplanes and automobiles – also pianos. Two of these (the telephone and using the street car) were brought as charges of looseness against my father 55 years ago.
- Lack of confidence in one another is the fundamental cause of the objection to the radio and even TV. Ministering brothers simply did not trust the brethren. J.T.Sr. said one should read a newspaper standing up!
- Yes, there are radios among us in — My son has one in his plane, another transistor at home. I have none. We've just got a new car – no radio. Why? Because of $140.00. I can get a portable transistor for $50.00.
- With this we can hear the news (we take no paper), also get warnings on freeway traffic conditions, also smog alerts and air defence warnings. I believe all should have a set – but not for worldly entertainment. I know of no TV's here.
- The public personalities appearing on radio and TV are a part of the world's entertainment system. We have no part in that. Children in school now are required to give reports of educational programs. A radio in a home must be strictly supervised, just as reading matter and records should be.
- Why do we not hear about alcoholic beverages, cards, dancing and movies – are these not the devil's tools, and have always been?
- We in — try to avoid rules and regulations – also the dominance of any one man. A deliberate violation of Scripture if not repented of would breach the fellowship …
- I'm free to say we would accept an applicant such as you describe if: (1) Devoted to Christ and has a real desire to remember Him, (2) Separate in walk from [trade] unions or bad associations, (3) Sound in doctrine. I realize that each of these three points is subject to a variety of interpretations and endless argument.
- Are you happy and free with these folks who are leaving a system? Do they love the brethren? How wonderful and encouraging to have any say to you: 'The Lord is with you of a truth'.
- Honestly, —, I'm thoroughly ashamed of the superior attitude I've had towards other blood bought Christians! …
- I would not for a moment disparage our [illegible] serving the Lord. He deserves honour but, nevertheless, he can't and doesn't speak for me, and his exercises should not be forced on anyone – or else back we go to where we left.
- "All things are lawful, but all are not expedient" (or, profitable). [1 Cor. 10: 23]
|
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.
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".
Wordsworth's poetry, or similar standard collections, should certainly not be changed, although we suspect that the originals did not escape some editing. and many such editions have copious annotations. It is more than likely that he revised his own compositions.
- As an English teacher you will have marked many poems and essays and doubtless indicated necessary changes for meter, rhyme, grammar or correct word usage.
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.
In the, Robert Stott, who Gordon knew personally and greatly respected, said, "Where appropriate a return is made to the original composition of the authors".
We hope to hear from you again, on this or other matters.
In our Lord Jesus, Gordon Rainbow.
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."
THIS IS MY STAND:
Since the sub-title of 'My Brethren' is explicitly
'HISTORY and MINISTRY of the early ‘EXCLUSIVE BRETHREN’ (so-called) their origin, progress and testimony 1827-1959 and onward',
- that should be a sufficient and reasonable explanation of the "rather absurd" fact that the ministry presented is only of a "select few" (actually 52) and why they now (in 2011) are, all but one, "deceased".
Although we are not connected with the "Rentons", My Brethren also does not "quote non-EB commentators and church leaders, especially living ones" because:
- it is not within our mandate, and
- there are many other sites devoted to such commentators,
- many if not most of such commentators are opposed or indifferent to the ideals expressed on MB.
Regarding Andrew Robertson MB's biographical sketch says:
- "When his employer adamantly decided to transfer him to Brazil – where there was no possibility of continuing his links in Christian fellowship – Andrew resigned."
- The whole statement on peebs.net is itself "nonsense" and only "suggests the notion" of what "johnw" imagines and not what was in Andrew's mind or what motivated him.
- I say this as having intimate knowledge of Andrew's thoughts and convictions through many years of weekly conversations.
G.A.R.
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.
All the above assumes a right condition in the responsible gathering.
If the responsible gathering is not scripturally based – or is not acting on scriptural principles – it matters not whether they have outwardly followed the above.
- The one or more withdrawn from need not be concerned as to their own position regarding recognition of their individual status with the responsible gathering.
- They are responsible to act in accordance with scriptural principle themselves – whether alone or in company with others.
We trust this is of some help to you and welcome further contact regarding your question.
In our Lord Jesus, Gordon and Jeff.
Page Top Article Top
| BROTHERLY CONFIDENCE |
|---|
| Correspondence with a brother of the "open" persuasion -- November, 2012.
|
|---|
Greetings Gordon,
I have read the article as you have requested. [The Lord's Supper and the Service of God: A Historical Review]
- "its importance and relation to the service of God – i.e., collective worship of Divine Persons in assembly – is unknown to many and scarcely understood by others."
Now, let me be forthright & direct. It is clear that you are trying to make a personal point with me rather than point out a general observation from this article.
If you would be gracious to point out your motive for having me read the article. It is imperative to "speak the truth in love". Also as the incumbent of the article, you must not shroud your motive leaving me to draw my own conclusions as to motive. I shall not do so for only God can "make manifest the counsels of hearts". Although, it is written," the word of God is living and operative, and sharper than any two-edged sword, and penetrating to the division of soul and spirit, both of joints and marrow, and a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart".
Requested in love, The Holy Spirit give us counsel
[Name Withheld]
Dear [Name Withheld],
The purpose of my paper is as stated below and remains unchanged:
- “It is intended primarily for younger brethren with whom I walk, and if they receive benefit its purpose will have been well served.
- “If any brethren of other backgrounds, who may be unaware of the historical developments and the manner and order in which the Spirit has brought forward the truth, are stimulated to look into these holy matters it would be a cause of thankfulness to our God.”
The statement you quote:
- “its importance and relation to the service of God – i.e., collective worship of Divine Persons in assembly – is unknown to many and scarcely understood by others”
– is of general bearing and, I believe, accurate based on my personal experience and knowledge.
Your conclusion that I am making a “personal point” with you is of your own imagination -- and absolutely wrong.
Various points covered in the paper -- which has been on mybrethren.org for some years -- had been touched on several times in our discussions and I hoped – in vain as I now see – that reading the paper would clarify my background and viewpoint on this important subject and lead to an interesting and positive discussion.
I am not, as you imagine, shrouding any motive but, as always, seek to be simple and straightforward. Perhaps your own always forceful -- and occasionally aggressive -- manner of speaking may have coloured your thoughts as to me.
Our contacts have been generally enjoyable -- but such continuing conversations on scriptural subjects cannot be of any real and lasting value unless conducted in full brotherly confidence. This is evidently lacking.
Without this necessary basis -- you may perhaps agree with me -- it is clear that our weekly conversations should now, regretfully, be discontinued.
In the Lord, Gordon.
Page Top Article Top
Your guest entries and messages will show that
the continuation of My Brethren is important to you.
|
Page Top
|