Columbia Theological Seminary Bulletin, 33, number 2, September 1940

BULLETIN

OF
COLUMBIA THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY

Inaugural Address
Manford George Gutzke, D. D.

PUBLISHED QUARTERLY AT
DECATUR, GEORGIA

Volume XXXIII September, 1940 No. 2

Entered as Second-class Matter, May 9, 1928, at the Post Office at Decatur, Georgia
Under the Act of August 24, 1912

Digitized by the Internet Archive

in 2012 with funding from

LYRASIS Members and Sloan Foundation

http://archive.org/details/columbiatheol3340colu

An address delivered by

MANFORD GEORGE GUTZKE, D. D.

On the occasion of his formal induction into office as
Professor of English Bible and Religious Education at

COLUMBIA THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY
MAY 13, 1940

Mr. President, Gentlemen of the Board of Directors, Members of the
Faculty, Alumni, Students, and Friends of Columbia Theological
Seminary:

The subject I have chosen to discuss is rather general in scope, but I
think both fitting and timely for the occasion. Having in mind the prob-
lems confronting our whole church, as well as the particular significance
of these exercises, I beg your attention to this theme:

THE FUNCTION OF THE BIBLE TODAY

Doubtless each generation in turn experiences more or less of darkness
and shadow as the forces of evil dominate the relations of men and the
problems of living, but certainly our age is just now plunging into deeper
gloom than any we have known. The foundations of social custom are
being shaken and disrupted until it seems the whole fabric of civilization
will be torn to shreds by ruthless destruction. Now is the time for us to
remember that the armed violence in Europe tonight is not a thing apart
from the history of man in past generations. The bitter truth of the
matter seems plainly to be that the godless philosophies of vain and wilful
men, who in the past have scoffed at Christian faith and virtue, and have
deliberately inflamed the carnal thinking of sinful minds, have at last
brought forth their natural offspring in that wanton cruelty which is
shocking the whole world. As we glance back through the blood-marked,
tear-stained, pages of human history, we must sadly admit that the tragic
calamities of this hour have been all too common among men. Far too
often have the hearts of the pure been broken to behold

"Truth forever on the scaffold,
Wrong forever on the throne."

The whole order of Western civilization is not without responsibility in
this day of horror. What we are seeing tonight in fearful war, has already
been happening in moral, social, and spiritual collapse. In vain have care-
less men counted on "society" maintaining standards of conduct, better
than the level of their own personal behavior. In vain have foolish men
expected faith in God to remain steadfast, while they themselves prac-
ticed a doubtful tolerance in permitting harmful neglect and destructive
criticism to sabotage the prestige of the Holy Scriptures. In vain have

[3]

selfish men given themselves over to secular pursuits, expecting "the
church" to safeguard the morals of society while they took license to live
in indulgent wickedness. "God is not mocked"! Many, many men, who
knew better, have sown the wind, and are now to realize in blood and
tears that we must reap the whirlwind.

But it is not my purpose tonight to keep your minds focussed on this
darksome hour. This much has been said that we might have a realistic
background for our thinking as we now turn soberly to our theme. What
then is the function of the Bible today? Is the study of the Bible some-
thing for days of leisure and peace? Or is it true, that the darker the
hour the more reason we should turn to the Scriptures? Is not this what
the Psalmist implies when he writes, "Thy word is a lamp unto my feet,
and a light unto my path"? Ve do well to remember that the world has
passed through fearful times ere this, and it has been the glorious testi-
mony of Christians, that when the walls of society and of empires crum-
ble before the onslaught of raw physical violence, then there is always an
Augustine with upraised arm pointing the hearts of men to "The City of
God." The heroes of faith have ever triumphed as they patiently ran their
race, enduring "as seeing Him who is invisible." It has ever been true,
and it is true now, that "God always causeth us to triumph in Christ
Jesus." Earnest men have faithfully warned a sleeping church for years
that the shadows were deepening in the hearts of men. Fascinated by
material prosperity, and drunken with human achievement, multitudes
have left their Bibles unopened, their knees unbent, their heads unbowed
they did not worship God sincerely, nor admit their own sins honestly.
But God has not left Himself without witness. In every generation some
have cared about God, have turned from their own sin to God, and have
lived triumphantly by faith in God. Such men have glorified the name
of Christ as they have been the salt of the earth and the light of the
world. By their true, patient, worthy living they have kept the name
"Christian" on something of a gold standard all over the world.

Let us first consider

THE PLACE OF THE BIBLE
IN THE CHRISTIAN ECONOMY

The Christian is not so much a person of distinctive moral attainment
or of superior ethical standards, even though his character is normally
exemplary. He is a Christian because he employs a distinctive technique
in living. He depends not primarily upon his own skill or power in man-
ipulating himself or his environment according to his own wisdom or
wishes, but essentially upon his understanding and faith in relating him-
self to the personal Will of the living God according to His revealed
Word. Christians are men of flesh and blood, of like passions with other
men, yet living on a plane unknown in the experience of the natural man.
Where the natural man lives alone within the inner recesses of his own
soul, and in that loneliness languishes under the burden of his own fail-

[4]

ures and the weight of adverse circumstances, the Christian is never alone.
He lives in conscious fellowship with God, who loves him, forgives his
sin, cleanses him, delivers him, empowers him, comforts him, and keeps
him. The Christian is a man in whose heart Christ dwells by faith.

Men are not born of the flesh as Christians. They are "born again" of
the Spirit and the Word. "Every man in Christ Jesus is a new creature."
This new life, called "Eternal Life," is also known as "Salvation," with
all that wonderful word implies. We shall not take time to remind our-
selves of its manifold significance, but simply recall that it indicates every-
thing, past, present, and future, which Christ Jesus secured for sinful
men by His own Death on Calvary, His Resurrection by the Power of
God and His Exaltation at the right hand of God. We do want to note
that all these blessings are ours by faith, "not of works lest any man should
boast." We remember that "all the promises of God are Yea and Amen in
Christ Jesus," in Whom "the unsearchable riches" of God's grace are
made available to all men, "Whosoever believeth on Him." Christians,
then, being the true children of Abraham, are saved by faith, and during
their earthly lives they "walk by faith and not by sight."

