Precious Jesus

"Afresh, precious, precious Jesus, I resign this body to You, for doing or suffering, for living or dying. Will You accept it? Will You use me for Your glory more than heretofore, that You may have some little return for all the benefits You have done to me? Oh, do grant this request; my heart longs for it, my spirit pleads for it; and "if You will, You can." You know the hot temptation of which I am the subject. Bring Your glory out of it, and keep me from the evil, and it shall be well." - Ruth Bryan

Tuesday, January 17, 2017

Abortion - an American holocaust

This link displays the reality of abortion, discretion is advised. However, let us not shy away from what may be too difficult to view - this is what is happening DAILY in America and it needs to stop. May God rise up against this holocaust, even if that means bringing this nation down.

Monday, January 16, 2017

They went out from us

“They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.”—1 John 2:19 

THE former verse contained a declaration that there were at that period many antichrists, which was an evident sign the last state of the apostolic church was just closing. It was necessary this should be known and taken notice of because whilst the fathers in Christ might be wholly out of danger from these heretics and from heresies and errors, yet such as were not established in Christ might not be so. As the Apostle therefore wrote to these and informed them what the times were, so he also informs them from whence these persons came. They originated in the church: they went out of it. They were therefore the more dangerous, seeing they knew the better how to sow their pernicious49 errors. They were the more to be avoided in their persons, as well as their doctrines also…Their renouncing the faith and fellowship of the Gospel after they have made plausible professions and appearances of being believers in Christ, their separating themselves from our church communion that they might broach 50 their infamous errors and spread the same with their infamous practices far and wide, fully manifest they were never true believers, but downright hypocrites and falsehearted professors. These persons I would guard you against. Your being preserved from them and their pernicious ways and errors will be good evidence for you that ye are on the Lord’s side and belong to Him. As this distinguishes you from them, so it makes you very precious unto us. It is therefore that I address you on this subject…I am  