At this point we must take issue with a current fallacy regarding
"faith." The idea has been widely spread that "faith" benefits the be-
liever by some sort of benign psychological, reflex influence. In this view
it would appear that "faith" is taken to mean something of an optimistic
frame of mind, born of credulity, which spreads such a glow of hopeful-
ness throughout consciousness as to warm the cockles of the heart, and
thus to produce subjectively, the well-known "fruits of the Spirit," viz.,
"love, joy, peace, etc." Doubtless such attempts at living in an imaginary
world of wishful thinking are made from time to time, though why any-
one should admire such mistaken efforts as "noble" remains somewhat
obscure. This is that "idealism" which so many of us find so ephemeral
and so impractical, that we can have no confidence in its claims. Simply
put, this is the notion expressed in such thoughts as this: "It makes no
difference whom or what you believe, just so you have faith, that's all
that counts." A more untrue and illogical statement is hard to conceive.
Needless to emphasize, Christian faith, "saving faith" is something en-
tirely different.

By "faith" we mean a functional technique wherein man appropriates
to himself the revealed promises of God, so that he acts upon them as
being philosophically real and pragmatically true. Such a man may recog-
nize the actual situation in which he lives, and be aware of his particular
plight and his specific peril. His eyes and mind may be wide open to the
real truth of his own limitations, failures, and prospects. But he also
recognizes that God is, and believes that God is "a rewarder of them that
diligently seek Him." Having heard from godly messengers what the
benevolent purpose of God in Christ toward himself is, this man commits
himself to God by faith in Christ, in acting as if God would grant the
Salvation promised in Him. Here we see faith being exercised as the man

[5]

directs his course of action in line with the revealed Will of God. When
the Jews asked Christ Jesus, "What shall we do, that we might work the
works of God?" He answered "This is the work of God, that ye believe
on him whom he hath sent." It is by such action of faith toward the
Person of Jesus Christ that Salvation is achieved by the Christian.

Let us amplify for a moment what the Christian believes about God.
God is recognized as the Creator, the Sustainer, the Sovereign, the Judge
of all the earth. He is believed to be holy in righteousness, justice, and
truth. This world is God's world, and in nature we can see the manifold
wisdom and goodness of God. "The heavens declare the glory of God;
and the firmament showeth his handiwork." The revelation of God in
the natural creation is true and plain. Only the fool can say in the face
of the stars, "There is no God." But this is not all the truth God has
revealed.

In Nature God has revealed His Law, and all the world knows that
"Whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap." The intrinsic right-
eousness and integrity of God is reflected in the order displayed in the
whole universe. Further, in the very conscience of man, God has fixed a
sense of moral equilibrium. All men that are conscious and sane are ready
to expect that consequence should follow behavior in direct ratio. But
true and holy as this revelation in Nature and in consciousness is, it is yet
an inadequate revelation for our needs. It is notoriously true that the
heathen have lived and died within sight of all the grand phenomena of
nature, grovelling in filth and ignorance, cringing in fear and terror, bur-
dened by the unrelieved guilt of their unforgiven hearts. Readily may we
admit that pagans have oft identified true principles of living in morality
and justice, but openly we must charge the whole history of mankind
can offer no bit of evidence to challenge Peter when he says, "There is no
other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved."

God is not only the Creator and the Judge, but the Savior. God is
just, but God is gracious. What the sinner needs to be told is not so much
that God will judge sin and destroy it, but that "God so loved the world,
that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should
not perish, but have everlasting life." The human heart can naturally
recognize the Law of God, but "Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither
have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared
for them that love him." Which is to say, science has not observed, phil-
osophy has not recognized, nor have the poets ever imagined, the riches
of grace which God has revealed in His Son. This revelation of the Grace
of God is the particular burden of all Scripture, as it was the great work
and mission of Christ, as it is today the cardinal truth of the Gospel,
preached by Christians to the ends of the earth.

It is in this that Christians are blessed above all men. "The law came
by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ." The Lord Jesus
said of Himself, "I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh

[]

unto the Father, but by me/' The Christian does come by Jesus Christ,
confident that in Him he is acceptable to God. The Christian believes on
Christ for redemption from his guilt, for deliverance from his sin, for the
regeneration of his heart and the renewing of his mind, for the blessed
presence of the Holy Spirit, and for his inheritance in the world to come.
He believes that now in this present world, Almighty God through Christ
Jesus by His Holy Spirit is working in him to will and to do of His good
pleasure. Thus does the just man live by faith. He walks by faith. He
prays in faith. He works through faith as a co-worker with God.

But whence cometh this faith? Paul gives us a plain positive answer,
"faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God." Faith is not
magical, but logical in its origin. God has revealed His purposes in Christ
in certain promises recorded in Scripture: "exceeding great and precious
promises that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature." To be
ignorant of these promises is to be effectually barred from entering into
the blessings: "Alienated from the life of God through the ignorance that
is in them." Ignorance of the laws of nature and of society carries its
own measure of disability for living. Ignorance of the promises of God
is equally fatal.

We do not hesitate to fix our emphasis at just this point. "The entrance
of thy Word giveth light." Where the Word of God is not known men
live in the darkness of their own sin and guilt. Just as no unpardoned
fugitive from justice will ever be a good citizen, so no unforgiven sinner
can ever love God. "We love Him, because He first loved us." "In this
was manifested the love of God toward us, because that God sent his only
begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him." Until a
man sees and believes on Jesus Christ on Calvary crucified for his sins,
he has no inner disposition to love God, or to obey Him from the heart.
Such a man is still in his sins.

The Word of God became incarnate in Jesus Christ. The Word of God
became literature in our Bible. Even as "no man knoweth the Father, save
the Son, and he to whom the Son shall reveal him," so it is true that apart
fom the Bible there is no revelation of God with power to convert the
soul. The Scriptures contain the promises of God as they are in Jesus
Christ. Hence the Bible is actually the Genesis the Revelation of our
faith, which we have seen to be the technique of our salvation, of our
life in Christ.

What we have pointed out thus far as derived from the very nature of
our Chistian life and experience, is amply verified in Christian biography
and Church History. Stong Christians have been men of strong faith.
Great believers have been men who honored, read, studied, and loved the
Bible. Those souls, whose triumphant testimony is the glory of the
Church, have all been men who were great Bible students and humble
Bible listeners. They have read, marked, and inwardly digested, the Holy
Scriptures as the Word of God. They have had this hall-mark of true

[7]

blessedness: Their delight was "in the law of the Lord; and in his law
they did meditate day and night."

The whole testimony of Christians may be challenged, and it has been.
The basic views in Christian philosophy may be questioned, and they have
been. But there can be no serious contradiction of this claim: Christians
are what they are because of the Bible. We need to keep in mind that it is
as true today as it has ever been, that the promotion of all that is vital
and distinctive in Christianity is directly involved in the teaching and
preaching of Bible truth.