and the reason they went out of it was : because they were not of it. “They went out from us, but they were not of us.” Where could these apostates go out from but the church? If they had not been in it, they could not have gone out from it. The church they went out of was the true church of Christ, founded by the Apostles themselves on Christ, the foundation and chief cornerstone, in which the true and everlasting Gospel was preached; the ordinances of Christ —Baptism and the Lord’s Supper—kept as purely as Christ Himself had delivered them; the whole church plan, form, order, laws, and government properly enforced and attended unto also. And these persons had professed their faith in all the essential truths of the Gospel. They had been baptized in the name of the Holy Trinity. They had been regular members of churches. They had been admitted to the Table of the Lord. It may be [that] they had been admitted to fill up some office in the house of God, such as that of deaconship or of being preachers of the Word.  
Yet their ambitious spirits were such, they could not be content but they must bring in another gospel, contrary to what the Apostles preached. And in the virulency51 of their spirits were set most desper-ately on spreading the same. They therefore broke through all the sacred ties and obligations of church fellowship and went off from the various churches to which they belonged, pretending to have greater light into truth and what they called the Person of Christ and grace than the very Apostles themselves. “They went out from us.”
  The word us is a very distinguishing one in the New Testament. It was made use of on the first formation of an instituted church, which took place immediately on the ascension of Christ into heaven. Peter, speaking of Judas Iscariot to the church then present, says, “He was numbered with us” (Act 1:17). And of the whole church as included in the word us, he says, “Wherefore of these men which have companied with us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, Beginning from the baptism of John, unto that same day that he was taken up from us, must one be ordained to be a witness with us of his resurrection” (1:21-22). We have this word us made use of by the Apostles in their writings to express the church of Christ by. As for instance, “Christ also hath loved us, and hath given himself for us” (Eph 5:2). “Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood” (Rev 1:5). Our Apostle uses this word us in the same sense here. These persons, whom he here styles antichrists, had been in the church. They went out of it without leave. They took themselves off abruptly; neither gave they their reasons for so doing. They would not acknowledge themselves under any sort of obligation to the churches to whom they belonged. Thus, they openly and publicly renounced all submission to Christ’s Lordship and Kingly authority over His house, the church. Thus, they went out as traitors and with a treacherous design against Christ and the church that He hath purchased with His own blood: to corrupt His worship, to renounce His truth, to blaspheme the same, to draw away from the true churches of Christ followers after them. They went out from us. It was most awful in them so to do.
It must have been in some of them the sin against the Holy Ghost, which is styled in this Epistle, “the sin unto death” (1Jo 5:16-17). They turned their back on Christ, His Gospel, His ordinances, His Apostles, His churches, and everything belonging unto Him, and framed out of their own errors, heresies, whims, and fancies, a Christ and Gospel for themselves. The Apostle assigns the reason why they went out from the churches in the way and manner they did—it was because they were not of one heart and soul with the churches in the truth. “They went out from us because they were not of us.”
  The true church of Christ is holiness to the Lord. Her real members are born of God. They have the Spirit of God. They know Christ. They live Christ. They are baptized into one and the same Spirit. They love the Truth. They abhor all and everything that detracts from it. No marvel that these antichrists should go out, depart from the true churches of Christ, and set up for themselves. They were not one with them, whilst they remained amongst them. Therefore, they only waited for an opportunity, and then they left them entirely.
Thus, it was in the Apostle John’s time, a little before the close of the apostolic age. “Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time. They went out from us, but they were not of us.” This is the account the Apostle gives of them. As it was then, so it has been ever since. All the heresies which have tormented the churches of Christ ever since and down even to our present times have originated from persons who have been in the churches, who have departed from the churches, from such as have made schisms and divisions in the churches. And when any old error is newly revived, it in general springs from such persons as are disaffected52 to the true churches of Jesus Christ.
 It may be you will expect me to give you to understand what I mean by a church of Christ. Most certainly, I understand a company of saints giving themselves up to the Lord and to each other by the will of God, to walk in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord agreeable to the rules laid down in the written Word. I do not look on all the congregations of saints to be worthy of the title of the churches of Christ…Many denominations amongst us…are sound in the articles of Truth—so far as they respect salvation—yet I should not look on them as justly claiming the titles of the churches of Christ, and that for this reason: because they are not framed according to the plan and model of the New Testament account of the same. The greatest reformation of churches that ever took  place since the reformation from popery was in Oliver Cromwell’s days. Dr. Owen,53 Dr. Goodwin,54 Dr. Chauncey,55 and others give the best account of the formation, plan, order, members and officers, laws, rules, government, and discipline of the churches of Christ, which I can refer you to: except it be in the writings of Dr. Gill,56 who has made some improvement in the same. The churches styled independent churches, and those styled the baptized churches of Jesus Christ, are properly churches.57 There is no difference between these but in the ordinance of Baptism. These have a defense in themselves, of themselves, and from themselves to defend their members from error and heresy. [Yet] many in these are weary of Christ’s yoke and often find ways and means to cast it off. At times, error and heresies spring up amongst them; and it must be so, according to the purpose and sovereign will of God. So says the Apostle to the Corinthian church, “For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you” (1Co 11:19). There were in that church many who profaned the Lord’s Supper and polluted it, some who denied the resurrection of the dead. Yet the church at Corinth being properly organized according to our Lord’s institution remained a true church, though all the members of it were not one with the Lord Jesus Christ. [Similarly,] the Gospel remains immutable in its truths, doctrines, and grace, notwithstanding Hymeneus and Alexander, [who] put the same away from them and made shipwreck of faith and a good conscience (1Ti 1:19).
It is an honor to belong to a true church of Christ. It is to be lamented any should be admitted into it without having a clear and Scriptural knowledge of it. For when they profess and give themselves up to walk with a church, it is very dangerous to depart from that church, unless any immorality or heresy spring up and is connived at 58 by the majority of members. Or unless a member has good reason to believe he should increase with the increase of God more by removing his communion to another church. In the present day, there is very little conscience made of these things. But whoever observes it will see, it is no honor to remove from one church to another, nor is it a blessing to any church to receive any disaffected member into their communion. It is always best when the church in its members is gathered into its own holy fellowship by the ministration of the same minister of the Gospel. Then they uniting in the same faith, the obligations they subject themselves unto as the yoke and by the divine authority of Christ will have a very blessed effect and lasting effect on them…But I drop this and proceed to my next particular, which is 
 He had said, “They went out from us, but they were not of us.” He gives this reason of their going out from them: They did not belong to them. Though they were for a season numbered with them, yet they were never of them or of their number; if they had, they would have most certainly remained with them: this is his argument. For if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us.  
How solemn! How awful! These antichrists came out of the apostolical church of Jesus. They had been in it. Their names had been registered in their church book. They had been church members with the best of saints. Yet all this did not preserve them from the foulest apostasy. They had heard and professed to have received and believed the very same doctrine the Apostles preached! Yet this did not keep them steadfast in the faith. They were carried away with lust and lasciviousness. This led them to corrupt the doctrine of God’s free grace: to suit it to encourage their own corrupt affections, and from hence to proceed to set forth such a different christ, such a different gospel, and such a different spirit as eclipsed the whole glory of that Christ and Gospel that was preached and declared by the Apostles themselves. If these wretches had not for a season been under the profession of Christ and in the church amongst His people, they could not have acted as they did. They could not so completely have corrupted the Gospel, if they had not had the notional scheme of the same in their minds. It answered their end for a season to remain in the churches to whom they had given in their names. It suited them to leave these churches at such seasons, when they could, to distil their pernicious influences, as they thought and hoped it would gain converts to them…Christ is yesterday, today, and the same forever (Heb 13:8). So are the truths and doctrines that 
have respect unto Him, and in and by which He is revealed unto and set before His church, and which His saints have such evidence of in themselves that one for them all says, “For all flesh is as grass, and all the glory of man as the flower of grass. The grass withereth, and the flower thereof falleth away: But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you” (1Pe 1:24-25). These heretics left the churches because they were not of them, only nominally.59 They were not the elect of God. They were reprobates.60…It is evident these could never belong to Christ…All heretics come out of the church. Most of them have been preachers and teachers in it. They are raised up by Satan, first to disturb the peace of the church and next to pollute and defile it with their abominable falsehood. The words of the Apostle are very suitable here: “Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you? If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are” (1Co 3:16-17). But I will go on and proceed to my last particular, which is 
It was by their departure from the true churches and by their errors, heresies, and sins into which they fell, they were man-ifested to be what they were. In the day in which we live, we have had many preachers who have shone forth in public view as blazing stars and comets, who have professed superior light, zeal, and usefulness to all others, who have been puffed off61 [and] had their own cant phrases.62 Such as saying of some of their great admirers, “They see the Spirit in such and such sentences,” in which they have chosen to express themselves. They have—very many of them—fallen foully, scandalously. Yea, most shamefully, and abominably, and all by lust…What shall we say or think of such? I know I think and cannot but pronounce they are of their father the devil. Yet we have persons professing godliness who will stand up for them, [saying] that they are powerful preachers, that they are preachers of the Gospel, that they are clearer and deeper in the truth than others are, that it is on account of their excellency of knowledge in the mysteries of Christ [that] they are persecuted!  
Sirs, such excuses for such notorious sinners are an awful sign of what our times are. Let us by no means have anything to do with licentious preachers and teachers. It is a shame to speak of those things that are done of them in secret. I count it to be a defilement to mention the names of such. I fear there is more licentiousness stalking up and down the professing religious world than any of us are aware of. May the Lord preserve us from it.
It is by these most holy and righteous dispensations of the Lord that He is pleased to separate between the precious and the vile. As it was in John’s time, even so it is now. They never belonged to the true church of Christ. So it need not stumble or distress us, as if such were instances of falling from grace. No. Such were never partakers of the grace of God. They professed something that they called grace, but they never knew any more of it than the sound. Let us therefore rejoice when such are most justly exposed… 
There is a greater discrimination made by the preaching of the everlasting Gospel than we can or ever shall be able to conceive and apprehend. It is to some the savor of life. It is to others the savor of death. All [this is] by divine and immutable appointment by which man and man are so discovered—as it concerns the Lord’s purposes towards them—as is most truly solemn and awful. One is called under the preaching of the Gospel, and another left. Not only so, but at times under one and the same Word, one is won to the obedience of Christ, another is led to blaspheme—so different are the effects that the revelation of God’s will produceth in the minds of such as are hearers of it. Hereby that solemn word of truth is realized in us poor worms of the earth, which is quoted by the Apostle, as delivered by the Lord: “Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth. Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will? Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour? What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction: And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory, Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?” (Rom 9:18-24). 
  These are most important and very solemn questions in which great truths are implied and contained. When they enter into our minds, and their weight, importance, and authority rest upon our hearts, they empty us of all dependence on ourselves. We clearly see that he that glorieth must glory in the Lord. If these things are so, let us know and remember [that] the church of Christ will be preserved and continued to the end of time, and the gates, that is, the powers of hell, shall never finally prevail against it. Let who or whatsoever may arise, and even though it may overthrow the faith of some, yet we may say—and it becomes us to say with the Apostle, when all they who were in Asia were turned away from him—“Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his. And, Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity” (2Ti 2:19). It well becomes us so to do—to depart from all doctrinal and practical iniquity. I can never believe men to be sound in the faith and truths of the Gospel who live in any known sin. I therefore suspect the judgment of many, who insist…that men may be sound in the faith who do not adorn it in their lives and conversations. I am for my own self fully persuaded [that] we can live no one single truth of the Gospel over in our minds any farther than we know it by the teaching of the Holy Ghost. And so far as we live any one single truth of Christ’s Gospel, so far we shall live down sin and live above by living Christ and living on Him.

49 pernicious – destructive. 
50 broach – introduce. 
51 virulency – extreme poisonousness. 
52 disaffected – alienated; resentful and rebellious. 
53 John Owen (1616-1683) – Congregational pastor and theologian; often called “The Prince of the Puritans”; wrote “The True Nature of a Gospel Church” in The Works of John Owen, Vol. 16. 
54 Thomas Goodwin (1600-1679) – Congregational pastor and theologian; wrote “Of the Constitution, Right Order, and Government of the Churches of Christ” in The Works of Thomas Goodwin, Vol. 11. 
55 Isaac Chauncey (1632-1712) – Congregational pastor and theologian; wrote The Divine Institution of Congregational Churches, Ministry and Ordinances, [As has bin Professed by those of that Persuasion] Asserted and Proved from the Word of God, for Nathanael Hiller, 1697. 
56 John Gill (1697-1771) – Baptist minister, theologian, and biblical scholar; wrote numerous works on the nature, ministry, and ordinances of the church, including A Complete Body of Doctrinal and Practical Divinity. 
57 Not all of our readers will agree with the author on this point. 
58 connived at – silently approved. 
59 nominally – in name only.
 60 reprobates – those rejected by God. 
61 puffed off – swollen with vanity and pride. 
62 cant phrases – peculiar phraseology of a religious sect. 

Samuel Eyles Pierce  (1746-1849): Baptist preacher; known for his exalted view of Christ and love of sovereign grace; born in Up-Ottery, Devon, England.  

Eye Him

Keep a steady eye on Christ, the blessed Mediator of the covenant.

Eye Him as the storehouse and fountain of all your supplies of grace and strength. For it is out “of his fulness have all we received, and grace for grace” (Joh 1:16). 
Eye Him as your Captain to fight all your battles against sin and Satan; for He has “spoiled principalities and powers” (Col 2:15); and if ever we overcome, it must be in the blood and strength of the Lamb.
 Eye Him as your guide to lead you through all the dark and difficult steps of your pilgrimage. For He leads the blind “in paths that they have not known” (Isa 42:16).
 Eye Him as your pattern. Endeavor to imitate Him in all His imitable perfections. Run your Christian race, “looking unto Jesus” (Heb 12:2). Remember how steady and firm He was in carrying on the great work of redemption. He set His face like a flint against all the storms and obstacles that lay in His way. He did not faint, nor was He discouraged, but travelled on in the greatness of His strength, enduring the cross, and despising the shame. For He said on the cross, “It is finished” (Joh 19:30).
 So study ye after His example to run your Christian race, your course of obedience, and press on against all temptations and difficulties, until ye have finished your course with joy and arrive at the mark and prize of the high calling of God in Christ.

Ebenezer Erskine-From “The Backslider Characterised” in The Whole Works of the Late Rev. Ebenezer Erskine, Vol. 1 

Saturday, January 14, 2017

The false doctrine of free will and it's Jesuit influence - contd. part 3

"I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you unto the grace of Christ unto another gospel: Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ." Galatians 1:6-7 


The Jesuits have succeeded in planting another gospel in the Lord's field. What the black-robes themselves consider that 'soveraigne drugge Arminianisme' has come to infect the whole of Christianity. It is for this reason that Jesus said,'ìNevertheless when the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth?' (Luke 18:8) 
Since we know that, 'evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived' (2 Tim. 3:13), then we can expect the overall state of Christian doctrine to be worsening, not getting better. The word 'another', which is used in both verse six and verse seven of this section of the first chapter of Galatians is two distinct words with two distinct meanings. In verse six, the words 'another gospel' refers to a different gospel, while in verse seven, where Paul  says it 'is not another', the word 'another' means that it is not another of the same kind. It is not just a different gospel. It is a totally perverted gospel that uses the gospel of Christ as bait or window dressing, but so substantially changes the effects of that gospel, that it makes it the gospel of the enemy of Christ, and not that of Christ.

 The gospel of Satan lifts up man to lofty heights. It exalts the will of man. It calls men to acts of benevolence, peace and unity. It rewards the highest acts of natural carnal charity and human endeavor. It encourages man to seek the common good of humanity and uplifts the human spirit as supreme. The gospel of satan denies the total depravity of man, and supports the Jesuit/Arminian teaching of man/god cooperation in the area of salvation and godly living. The gospel of satan declares that God is but a witness in the redemption of mankind, not the author and finisher of it, and that He has merely made a way for those who can find it within themselves to seek after Him. The gospel of Satan does not deny Jesus Christ so much as it demotes him from His Sovereign throne.

Why do you think the Jesuits have engaged in a war to the death to extinguish the Doctrines of Grace? Why have they printed their own Bibles, and why do their proxies, the Arminians, challenge the efficacy of the sacrifice made by Jesus Christ on the Cross? The gospel of satan seeks to elevate man in the eyes of his Creator, while using the terminology of Christendom to generalize and marginalize the work of Jesus Christ on the Cross. The gospel of satan is not preached by dark princes with black hoods and red eyes. It is preached by swarms of ministers and pastors who exhort and encourage their flocks to please and satisfy God by their good works. It denies that mankind is depraved and fallen, separated from God, totally dead in trespasses and sins.