Let us now turn our attention to

THE SITUATION
IN CONTEMPORARY RELIGIOUS EDUCATION

The term "Religious Education" is of doubtful significance amongst us
today. We shall use it in these remarks as our General Assembly uses it,
and shall mean thereby the whole range of educational work carried on by
our Church. However much may be novel and strange in the current
methods and procedures in the Religious Education program, the basic
purpose involved is as old and familiar as the Great Commission: "Go ye
into all the world and teach all nations . . ." The making and culturing
of Christians has ever been the heartfelt purpose of Spirit-filled witnesses
for Christ.

Modern Religious Education has a significance for our own times, be-
cause of new conditions in our social order. Many functions common to
the family and to interested individuals in times past, have become the
particular responsibilities of authorized specialists in our intricate social
structure. The basic problems of shelter, of food, of health, for example,
have been subjected to intellectual analysis with subsequent technical
description, until the disciplines of engineering, of commerce, of medicine,
require specialized training for those who would serve therein. Education
likewise, both secular and religious, has become the subject of intensified
study, in which theory and technique have been formulated and developed
toward achieving the best results. Religious Education, as a formal tech-
nique, has developed as a child of our times, with an apparent fitness to
meet the needs of this hour, but yet with certain grave deficiencies, which
may be accounted for by circumstances surrounding its development.

What these circumstances are, and how they have affected the develop-
ment of Religious Education technique, can be indicated best by recount-
ing the historical background of contemporary educational thinking in
America. For the past three centuries the intellectual views of the West-
ern World have been dominated largely by what has been called "Science,"
but what was really materialistic philosophy at heart. The modern scien-
tific Era began with men like Copernicus, Galileo, Kepler, and Newton,
who sought to discover the laws of natural phenomena by observation,
both empirical and experimental. The tension which arose between those

[8]

independent minds and the authoritarian ecclesiasticism in the Church of
their day, was temporarily relieved by the dualistic philosophy of Des-
cartes. Accepting that view as a premise by common consent, the scien-
tists pursued their study of the material world without further collision
for some time with the dogma of the Church. The success of the scientific
approach in the interpretation of natural phenomena and in the control
of natural forces was so great that the intellectual life of the Western
World was captivated by its methods and fascinated by its views. Being
confined by definition and by inclination to material data, it is not sur-
prising that the dominant philosophies of the intelligentsia became more
and more naturalistic while often more or less consciously and willingly
anti-Biblical.

Out of such a background have developed the social sciences and the
modern theories of pedagogy. The dualism of Descartes, the psychology
of Wundt, the pedagogy of Rosseau, the biological theory of Darwin, the
philosophical pragmatism of William James, were blended in America by
the experimentalism of John Dewey into an educational technique that
has seemed admirably suited to train neuro-muscular equipment for living
in the socio-economic environment of the material world, and by its own
definitions and adopted limitations has been quite inadequate to deal with
the needs of what Christians call the soul. Having begun with the Carte-
sian premise that man has both body and soul, and that only the body
can be studied by the scientific method, and having studied the body in
all its relations with the material environment in nature, the modern mind
has formulated patterns of thought limited to the "natural," while exer-
cising conscious deliberate discrepancy to avoid the "spiritual." Keeping
these historical facts in mind it is not difficult to understand that any
systematic philosophical basis for Religious Education derived from that
intellectual background must obviously be inadequate for the teaching of
the historic Christian Gospel, as we know it. It is not so much that any
of the above mentioned concepts is untrue taken by itself, as it is that
taken together they are not all the truth we need to have in mind when
we would chart an adequate approach to the problem of education for
spiritual life and experience. The perspective in such thinking is "local-
ized" by arbitrarily focussing upon the "natural" alone. It is obviously
logically impossible to arrive at adequate conclusions about that which
was excluded in the premises.

We need now to soberly recognize that in adopting the general tech-
nique of contemporary Religious Education with its secular origin and
materialistic backgrounds, our own Church has been in imminent danger
of incorporating a far more naturalistic viewpoint in its educational pro-
gram than our hearts desire, our convictions imply, or our Bibles warrant.
The fact remains that our faith is derived from a revelation. It does "not
stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God." That revelation
in Christ Jesus is amongst us now in formal fashion in the Scriptures, in
power of the Holy Spirit, and in testimony in the witness of believing
souls in whom the grace of God is effecting the salvation provided in

[9]

Christ Jesus. It is because these two things are true: first, that current
Religious Education derived from secular pedagogy is so largely dominated
by naturalistic thinking, and, second, that our Gospel is at heart a revealed
message of the supernatural working of the power of God in grace, that
considerable tension has existed throughout our whole Church in this vital
field of Religious Education.

This condition has been prevalent not only in our own denomination,
but throughout the rank and file of American Christendom. In the oppo-
site periphera the tension is negligible. On the one hand is a segment of
contemporary Christianity that has abandoned the Scriptures as the au-
thentic authoritative revelation of God. Among these there is much ener-
getic seeking after "creative" methods by which wise educators may pro-
duce "Christian" character by expert manipulation of the factors involved
in human personality. For them the "Jesus' way of living" is an ideal
into which they plan to "condition" their pupils by intelligent control of
environment and learning situations. On the other hand are those who
have repudiated "Religious Education" as a ^'device of the devil," and
who look askance at any modification of method or procedure, which looks
different than that which was used and proven in the past. But in the
main body of Christians of all denominations, among the people who want
to exercise their intellect in grasping the meaning of the Gospel for our
own day and circumstances, but who also hold to the Scriptures as "the
only infallible guide and rule in matters of faith and practice" in which
the Gospel promises are authentic and valid, there is this tension of which
we speak. At times and in places conflict and controversy have troubled
the fellowship of our own Church when sincere men have differed in
honest opinion as to which particular view should prevail in the judgment
of the Church as a whole upon matters of educational principle and policy.

This clash of opinion is reflected not only in contemporary religious
literature, but may be heard from the rostrum as expressed by leading
educators. It is not unusual to hear an address in which the speaker begins
by accepting as valid the viewpoints and principles of naturalistic inter-
pretation of life and experience to such an extent that the authority of
the Scriptures as revelation and the reality of the Supernatural as a func-
tional factor are reduced to mere figments of imagination and speculation,
and then proceeds to ring the changes upon the historic Christian convic-
tions by asserting that of course we must have salvation by faith, only
through Christ Jesus because of Calvary, by the Holy Spirit, and all this
reinforced by most solemn assurances that the speaker believes in heaven,
counts on the resurrection, and is guided by the Bible. It takes very little
acquaintance with logic or experience with duplicity to be convinced that
there is a basic fault in the whole of such conglomerate thinking. Per-
haps this much could be said: when we grant the personal sincerity of
such a speaker we have a bonafide example of the tremendous forces oppos-
ing each other in contemporary religious thought, forces so powerful that
a speaker may be swayed by each though they are mutually contradictory,
being directly opposed to each other.