The gospel of Satan adds to the work of Jesus Christ in the redemptive act by making it conditional on the earnestness of the heart of man, or the reflective  religiousness of mans life. It appeals to that seed or strand of good in man that they suppose is able to ascend to the heavens without dying.

The gospel of Satan is preached by presidents and congressmen who appeal to the nobility in the souls of man in order to convince men to be even MORE noble by being even less free. It is also preached by religious charlatans who have created a template or a recipe out of disparate and unconnected scriptures. The gospel of Satan is the gospel of decision ism and of the altar call whereby man can be emotionally manipulated into going forward in a meeting and approaching the priest with an outward declaration of repentance, and by kissing his ring of absolution, man can descend into the amorphous religious world of pews and pulpits, Sunday schools and pot-luck lunches, NASCAR and Left Behind. It is the gospel of religious education facilities and seminary trained popes. The gospel of Satan is the gospel of praise and worship that exalts the worshipfulness of man, and denies God the praise due His Sovereign works. It is the gospel of repetitive and emotional Christian music and bestselling prayer books, but it bypasses the screams of the tormented and downtrodden who truly seek God in order to escape the wrath that is to come. The gospel of Satan is the gospel of many mediators, whether they are the smiling, educated pastors who read the Bible for you and tell you what it means, or the manipulative evangelist who proposes that gain is godliness and that carnal blessings are the result of living Godly in Christ Jesus. The gospel of Satan denies the crucible of suffering, and the tribulation by which we must enter the Kingdom of God, and replaces it with the tithing envelope and the missionary offering by which we are exhorted to cheer on those who will enslave the next generation of good people who are called by this false co-redemptive gospel of works.
The secular priests of the gospel of Satan preach a gospel of benevolence and unity above all. They are encouraged by religious superstars like (Jesuit anointed) Billy Graham and T.D. Jakes to preach a gospel of peace and mutual understanding.
 The gospel of Satan despises good doctrine. In fact it brazenly declares that doctrine divides. Or, it titillates with bizarre interpretations of the prophetic. It heaps together teachers who can spellbind with Gnostic mystery knowledge and hidden secrets, but who deny the very basic doctrines of our faith. The satanic gospel denies the very nature of the thrice Holy God, or it declares that Jesus Christ was just a man and He is one of the many ways that people can come to God.
The gospel of Satan encourages us to love and hug, but it discourages us from searching the scriptures to see if things be true. The gospel of Satan resists judgment and humanizes mercy, denying that mercy ceases to be mercy if it doesn't pass through judgment and condemnation first. The satanic gospel will have two walking together, even if they are not agreed, and the children of light having fellowship with darkness. 
The satanic gospel declares that good people go to heaven on the preposterous assumption that there are any good people to begin with. The gospel of Satan wins souls for Jesus but denies that He alone added to the church daily such as should be saved (Acts 2:47) The gospel of Satan wrests with the scriptures, redefining foreknowledge and election, while declaring belief as the sovereign act of man. It refuses to acknowledge, as we have shown, that as many were ordained to eternal life believed. (Acts 13:48).
The gospel of Satan robs God our shepherd of the glory He demands for His Sovereign protection and the preservation of His sheep. The satanic gospel proudly declares that God is banned from His creation and that salvation is born of works ; declaring God a liar when He states that all of HIS WORKS were known to Him from the foundation of the world (Acts 15:18), and that all of HIS WORKS were done so that He alone could show HIS manifold wisdom to the principalities and powers in the heavenly realms (Eph. 3:10). God hath said that WE whom He has Sovereignly rescued: have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of Him who worketh all things after the counsel of His own will (Eph. 1:11) How shall the purveyors of the satanic gospel escape the fires of Hell, having despised the gifts of God? But you will find that many of Satan's messengers even deny the reality of Hell, or they will deny that it is everlasting in its torment and punishment. They must teach such things, because they demand a god that is unjust and corrupt,  a god that winks at sin and ignores pride. They desire a god that is powerless to actually and effectually save, but who opens the door wide to all who travel the wide road.
Satan's gospel must focus attention on this world and its comforts and pleasures. It must never for a moment glance into the eternals because it is dreadfully aware of what awaits all those who preach such a false gospel. Satan's gospel must never truly focus on the cross and the work that was wrought there; instead it will substitute Holy Ghost manifestations and Jesus Crusades. Come and get your healing, your wealth, your tongues or your anointing, but touch not the blood and seek not redemption.
I was never so sure about the rightness of our cause until I began to preach on the Sovereignty of our God. It is surely not easy to be despised and hated. Our flesh desires to be embraced and comforted by all men. But God has declared that the world must hate us, and it must despitefully use us. I am despised by the religious culture and chastised by people who I once had hoped were my friends. Our message will not be accepted by a dead and dying world, and our cause will not be trumpeted by the monied interests of corporate religion. As more and more people eschew the churches and the chapels of institutional Christianity, the enmity towards our message of freedom will grow more and more pronounced. But here is what we know: Whatsoever the Lord pleased, that did He in heaven, and in earth, in the seas, and all the deep places. (Psalm 135:6) God has done what He has pleased. It pleased Him to call to Himself His elect. And it pleased Him to suffer the false gospel of His enemy to be trumpeted to all whose pride will bar them from heaven. Having hated the truth, they have freely embraced a lie. They have embraced the gospel of Satan, and they have done it with the name of Jesus Christ on their lips.

from chapter six -

Friday, January 13, 2017

The world

“Come out from among them and be separate, says the Lord. Do not touch what is unclean, and I will receive you.” (2 Corinthians 6:17)

 Present day Christianity reveals the essential need for this separation. Today’s widespread desire is to make things pleasant in Christianity; to saw off the corners and edges of the cross, and to avoid, as far as possible, self-denial. Everywhere we hear professing Christians declaring loudly that we must not be “too narrow and exclusive.” By their lifestyle they profess that there is nothing wrong with participating in that which the holiest of saints rejected as bad for the soul. Unfortunately, thousands proclaim we may go anywhere, do anything, spend our time in anything, read anything, keep any company, plunge into anything, and all the while still be good Christians.