[10]

It would seem almost beside the point to underscore emphasis here about
the course our own Church should follow, but the situation seems also to
demand some such emphasis. The formal promotion of "Religious Edu-
cation" as a new field of study has been dominated largely by men who
have the general viewpoint of naturalistic philosophy. That this is so is
brought into sharp focus by the fact that the International Council of
Religious Education has recently taken cognizance of wide-spread criti-
cism of its general philosophical approach on the part of the Church at
large, and has appointed a Commission to study these criticisms and to
report recommendations looking toward modification of the Council's
program. Doubtless we should make whatever contribution we can to the
cause of Scriptural instruction everywhere, but most certainly there is
no reason why our Church should wait for guidance from the Interna-
tional Council. One needs but to call to mind the dominant influences
that have prevailed in that Council to have a rather definite idea of what
to expect by way of any significant change in the immediate future.
Meanwhile a whole generation of youth stands in jeopardy of being de-
prived of just that Biblical instruction which our own leaders have always
deemed essential. Our ministers and our elders must perform their duty
in line with the intent of our Church Government to promote Bible in-
struction now. The matter is of sufficient import to warrant the attention
of our General Assembly. It would not be the first time that action by
our own Assembly has marked the direction which other groups have
afterward followed.

There need be no diffidence as we grapple with the critical problems in
the confused field of Religious Education Theory, as though we were prone
to ignore some worthy discovery of science. Science is primarily and essen-
tially a method of research employed by honest men whose attitude is one
of humble deference to facts. Scientific minds employ speculative and
philosophical reflection only by way of formulating hypotheses for expla-
nation of observed phenomena, but such hypothetical conclusions are de-
signed only to guide further experiment and research. While it is true
that the form of such hypotheses may remain constant over some consid-
erable period due to the fact that no further discovery has been made upon
which to base any alterations of view, and it is further true that the
human mind tends to accept as factual any statement that has not been
successfully contradicted over a considerable period of time, still it is to
the everlasting credit of the temper and spirit of the scientific attitude,
that any ideas, no matter how firmly entrenched in the popular imagina-
tion or rooted in common prejudice, will be discarded by real scientists
upon the discovery of new facts which make those ideas untenable. The
past half-century has witnessed the most far-reaching modification of
scientific thought, due to the genius and industry of enterprising indi-
viduals who have ventured to direct their trained research into old fields
wherein they have discovered new facts. It is beside our purpose to dwell
upon this amazing revolution which has taken place in scientific theory
since the turn of the century, but we note that such is the case, only that

[n]

we might rid our minds of the naive impression that we needs must incor-
porate into our thinking every suggestion that has ever prevailed in the
scientific views of the past. We would have ourselves free to reflect that
since science alters its own concepts without hesitation, and openly ac-
knowledges that it would not insist upon any current formulations of
thought as being final, we are doing no violence to intellectual integrity
if we humbly question the validity of such ideas as are apparently sup-
ported by the science of this hour but which openly contradict concep-
tions embedded in the Holy Scriptures.

We hold it to be pertinent to our interest to remark that while science
is constantly scrapping as obsolete, ideas that have proudly held sway for
centuries, and is even now deliberately reshaping molds of thought to
accommodate data secured in recent discoveries, Christians have a Revela-
tion to guide them in that spiritual realm of our particular interest, whose
validity is unchallenged and whose power is unimpaired for those who
believe. There is an eternal significance in the things of Christ which
accounts for the unvarying impact of the Scriptures upon the human
heart in every generation. When we remember that the formal educa-
tional technique of modern times has been derived from a systematic
conception of man based upon the conclusions of natural science and not
upon the Scriptures, we can understand even more clearly the fact and
the nature of that constant tension between Christian Conviction and
recent "Religious Education" to which reference has been made. We need
not imply any necessary conflict between Science and Revelation, even
though we may expect that conclusions based upon scientific research
restricted to objective natural phenomena will differ in form and signifi-
cance from insights derived from the Scriptures, which set forth truth
about the whole of man in both material and spiritual aspects with both
temporal and spiritual relationships. Such conflict, while not necessary,
has nevertheless been actual in history, and the strain of the conflicting
viewpoints within the Church continues with us to this very hour, mar-
ring the fellowships and reducing the power of our common Christian
testimony.

In the particular field of our present interest this tension could be per-
manently relieved by an intelligent logical procedure on the part of Chris-
tian educators. Inasmuch as Religious Education with us is concerned
with the whole man both for this world and for the spiritual realm, and
since our whole confidence rests in the effectual realization in the believer
of salvation by Jesus Christ made available through the Gospel by the
Word of God, our leaders need but to fashion educational theory upon the
premises of scriptural psychology and philosophy. Let it not be inferred
that such theory or technique need be any the less technical or even intel-
lectual in its form. But rather than seeking for clues about the real nature
of man in the restricted, abstracted, field of the metrical phenomena of
nature, let Christian educators search the Scriptures for those insights
into human nature that will make possible such a conception of man as

[12]

will be useful to our specific Christian purpose, viz., the making and cul-
turing of Christians. Some such reconstruction of Religious Educational
theory and technique is an urgent need amongst us at this very hour.

What we have in mind here can be illustrated by briefly examining two
grave fallacies in contemporary religious educational thought. The first
we will note concerns the nature of man, arising from the positions of
naturalistic psychology. The second involves the nature of learning, being
derived from dominant pedagogical views so prevalent in secular educa-
tion. Basically both fallacies can be traced to that arbitrary bisection of
human nature already identified in the influence of Descartes. These con-
ceptions we shall examine are so prevalent and sound so plausible that we
shall need to look closely to detect their inherent inadequacy.

1. AS TO THE NATURE OF MAN

The view is commonly held that man is primarily and essentially a
physical being, and that human personality is the outcome of experience
with the objective material environment. With physiological psychology
as a starting point, and the statistical interpretation of quantitative phe-
nomena of overt behavior as a method, a conception of man has been
formulated in which the individual is essentially "a gratuitous concourse
of atoms" happening by chance within a fixed impersonal environment,
and becoming willy-nilly just what that environment would determine.
The classic terms of "soul," "will," "consciousness," and even "mind,"
which have seemed to imply some non-physical entity to be recognized
apart from the physical body, are reduced to mere words without sub-
stance or meaning. Scarcely a generation ago there was presented to the
world a novel interpretation of man which was logically consistent with
the "recognized" facts and with the general attitude then prevalent among
the investigators of human nature. Behaviorism was the natural product
of American psychology, and at its initial pronouncement was hailed far
and wide by our educators and philosophers as the only true conception of
man verifiable by scientific observation. It is a striking tribute to the
general balance of common public opinion, that when this view of man
was once generally evaluated it was tacitly abandoned as inadequate. No
logical demonstration was required to relegate behaviorism to the limbo of
derelict systems of thought. When once recognized in its obvious impli-
cations it was simply left to sink by the weight of its own topheavy
inferences. What concerns us now is that the roots from which this
unacceptable conclusion was derived remain with us in our psychology
and pedagogy to this hour. While the system has been abandoned, the
motif prevails far and wide. Our educational psychology is behavioristic,
and many of our leading educators were trained in behaviorism.

The general view persists that character is produced rather automat-
ically as a quantitative result of the welter of experiences. A certain
neuro-muscular-glandular equipment is accepted as given, but the develop-

[13]

ment of the personality is conceived as taking place by the conditioning
of reflexes in that equipment. Attention has been so fastened upon the
minutiae of stimulus-organism-response data, that the result in our think-
ing is that of a picture of a forest with major accent upon the leaves of
the trees. For some time the building of character has been conceived as
if it were similar to the building of a brick wall. The focus of study has
been upon the end result. Description of desirable personalities consisted
of listing the various habits, attitudes and skills, ad infinitum, which,
taken together, were to constitute the goal of character education. Teach-
ing was conceived to be something of a glorified animal-training forte
wherein the purpose seemed to be very similar to the circus performer
who is able to make his trained apes act almost human. In other words,
nature provided the "raw material" out of which by socialization processes
the acceptable personality was to be produced. It was only reasonable
therefore that the given "raw material" should be esteemed alike in all
people, and the whole process of producing "Christians" should finally
be conceived to be one of methods of training, conditioning, and control.

The significance of this naturalistic view of man is a matter for our
immediate practical concern. In our day every member of our church
has been subjected for the years of childhood, at least, to the influences
of the current secular educational system. Everyone knows that our public
educational intent is deliberately restricted to certain aspects of the per-
sonality, with anything religious being scrupulously avoided. This makes
it possible for the prevailing technique of that field to be designed to
train, condition, control physical and mental reflexes exclusively, and to
ignore by common consent anything that would grapple with the problems
of the soul, the conscience, or the will. Our forefathers were not willing
to delegate the education of the Spiritual to the State. This they meant
to attend to in the home and in the church. It is beside our point to com-
ment upon the sad denouement of this part of their educational plan, but
we must note that it was not included in the public school program. That
program has made great strides in educating our youth to use mind and
body, but has been notoriously lacking in producing moral character. And
in the course of promoting that program we have developed an educational
technique so universally practiced that it has seemed by common consent
to be true to the nature of man and adequate for all educational purposes.
Thus we find ourselves attempting to "teach" Christian living and experi-
ence by the identical methods used in our secular educational system.
Needless to emphasize, such conceptions as "original sin," as "total de-
pravity," as "the necessity of regeneration," as the "personality of the
Holy Spirit"; such distinctions as "law" and "grace," "faith" and
"works," "flesh" and "spirit," "earth" and "heaven"; such principles as
"the power of the resurrection," "the mediation of the living Christ as
our Advocate," "the forgiveness of sins," "the communion of the Holy
Spirit," "the power of the Blood," have come to sound so obsolete, to
seem so unimportant, to imply something so overdone, that it has seemed
wise to ignore, proper to omit, or even necessary to reinterpret and to

[14]

restate by way of correction, these outworn, outmoded "relics of the
Middle Ages!"

Our texts on child pedagogy generally trace the dynamic for Christian
living to such natural factors as "instincts." It is not exceptional to read
through a whole treatise on "How to teach religion," offered as a study
course to our Sunday School teachers, without finding any functional sig-
nificance attached to the promises of God, the Atonement of Calvary, the
infilling of the Holy Spirit, the exercise of prayer, or the hope of Eternal
Life. Shocking as this may sound to our ears, the prevalence of these
symptoms are all too common to be ignored. They do not necessarily
indicate any deliberate intention on anyone's part to consciously denature
the Gospel. But they are evidences of the influence of this widespread
fallacy in the conception of human nature pervading our American edu-
cational thinking.

How shall we present in contrast a more adequate conception of man?
We shall not attempt in the limits of this address to set forth such pres-
entation with any systematic thoroughness, but shall offer simply a sketch
of such a conception agreeable to implications in Scripture and apparently
justified by empirical observation. Let us be reminded we need have little
concern if we differ with current formal conceptions of human nature.
There are many of them and they all differ, hence there need be no
intellectual consternation if we exercise our "philosophical prerogatives"
in setting forth a conception suitable to our own viewpoint. We conceive
man to be, not an impersonal construct like a brick wall, but a unified
living organism like a tree. The brick wall is built by a builder who has
the design in his own mind and who arbitraily and specifically makes the
bricks and places them to suit his own purpose. The design is in his mind
and the brick is helplessly "impersonal" in his hands. But the design of
the tree is in the seed from whence it grew. How that design persists
or where it is located in the seed baffles the biologist to this day, but that
it exists is disputed by no one. The oak is in the acorn in mysterious
fashion. Environment, conditions, culture, do not effect the nature of
the oak, but the seed does. An acorn and a walnut can be planted side
by side, and they will grow side by side, till they weather fifty years
together, but the one will be an oak and the other a walnut as long as
they live. Attention and culture may prolong the life and increase the
spread of the oak, but it remains what the seed determined it to be. Out
of all the various chemical elements in the soil and atmosphere, and under
all the effect of the physical factors of sunlight, weather, etc., something
in that acorn is and remains the dominating principle of design and iden-
tity in that organism. So it is with man.

The human being is not a conglomeration of residua out of a series of
chance happenings. The human identity and personality is not some grotto
that has appeared at this instance in the shifting strata of ecological
movement in the structure of society, the helpless, hapless, product of
impersonal factors in an impersonal universe. Students of human nature

[H]

have for twenty years or more been demurring against all such mechan-
istic interpretations of man. The function of the Will in not only organ-
izing the personality but also in determining the character has been
recognized in reputable psychology by some in this country and even
more widely in Europe. The significance of purpose in the human being,
never entirely ignored, has recently loomed much larger in the views of
systematic psychology. The teleological aspect of deliberate conduct has
been accented in Gestalt psychology to a point where it claims the atten-
tion of all. This much is mentioned to remind ourselves that the ground-
work is being done in preparing for a systematic conception of man in
line with our illustrative sketch already presented. There is a steady drift
toward some such view of man as will recognize in him some dominant
principle or purpose that serves to select from life's motley experiences,
such impressions or conditionings as will serve a definite purpose deter-
mined from within the person himself.