If you are one of those unhappy people who think everybody is a Christian who attends a place of worship, no matter how he lives, or what he believes, I fear you will care little about separation from the world. But if you read the Bible, and are serious about your soul, you will know there are two classes of professing Christians - the converted and unconverted.  There must be a difference between believers and unbelievers. To you, therefore, I make a special appeal this day. While many avoid the subject of separation from the world, and many absolutely hate it, and many are puzzled by it, give me your attention while I try to show you this principle. 

1. The World is a Source of Great Danger to the Soul.”

When I speak of “the world” in this article, I mean those people who think only, or chiefly, of this world’s things, and neglect the world to come—the people who are always thinking more of earth than of heaven, more of time than of eternity, more of body than the soul, more of pleasing man than of pleasing God. It is of them and their ways, habits, customs, opinions, practices, tastes, aims, spirit, and tone, that I am speaking when I speak of “the world.”
 Now “the world,” in this sense, is an enemy of the soul. There are three things which a true Christian must renounce and give up, and three enemies which he must fight with and resist. These three are the flesh, the devil, and “the world.” All three are terrible foes, and all three must be overcome if we would be saved.
Let us turn to the testimony of the Holy Scriptures. If the texts I am about to quote do not prove the world is a source of danger to the soul, then there is no meaning in words. Let us hear what the Apostle Paul says:
 “And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God” (Romans 12:2).
 “Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might know the things that have been freely given to us by God” (1 Corinthians 2:12)
“Who gave Himself for our sins, that He might deliver us from this present evil age, according to the will of our God and Father” (Galatians 1:4). 
“You were dead in your trespasses and sins, in which you once walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of power of the air, the spirit who now works in the sons of disobedience” (Ephesians 2:1-2).
 “For Demas has forsaken me, having loved this present world, and has departed for Thessalonica—Crescens for Galatia, Titus for Dalmatia” (2 Timothy 4:10). 

Let us hear what James says: 
“Pure and undefiled religion before God and the Father is this: to visit orphans and widows in their trouble, and to keep oneself unspotted from the world” (James 1:27). 
“Adulterers and adulteresses! Do you not know that friendship with the world is enmity with God? Whoever therefore wants to be a friend of the world makes himself any enemy of God” (James 4:4). 

Let us hear what John says:
 “Do not love the world or things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world- - the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life—is not of the Father but is of the world. And the world is passing away, and the lust of it; but he who does the will of God abides forever” (1 John 2:15-17). 
“Behold what manner of love the Father has bestowed on us, that we should be called children of God! Therefore, the world does not know us, because it did not know Him” (1 John 3:1). 
“They are of the world. Therefore they speak as of the world, and the world hears them”(1 John 4:5).
“For whatever is born of God overcomes the world. And this is the victory that has overcome the world—our faith” (1 John 5:4). 
“We know that we are of God, and the whole world lies under the sway of the wicked one” (1 John 5:19). 

Let us hear, lastly, what the Lord Jesus Christ says: 
“Now he who received seed among the thorns is he who hears the word, and the cares of this world and the deceitfulness of riches choke the word, and he becomes unfruitful” (Matthew13:22). 
“And He said to them, you are from beneath; I am from above. You are of this world; I am not of this world” (John 8:23). 
“If the world hates you, you know that it hated Me before it hated you” (John 15:18).
 “And I will pray the Father, and He will give you another Helper, that He may abide with you forever—the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees Him nor knows Him; but you know Him, for He dwells with you and will be with you” (John 14:16-17). 
“If you were of the world, the world would love its own. Yet because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you” (John 15:19). 
“These things I have spoken to you, that in Me you may have peace. In the world you will have tribulation; but be of good cheer, I have overcome the world” (John 16:33). 
“I do not pray that You should take them out of the world, but that You should keep them from the evil one. They are not of the world, just as I am not of the world” (John 17:15-16). 

I make no comment on these texts. They speak for themselves. If anyone can read them carefully, and fail to see that “the world” is an enemy to the Christian’s soul, and that there is an utter opposition between the friendship of the world and the friendship of Christ, he is past the reach of argument, and it is a waste of time to reason with him. To my eyes they contain a lesson as clear as the sun at noon day.

Read J.C. Ryle's writing, 'the world' in its entirety at

Wednesday, January 11, 2017

The false doctrine of free will and it's Jesuit influence - contd.

In the last post, we saw how Jacob Arminius was influenced by the Jesuits and infected Protestantism with 'free will' theology, which is a doctrine of demons. Let's now take a look at another heretic, Charles Finney....

In response to the authentic move of God in the Great Awakening, the Jesuit inspired Holiness movement swept through America and Europe in the 1800's, and here we witness the rise of Charles Finney in the middle of that Century.
 Charles Finney reacted to the pronounced Calvinist emphasis of the Great Awakening by purposefully de-emphasizing God and re-emphasizing man in his preaching. He desired to make the gospel more man-centered.
Charles Finney was the man who created the decisionism evangelical concept, where a person is led through an altar call and is pressured to make a decision for Christ. You will find no altar calls and no decisionism in all of the New Testament. The Bible merely declares that after the preaching of the True Gospel, many believed.
 Finney had started his Christian walk as a Presbyterian lawyer, but had a tremendous mystical experience one day that changed both his life and Christianity as it is currently experienced around the world. Finney claimed to have experienced the mighty baptism of the Holy Ghost and that experience changed the way he viewed himself and the Gospel. His experience was not to be viewed or judged in relation to scripture, but was wholly personal and real to him. He said that he felt what was like a wave of electricity going through me, and that wave would result in a completely new theology for Charles Finney. Finney readily embraced Jesuitical Arminian theology as a result of his personal Spiritual Exercise and appreciated the concept of receiving personal mystic revelations as a result of emotional experiences. He supported such activities as the hysterical laughing phenomena, fainting and weeping outbreaks, and what were otherwise considered Holy Ghost manifestations. 