With some such view our Gospel can be readily articulated. We con-
ceive that the Gospel in the Word of God is a seed, which, when received
into the human heart, takes root there and grows into a Christian. "Christ
on Calvary for my sins" believed into my heart becomes a motif that
serves as a selective principle guiding the growth of my personality
throughout all subsequent experience and circumstance. By this view we
might expect Christians to appear in any sociological environment, and
despite any psychological native equipment, wherever the Scriptures are
presented and believed. And this is just what in actual fact we do find.
To be sure environment and nurture affect the development and fruitful-
ness of the Christian life, just as they do the growth of a rose or an apple
tree, but they do not determine the nature of these organisms. The seed
does that in the natural world even as the Word of God does in the
Spiritual.

Enough has been said to make clear what we mean when we say that
the conception of human nature which implies that Christian personality
is secured by manipulation of the native "raw materials" by ingenious
educational methods is fallacious in principle, and is definitely unaccept-
able as a basis for educational technique to be employed by the Christian
Church.

Let us look more briefly at the second fallacy which is closely related.

2. AS TO THE NATURE OF LEARNING

In the realm of American pedagogy it is so widely held as to appear a
truism, that ideals are adequate to motivate and to guide human conduct.
I need not take your time to do more than merely refer you again to
popular texts on Religious Education, for abundant evidence that it is the
preponderant view in that field which is our particular interest just now.
The production of Christian character is openly premised upon the prin-
ciple of setting forth desirable ideals and then arousing instinctual drives

[1]

to supply the dynamic necessary to inspire activity toward the attempted
achievement of those ideals. Just how long the modern youth can be
thus inspired to work toward a goal which, by definition, he can never
achieve; and just what ingenuity is required to secure his consent to
sublimate the "lower" drives to promote the "higher" goals in a world
that is so obviously crass and sensual, does not appear in the context of
such treatises. Anyone acquainted with the power of the Gospel, the work
of the Holy Spirit, or the present ministry of the living Christ, knows at
once how character transformation can be affected, but we are not ready
in our discussion to introduce these factors. The viewpoint we are now
identifying has no place and no meaning for such things. In this, so-called
"modern," educational technique the aim is to inculcate into the mind of
the growing youth certain patterns of possible conduct conceived to be
superior and desirable, and to magnify their superiority and desirability
in some such way as to fire the imagination and to enamor the emotions
to the point where the individual will attempt an imitation of what has
been projected hypothetically before him. It is not difficult here to recog-
nize the use of rewards and punishments as motivation, and to realize
that this whole system is but a contemporary version of Salvation by
works according to the Law. "You get what you deserve, so you had
better deserve something good." The death of Christ is valuable in this
view as an example, a pattern for us to follow. Virtue is to be its own
reward. And if you want to be "nice" or "good," of course this is the
way you ought to live and to do. We cannot refrain from reminding our-
selves that Paul writes in Romans 7 that he found the law to be "holy,
just and good," even while he stood condemned before it in his own
inability to achieve righteousness thereby. But there can be not the slight-
est question that we have in this pedagogical principle something entirely
out of place in New Testament procedure.

Not only is this idea inadequate for any application of the Grace of
God, but it seems equally impractical in the very field in which it pur-
ports to serve. It has long been accepted that conduct cannot be judged
by appearances. It is equally true that character is not procured by any
imitation of desirable traits. The imitation of noble conduct remains just
as it originated it is an imitation. In the realm of material, physical and
perhaps even social relations, a certain skill in adjustment can be acquired
by adopting patterns of behavior suggested by the conduct of others. But
in matters of qualitative significance, when the intention or the motive
gives meaning to the act, imitation of overt behavior is something quite
different from the sincere act being imitated. Ananias and Sapphira are
on record as having imitated to appear as if they too were as generous as
Barnabas. The secret of their tragic blunder can be traced to the fact that
their motive was something quite other than that of Barnabas.

To motivate conduct by ideals means to present as stimulus to the indi-
vidual a hypothetical possible pattern of behavior which if he would
follow would prove to be eminently desirable or satisfactory. Before that

[17]

ideal could affect him he would have to imagine it in his own mind. In
other words the individual is asked to pre-conceive a desirable course of
conduct so stimulating to himself that he will discipline himself in self-
denial to achieve it. No doubt everyone is familiar with the man who
undertook to lift himself by his own bootstraps. Just how long educa-
tional theory will persist in fashioning itself upon this psychologically
impossible principle, we cannot say. The greatest living American educa-
tional philosopher has put all the weight of his genius and the prestige of
his fame into the support of just that idea, and does not hesitate to recom-
mend it as the principle to reproduce whatever virtues Christians may
ever have manipulated. But it is imperative that Religious Education in
our Church rid itself of this fallacy without delay. The Christian Gospel
offers the vicarious atoning sacrifice of Jesus Christ in historical fact with
eternal significance to the heart of the guilty sinner as the motivating
factor that will be the dynamic involved in his regeneration and sancti-
fication. The factual data of Christ's work on our behalf when received
as true by faith on our part is used by the living God, by His Holy Spirit,
to effect factual regeneration of our very beings. It is then that "the love
of Christ constraineth us." Not merely the example of His love as a sort
of idealistic pattern that we, sinful as we are, should imitate to be like
Him; but the functional effectiveness of that love in the living Christ,
then manifested on Calvary, now operative in the hearts of all who believe
and are filled by His Spirit. "The Love of God is spread abroad in our
hearts by the Holy Ghost." Christian living in purpose and in conduct
is not fashioned in an attempt to achieve a righteousness we admit we do
not have, but is fashioned in the desire to manifest to the Glory of God
that righteousness from God which we do now possess in Christ by faith
and in which we are acceptable before God "in the beloved."

The physical limits of this address will prohibit further development of
this discussion. This much has been stated to offer some interpretation
of the contemporary situation in Religious Education. What we would
further say will be intimated now as we turn to consider

III. THE PARTICULAR TASK
CONFRONTING OUR CHURCH

The task of preaching; and teaching the Gospel was committed to the
Christian Church by our Lord Jesus Christ Himself, placing all believers
under a sense of obligation to carry the message to all men everywhere.
No one is born naturally as a Christian. The natural birth produces the
natural man. It is the New Birth by the Word and the Spirit that pro-
duces the spiritual man. As the natural birth takes place by blood, by
the will of the flesh, by the will of man, so does the spiritual rebirth take
place as of God, who begets believers by His Word. This makes the pres-
entation of the Gospel essential to the salvation of men, to the begetting
of Christians.