In an article entitled The Legacy of Charles Finney, Michael S. Horton writes: What's So Wrong With Finney's Theology? First, one need go no further than the table of contents of his Systematic Theology to learn that Finney's entire theology revolved around human morality. Chapters one through five are on moral government, obligation, and the unity of moral action; chapters six and seven are "Obedience Entire," as chapters eight through fourteen discuss attributes of love, selfishness, and virtues and vice in general. Not until the twenty-first chapter does one read anything that is especially Christian in its interest, on the atonement. This is followed by a discussion of regeneration, repentance, and faith. There is one chapter on justification followed by six on sanctification. In other words, Finney did not really write a Systematic Theology, but a collection of essays on ethics. (PREMISE magazine/ Volume II, Number 3/ March 27, 1995/ Page 6) In the same article, Michael S. Horton unveils the true heresy in the teaching of Charles Finney. Finney believed that a Christian ceased to be a Christian each time he sinned, and that he must once again be purged of each sin by personal actions and personal sacrifices. Horton quotes Finney:
Whenever he sins, he must, for the time being, cease to be holy. This is self-evident. Whenever he sins, he must be condemned; he must incur the penalty of the law of God...If it be said that the precept is still binding upon him, but that with respect to the Christian, the penalty is forever set aside, or abrogated, I reply, that to abrogate the penalty is to repeal the precept; for a precept without penalty is no law. It is only counsel or advice. The Christian, therefore, is justified no longer than he obeys, and must be condemned when he disobeys; or Antinomianism is true...In these respects, then, the sinning Christian and the unconverted sinner are upon precisely the same ground. [pg. 46 of Finney's Systematic Theology] (emphasis added) 

So we see that Finneyís theology was not Protestant at all, but was wholly Catholic. The reason that Charles Finney loved the altar call is because Charles Finney loved the ALTAR - The place where personal sacrifice is offered.

But Finney, after experiencing a Loyola-like spiritual conversion, began preaching the same Jesuit theology as the Spanish Jesuit monk Luis de Molina. Finney taught that absolute perfection and full obedience was a condition of justification, and that a man could not be justified while sin remained in him. With a cursory examination of Finney's theology, you will see that it differs in no real way from the pronouncements of the Catholic Council of Trent, the same Council which gave marching orders to the Jesuits in 1563.   -

Saturday, January 7, 2017

The false doctrine of free will and its Jesuit influence

It is vital that the elect of God understand the evil of free will and where it originates. Never should we ever embrace this doctrine or those who defend it.
 I want to share a couple of resources exposing the Jesuits and their agenda against Protestant churches.....

August Toplady, who penned 'Rock of ages' also  wrote 'Arminianism: the road to Rome'. I want to share a bit of what he wrote in that article...

"The "Sovereign drug, Arminianism," which said the Jesuit, "we (i.e. we Papists) have planted" in England, did indeed bid fair "to purge our Protestant Church effectually. How merrily Popery and Arminianism, at that time, danced hand in hand, may be learned from Tindal: "The churches were adorned with paintings, images, altar-pieces, & etc. and, instead of communion tables, alters were set up, and bowings to them and the sacramental elements enjoined. The predestinarian doctrines were forbidden, not only to be preached, but to be printed; and the Arminian sense of the Articles was encouraged and propagated."10 The Jesuit, therefore, did not exult without cause. The "sovereign drug," so lately "planted," did indeed take deep root downward, and bring forth fruit upward, under the cherishing auspices of Charles and Laud. Heylyn, too, acknowledges, that the state of things was truly described by another Jesuit of that age, who wrote: "Protestantism waxeth weary of itself. The doctrine (by the Arminians, who then sat at the helm) is altered in many things, for which their progenitors forsook the Church of Rome: as limbus patrum; prayer for the dead, and possibility of keeping God's commandments; and the accounting of Calvinism to be heresy at least, if not treason." - source

There's a book written by Michael Bunker entitled 'Swarm of Locusts' that gives us greater detail and insight into the origin of free will and the Jesuit ties to Jacob Arminius. Here is an excerpt from that book...

The following quote came from a Jesuit, written in 1628 to the Jesuit Rector at Bruxels, to calm his nerves about an ensuing parliamentary call. The Jesuit writer tells the Rector that he has nothing to worry about, because the Jesuits have planted the seed “arminianisme” and it will certainly come to fruition:

"March, 1628. Father Rector, let not the damp of astonishment seize upon your ardent and zealous soul, in apprehending the sodaine (sudden) and unexpected calling of a Parliament. We have now many strings to our bow. We have planted that soveraigne drugge Arminianisme, which we hope will purge the Protestants from their heresie; and it flourisheth and beares fruit in due season. For the better prevention of the Puritanes, the
Arminians have already locked up the Duke’s (of Buckingham) eares; and we have those of our owne religion, which stand continually at the Duke’s chamber, to see who goes in and out: we cannot be too circumspect and carefull in this regard. I am, at this time, transported with joy, to see how happily all instruments and means, as well great as lesser, co-operate unto our purposes. But, to return unto the maine fabricke:--OUR FOUNDATION IS ARMINIANISME" [Hidden works of darkness, p. 89, 90. Edit. 1645.] (emphasis added)