[18]

We have already noted that Christian life and experience issues from
believing the promises of God in Christ. Those promises are set forth in
the Holy Scriptures as the Word of God. They are eternal in significance
and unchangeable in validity, being based upon the fact of Calvary in
history and rooted in the nature of the eternal God in principle and inten-
tion. Our God is a living God, the Scriptures are His living Word. These
promises were revealed "in times past unto the fathers by the prophets"
as they have now been revealed "unto us by His Son," and they have been
"written for our learning upon whom the ends of the world have come."
The Holy Spirit was given to make that Word living and real to our
individual hearts and lives. The Scriptures are no less valid because they
were written centuries ago, than the Cross of Calvary which happened
1900 years ago.

But each generation in turn must be taught the Word of God. Doubt-
less the children of godly parents will be disposed to receive the Word
gladly, but they are not born with any innate grasp of it. They must be
taught. Moses made provision for succeeding generations to teach their
children the Works of God in Israel. Throughout Scripture this responsi-
bility for teaching the young and the stranger has always been placed upon
men who knew God. Our Lord Himself was a Teacher, and in His great
commission He specifically charged His disciples to teach all men. The
Gospel is a revelation of what God will do in His power by His Spirit
according to His Promises in and for "whosoever believeth." Inasmuch
as it is the will, the intention, of a living Being, it would remain forever
unknown to any study of the created world, while it would be known to
anyone to whom He would reveal it. That He has so revealed it in His
Word, and will so reveal it to anyone through His Word, is the plain
teaching of Scripture as it is corroborated by the common experience of
Christians.

With such considerations in mind we can indicate our immediate task
very simply.

1. WE MUST STUDY THE BIBLE

It is not enough to have confidence that the Scriptures are the Word
of God. It is essential that we have knowledge of what the Word of God
says. The books of the Bible constitute a literature in which certain ideas
and concepts are set forth in human language. The words used to desig-
nate these ideas have a scriptural meaning to be construed on the basis
of their scriptural context and biblical usage.

Study of the original languages, together with research into the social
customs of the times in which the Scriptures were written, can all be
helpful to enrich our grasp of the meaning of what was written. But
such philological, archaeological, ethnological and historical research can
never be determinative in matters of doctrinal interpretation. The Scrip-
tures say something as they are written. What they say and what they

[19]

mean is to be understood by comparing Scripture with Scripture in what-
ever language they may be studied.

Our missionaries in the Congo have translated the Scriptures into the
Baluba language. Perforce they were obliged to use Baluba words, terms,
idioms, thought-forms. The religious and philosophical conceptions of the
Baluba tribes had been couched in and conveyed by these very words,
terms, etc. But language students could study Baluba with meticulous
care as extensively as they would, and never deduce the meaning of our
Baluba Scriptures from Baluba literature. However the study of the
Baluba Bible, comparing Baluba Scripture with Baluba Scripture, would
enable anyone to grasp the message, as one might secure it from the
English Bible, the French Bible, etc.

The context of the whole Bible is the source of the content of Scriptural
statement. We mean the New Testament as it stands in the light of the
Old, and we interpret the Old Testament as it appears in the light of the
New. We approach our study remembering "All scripture is given by
inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correc-
tion, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be
perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works."

Just as one studies the literature of any language to become proficient
in the interpretation of that language, so one studies the Scriptures to
become proficient in their interpretation. It is usage that invests words
with meaning, and it is usage in the Bible that invests ideas and concepts
there with meaning. To understand common words we must be familiar
with their common usage; to understand scriptural concepts we must be
familiar with their scriptural usage.

Men get to know the Bible as they get to know any language. Both
formal study and informal acquaintance and association contribute to the
mastery of Spanish or Japanese. Even so in coming to know the Bible.
Formal study under definite guidance will yield results. But living with
it, reading it, hearing it, thinking it, until it becomes "second nature,"
until our thoughts couch themselves in its terms and use its ideas that
will give one a grasp of the Bible that will be truly powerful and prac-
tical in life and experience.

This task of studying the Bible as one would study any body of par-
ticular literature, belongs to every generation. It belongs to ours. The
very exigency of contemporary circumstances wherein we need direct
help and guidance from God from day to day makes it all the more urgent
that everyone study the Bible with earnest practical purpose at once and
as much as possible.

2. WE MUST INTERPRET THE BIBLE IN CONTEMPORARY

LANGUAGE

Coupled with all that we have implied in emphasizing that the Scrip-

[20]

tures must be studied as they are to discover their meaning, we must
recognize that in presenting that message, it is essential to do so in the
language of the people to whom it is being given. Not only must the
Gospel be published and preached in the vernacular of the common people,
but it must be taught in the current phraseology and vocabulary of
our times.

The rapid changes within our whole social order, physically, mechani-
cally, ideologically, culturally, have been reflected in shifting variations
in our speech. New words, new terms, new thought-forms devised to
incorporate reference to new conditions, new inventions, new discoveries,
new ideas, into our common language, have distinguished the present age.
The vocabulary of forty years ago is woefully inadequate today, even as
the speech of 1940 would be quite unintelligible to the mind of 1900.

Such changes have marked all human history but in our generation
their completeness in extent and in thoroughness has been unprecedented.
There is an intellectual cast of thought, a scientific bent of interest, a
philosophical turn of mind abroad today, that we must not and would not
ignore. In our own field the social sciences have developed a glossary of
significant terms, and cultivated a taste for objective analysis and inter-
pretation of human experience, that must be taken into account when we
would address the public in the interests of our Gospel.

Inasmuch as our Gospel is a living message we cannot hesitate to present
it in the language of the hour. Hudson Taylor made a distinct contribu-
tion to Foreign Mission technique when he adopted Chinese customs, lan-
guage, dress, manners as a means to facilitate the presentation of the
universal gospel to the Chinese. Since there is a 20th Century cast of
mind wherein we live, let us not falter in "translating" our Scriptures
into the 20th century "vernacular."

The intrinsic eternal meaning of our Gospel need not be impinged. The
work of Calvary is as significant in Russian as it is in English as it is in
Choctaw. It can be as vital in the scientific terminology of the 20th
century as it was in the philosophic phraseology of the 17th century. A
thousand years ago an infant was nourished at its mother's breast. The
general understanding then of the physiological processes involved would
seem most naive to us now, but the modern infant still is nourished in
the same way. The technical information we have today has improved
our practical understanding, but it has not altered the facts involved.
With the widespread interest in social sciences and in personality inter-
pretation, we have today an entirely new equipment of terminology with
which to preach and to teach the Gospel of Christ. Our power and
effectiveness in reaching this generation can be substantially increased by
our diligent utilization of speech mechanisms familiar to our own con-
temporaries.