The young man Arminius lost his family during a war with the Spanish in 1575. As a fifteen year old orphan, he entered the University of Leyden, and under scholarship by the government of the City of Amsterdam, he was sent to the Theological school in Geneva for studies at the feet of the great Protestant reformers. At Geneva, Arminius studied under a professor named Theodore Beza, the man who had assumed the leadership role of the Protestant movement in Switzerland from John Calvin. For some reason that seems to be lost to history, Arminius immediately took a disliking to Beza, and found his forceful defense of the Doctrines of Grace to be harsh and unyielding.
Here is where our mystery gets increasingly interesting. Back in Amsterdam there was a movement of “counter-reformation” begun supposedly by a rich merchant named Dirck Coornhert. Coornhert was a Dutch humanist who was enamored with the teachings of the Catholic humanist Desiderius Erasmus and a Spanish Jesuit monk named Luis de Molina.
Erasmus has been rightly identified by Martin Luther and others as a “Pelagian in Catholic clothing”, so we can readily trace the Pelagian and Semi-Pelagian heresies as they traversed their way through Amsterdam while Arminius was away in Geneva.
Dirck Coornhert disdained the Reformation teachings on the Doctrines of Grace, and sought to confront them wherever he found them. Coornhert had read with growing affections the teachings of Luis de Molina regarding Free Will and Predestination. The Jesuits had hit on a brilliant way of dismantling the debate. They would preach that BOTH “free will” and predestination were true and that a good God who was truly sovereign surely might have given his creations a freedom of the will in order to allow them to choose to be saved. Luis de Molina was creating a doctrine that would eventually be called Media Scientia or “Middle-Knowledge”. Eventually this heresy would be known as Molinism.
In an article on Luis de Molina entitled, Contending for the Faith, Rev. Bernard Woudenberg said of the Jesuit Luis de Molina,
“Being a Romanist, he was forced to honor the theology of Thomas Aquinas with its acceptance of divine sovereignty, but at the same time, as a Jesuit, he was committed to defending the papacy against the growing influences of Calvinism. And so de Molina set forth to steer between these by proposing his original and highly influential concept of the media scientia, or "middle- knowledge." In this he proposed that “between God’s knowledge of the cause and effect relations which He had implanted in the universe, and that of divine freedom whereby He remains free at any time to do what He wills, there is an area of middle-knowledge which God provides for man in which man is granted freedom to do whatever he chooses without outside necessity or predetermination of any kind.” (emphasis added)
The Catholic lie on co-operative Justification had been countered by the true Grace doctrine of Salvation by Grace through Faith, so now an evil “compromise” was offered to the world, and by deceit and subterfuge the compromise would eventually become the predominant teaching in all the churches of the world. 
Back in Geneva, Theodore Beza had a growing suspicion that his student Jacobus Arminius was not who he proposed to be. Questions were being asked about comments that Arminius was making to fellow students, and there were still questions about his financial support from the rich, aristocratic merchants of Holland. Apparently Arminius was able to lie well enough to get past Beza’s questioning, a skill that would come in handy years later when he would be looking for a teaching job in Amsterdam. Beza then asked Arminius to answer and publicly refute the teachings of Dirck Coornhert. Although Arminius completed the task, he later claimed to be convinced by Coornhert’s arguments, and he became ardently opposed to the teachings of the Reformers. Please do remember that Coornhert had developed his ideas from the writings of the Catholic humanist Erasmus and the Jesuit Luis de Molina.
In 1586, Arminius was released from Geneva, but instead of heading back to Amsterdam where he was under contract to the City to labor in order to pay back his tuition, he headed to Rome for a “vacation”.

Most Calvinists believe that it was during this vacation in Rome that Arminius was recruited by the Jesuits to their point of view. I believe that there is enough other evidence that Arminius was compromised long before his pilgrimage to Rome, particularly in that he had already embraced the Jesuitical writings of Dirck Coornhert. By this time, Arminius had become a private student of the writings of Luis de Molina, and in 1588, the same year in which Arminius was ordained a minister (by the strange endorsement of Theodore Beza), de Molina published his treatise on the will entitled A Reconciliation of Free Choice with the Gifts of Grace, Divine Foreknowledge, Providence, Predestination and Reprobation which is commonly referred to as the “Concordia”.
What the Jesuits were loathe to admit, was that Molinism was nothing more than a rebirth of the ancient “Semi-Pelagianism” heresy, which contends that man cannot be saved apart from God’s grace; however, fallen man must “cooperate” and assent to God’s grace before he will be saved. The Jesuits recognized that the Protestants would never embrace the teachings of a Catholic Spanish monk, so they capitalized on the growing and open debates taking place within Protestantism. Molinism would be recast as Arminianism, and eventually, it would take over the ecclesiastical world.
A famous quote from de Molina eerily foretells of the Jesuit lie that proceeds from the mouths of “evangelical” leaders today:
“all human beings are endowed with equal and sufficient divine grace without distinction as to their individual merits, and that salvation depends on the sinner’s willingness to receive grace”. (Concordia, 1588)
The Catholics say of Molinism:
“Molinism is an influential system within Catholic theology for reconciling human free choice with God’s grace, providence, foreknowledge and predestination. Originating within the Society of Jesus (The Jesuits) in the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries, it encountered stiff opposition from Bañezian Thomists and from the self-styled Augustinian disciples of Michael Baius and Cornelius Jansen.” - [Alfred J. Freddoso, Catholic Professor at Notre Dame.] (emphasis added)
It is clear from history that the Society of Jesus readily accepted Molinism as an effective and efficient tool in the war against Protestantism. That fact has never changed.

The fact that Arminius derived his doctrine wholly from the Jesuits may be one of the worst kept secrets of all time, but if you asked the average pew-sitting pseudo-protestant religionist in America today from where they derived their theology, they would likely tell you,
“Why, from the Bible, of course”.
But we live in the age of mass media driven religion. Almost 100% of the pop-theology that pours forth from the pulpits, the television, the radio and “Christian” print media is Arminian and has its roots in the teachings of the Jesuit monk Luis de Molina.
Augustus Toplady, the great Calvinist hymn writer who wrote ROCK OF AGES said this about the ties between Arminius and the Jesuits:
“The Jesuits were moulded into a regular body, towards the middle of the sixteenth century: toward the close of the same century, Arminius began to infest the Protestant churches. It needs therefore no great penetration, to discern from what source he drew his poison. His journey to Rome (though Monsicur Bayle affects to make light of the inferences which were at that very time deduced from it) was not for nothing. If, however, any are disposed to believe, that Arminius imbibed his doctrines from the Socinians in Poland, with whom, it is certain, he was on terms of intimate friendship, I have no objection to splitting the difference: he might import some of his tenets from the Racovian brethren, and yet be indebted, for others, to the disciples of Loyola.” (Augustus Toplady – The Road to Rome)
Just in case you think that tying Arminius to the Jesuits is a concoction contrived by militant Calvinists, let’s consult the Jesuits on the matter. The following quote came from a Jesuit, written in 1628 to the Jesuit Rector at Bruxels, to calm his nerves about an ensuing parliamentary call. The Jesuit writer tells the Rector that he has nothing to worry about, because the Jesuits have planted the seed “arminianisme” and it will certainly come to fruition:
"March, 1628. Father Rector, let not the damp of astonishment seize upon your ardent and zealous soul, in apprehending the sodaine (sudden) and unexpected calling of a Parliament. We have now many strings to our bow. We have planted that soveraigne drugge Arminianisme, which we hope will purge the Protestants from their heresie; and it flourisheth and beares fruit in due season. For the better prevention of the Puritanes, the Arminians have already locked up the Duke’s (of Buckingham) eares; and we have those of our owne religion, which stand continually at the Duke’s chamber, to see who goes in and out: we cannot be too circumspect and carefull in this regard. I am, at this time, transported with joy, to see how happily all instruments and means, as well great as lesser, co-operate unto our purposes. But, to return unto the maine fabricke:--OUR FOUNDATION IS ARMINIANISME" [Hidden works of darkness, p. 89, 90. Edit. 1645.] (emphasis added)
source -

This is from Edward Hindrie's book, 'The anti-gospel, the strange anti-Christ doctrine of free will being preached in heathen churches today"...