We do not imply condemnation of the language of former times, nor
criticisms of other generations as they exercised themselves in effective

[21]

witnessing. We simply recognize that words, phrases, accents, emphases
which may have unusual force and aptness in one era often become empty,
formal, ineffectual in another time under different cultural circumstances.
We remind our hearers that the content of our message is permanently set
forth in a self -interpretative literature of Scripture, and are now saying
that the form of our presentation should be native to our own times.
What we need is fresh Bible study with constant Bible reading so that
our own modern minds may grasp the meaning of the Gospel in the "con-
tainers" of contemporary thought-forms. There is no inclination here
to make invidious suggestions as to comparative fitness. Things in time
and space, in custom and procedure, do change in outward form: the
essence remains. So let it be with the Gospel. And to this end let our
generation take up anew the study of this inspired Word in the deliberate
purpose to know it for ourselves and to give it to others.

3. WE MUST TEACH BELIEVERS THE TRUTH ABOUT
CHRISTIAN LIVING

So much of our study of matters of Christian living in the immediate
past has been descriptive in its approach. We have concerned ourselves
to identify the outward forms of overt conduct as Christian or non-
Christian, and in consequence there has been much mutual incrimination.
Interminable controversies and heated arguments have disturbed our hearts
as men clashed in their opinions as to whether a given conduct-pattern
were "Christ-like" or "of the devil." Some shifting of the locus of this
interest has taken place, from matters of social behavior, through public
conduct, even into economic, national, and international affairs. Always
there has been the same vague, uncertain, unsatisfying sense of being
baffled to know anything for sure. The New Testament plainly instructs
"judge nothing before the time." Yet how often have we been wearied
by fruitless efforts to establish this deed as Christian, that policy as Anti-
Christian!

What is urgently needed amongst us is an intelligent emphasis upon the
origin of Christian living. We need to remember that the classic Christian
virtues are the fruit of the Spirit, and that our major concern is to make
sure that the seed has been inculcated which will produce that fruit by
the Spirit. As gardeners we need not concern ourselves about the tinting
of the petals, nor the perfuming of the rose, but we do have our respon-
sibility in determining that the proper seed will be sown, and the favor-
able culture will be provided.

Our people want to know how to live the Christian life. It has already
been noted how fallacious it is to attempt to help them by focussing their
attention upon certain end conduct-patterns as ideal. What they need to
know is the technique they must employ to achieve even those ends they
themselves understand and recognize. Our Young Peoples gatherings are
featured by earnest sincere souls who want to know and desperately need
to know how to live with God.

[22]

The evidence is all too tragically conclusive that many of our Young
People are earnestly attempting to approach the achievement of spiritual
and eternal values through nature rather than by grace. The prayers
offered, the songs selected, the thoughts presented in meditation, dwell
predominantly upon the natural, and often are quite void, probably uncon-
sciously empty, of any recognition of Christ's atoning death, His justi-
fying mediation, and His sanctifying fellowship. There is something
ominously omitted in the Religious Education of a group of young men
who can lustily sing "This is my Father's World," but who probably
would not even recognize the air of "There is a green hill far away," let
alone sing such a song of praise with fervor and worship. Men have lived
in the light of nature, and have loved family and friends, without ever
gaining insight into the grace of God which saves the sinner. If the point
is raised that the modern youth has no sense of sin, it would simply betray
the utterly inadequate content of such religious educational program in
which the modern youth has been nurtured. Surely we are not prepared
to challenge the categoric statement "All have sinned and come short of
the glory of God!" The blame rests not upon the young people, but upon
their preachers and their teachers.

To be sure there is religion conceived from within the heart of man and
shaped in the mind of man all over the world, but it is natural religion
with all the limitations that term implies. In natural religion men select
an ideal and try like Babel of old to achieve it. In revealed religion men
believe into their very beings the validity of certain promises of the living
God, and commit themselves to them with the result that they are changed
from within by the power of God. We repeat that God is revealed in
nature, but it is not God in nature that saves souls or produces the phe-
nomena of Christian experience. It is God in grace, in the Gospel, in His
Word, in Christ Jesus, by the Holy Spirit, who redeems, delivers and
quickens men by Himself and makes them fruitful in Spiritual behavior.

Much has been said and written against "content" material, by which
aspersion has been cast on the form of sound words, in an attempt to em-
phasize the function of experience in learning. But upon second thought
it is quite obvious that any teacher has a "content," even the most radical
experimentalist of them all. In any experience even the most physical,
there is the "content" of the particular natural environment, native ca-
pacity, and personal heritage. The "content" of spiritual experience comes
in the form of the promises of God reported to us by the writings of
"holy men of old who spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost,"
but valid only in being received, i. e. experienced. That was a rather
naive betrayal of scriptural illiteracy when men supposed that emphasis
upon experience as a function in learning was anything new to the Chris-
tion. The Scripture had plainly said "the letter killeth, but the spirit
giveth light." Certainly this did not mean the Spirit apart from the Word,
but rather that the Word, taken only in letter is dead, but, received as the
will of the living God, as the pattern of promise and the purpose of the

[23]

Spirit, is effectual in men's lives. Our Church has understood this from
the Scriptures from the beginning. The only novelty here is that this
practical truth was late getting into the stream of pedagogical philosophy
and practice. We would reiterate however that experience as a means of
discovering God's will in Christ Jesus is doomed to be fatally fruitless.
There is a message to be found only in Scripture. However it may be
presented its content must be true to the Word of God. "What God has
promised He is able also to perform" and it is believing that which
makes anyone a true child of Abraham.

Our generation needs to be taught that salvation is of God by His
grace. There is an ineptitude in human nature, a disinclination in the
natural heart, an unfitness in the soul that disqualifies man as he is from
fellowship with God. But Christ Jesus died for our sins, He was raised
for our justification, He lives for our sanctification, He waits for our
glorification. The Holy Spirit has been given to comfort, to guide, to
teach, to show, to empower our regenerated beings in fellowship and com-
munion with a living, indwelling, personal Christ. We can walk with
Him, and we can talk with Him. We can pray to Him and He will
answer us. The Lord Jesus is living now and our fellowship with Him
personally should be intimate, personal and constant. "Christ in you, the
hope of glory'* needs to be etched into the consciousness of every believing
soul. And to this task we must set ourselves with diligence and vigor
at once.

For this urgent vital assignment we hold in our hands a divine Reve-
lation that is adequate and authentic. We shall never be able to fully
appreciate or to worthily thank Almighty God for this gracious provision
for our spiritual needs. Enough that we do have it, and we do know its
significance sufficiently to commit ourselves to its study and to its propa-
gation. All men need this truth, and they need it now. We have it and
are commissioned to take it to every one. Then let us prove ourselves
worthy to this extent that we will be appreciative, receptive, obedient and
diligent in the study and the dissemination of the Scriptures, our Holy
Bible, the Word of God.

[24]