The anti-gospel is a dethroning of God and enthroning of man. God is no longer sovereign. Man is made the sovereign master of his destiny with God merely a hopeful observer. The anti-gospel rejects the sovereign grace of God in his election of those for salvation. This injection of the Roman Catholic free will theological poison into nominal “Christian” denominations is the result of a satanic conspiracy. This strategy will give rise to an ecumenical movement that will ultimately result in the nominal “Christian” denominations falling under the yoke of the Vatican.
 Under Semi-Pelagianism, man was fallen and his will was hindered by sin, but not totally so. According to Semi-Pelagians, man is not spiritually dead, but only spiritually sick. They taught that man could utilize his faith to cooperate with God in facilitating his own salvation. Semi-Pelagians accepted that God was sovereign but at the same time they promoted the inconsistent view that man had free will in order to choose whether to be saved. SemiPelagianism became the generally accepted doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church. The Catholic Church codified this semi-pelagian anti-gospel, with accompanying curses, at the Council of Trent (circa 1547). If anyone saith that, since Adam’s sin, the free will of man is lost and extinguished; or that it is a thing with only a name, yea, a name without reality, a figment, in fine, introduced into the Church by Satan; let him be anathema. COUNCIL OF TRENT, SESSION VI, DECREE ON JUSTIFICATION, Canon V, January 13, 1547. If anyone saith that man’s free will, moved and excited by God, by assenting to God exciting and calling, no wise cooperates towards disposing and preparing itself for obtaining the grace of justification; that it cannot refuse its consent, if it would, but that, as something inanimate, it does nothing whatever and is merely passive; let him be anathema. COUNCIL OF TRENT, SESSION IV, DECREE ON JUSTIFICATION, Canon IV, January 13, 1547. If anyone saith that by faith alone the impious is justified; in such wise as to mean that nothing else is required to cooperate in order to the obtaining the grace of justification, and that is not in any way necessary that he be prepared and disposed by the movement of his own will; let him be anathema. COUNCIL OF TRENT, SESSION VI, DECREE ON JUSTIFICATION, Canon IX, January 13, 1547. 
Semi-Pelagianism was promoted by a Jesuit priest named Luis de Molina. This doctrine became popularly known as Molinism.  The Roman Catholic church knew that Protestant Christians would never adopt Molinism if it were known to have sprung from a Jesuit priest, so they decided to use a front man in order to introduce this anti-gospel into the Protestant churches. They used a man named Jacobus Arminius (1560-1609), who was an admirer of Molina, to popularized the free will doctrine of Molina among Protestants. As a result of the successful efforts of Arminius and other Jesuit agents, Molinism has since become popularized not as Molinism but as Arminianism. Many view Arminianism as an orthodox Christian view of Scripture, when in fact it is a corruption of the gospel that has been injected into the Protestant denominations by Jacobus Arminius. Arminianism is simply repackaged Roman Catholic doctrine.  source -

A.W. Pink stated this, "In the year 1563 by the order of the Pope, there was a council held at Trent. And Rome then and there defined her theological position on the points that had been made by the Reformers, and one of their decrees read thus [now the decrees of the Council of Trent are their standard today on controverted points], "If anyone shall affirm that since the fall of Adam man's free will is lost, let him be accursed". I want to read that again, what I am reading now is Roman Catholic Doctrine according to their own standards the decrees of the Council of Trent 1563, "If anyone shall affirm that since the fall of Adam man's free will is lost, let him be accursed".  So that those who insist on man's free will place themselves side by side with Rome on that doctrine!"-  from 'studies in the Scriptures' April 1926

When you dig into the origin of the 'free will' and its influences, it becomes clear Pink was right. The Jesuits/RCC have infiltrated Protestantism with their doctrines of demons, which have taken such a deep hold on most churches today that I am convinced only the return of Christ will finally destroy this horrendous evil.  Free will does not exist, is not biblical, and will lead multitudes down the broad road. May it please the Most High to teach His elect this truth and cause us to  vehemently uphold it. 

Tuesday, January 3, 2017

Meditations on Christ - Isaiah 33:17 - Ken Wimer

Make use of thy God

It is strange how little use we make of the spiritual blessings which God gives us, but it is stranger still how little use we make of God himself. Though He is "our own God", we apply ourselves but little to Him, and ask but little of Him. How seldom do we ask counsel at the hands of the Lord! How often do we go about our business without seeking His guidance! In our troubles how constantly do we strive to bear our burdens ourselves, instead of casting them upon the Lord, that He may sustain us! This is not because we may not, for the Lord seems to say: "I am thine, soul, come and make use of me as thou wilt; thou mayest freely come to my store, and the oftener, the more welcome"

It is our own fault if we make not free with the riches of our own God. Then, since thou has such a friend, and He invites thee, draw from Him daily. Never want whilst though hast a God to go to; never fear or faint whilst thou hast God to help thee; go to thy treasure and take whatever thou hast need of - there is all that thou canst want. 

Learn the divine skill of making God all things to thee. He can supply thee with all, or, better still, He can be to thee instead of all. Let me urge thee, then, to make use of thy God. 

Make use of Him in PRAYER. Go to Him often because He is THY God. O, wilt thou fail to use so great a privilege? Fly to Him, tell Him all they wants. Use Him constantly BY FAITH at all times. If some dark providence has beclouded thee, use thy God as a "sun"; if some strong enemy has beset thee, find in Jehovah a "shield", for He is a sun and shield to His people. If thou hast lost thy way in the mazes of life, use Him as a "guide", for He will direct thee. Whatever thou art, and wherever thou art, remember, God is just WHAT thou wantest, and just WHERE thou wantest, and that He can do ALL thou wantest. 

C. H. Spurgeon