THE SIGNS OF THE TIMES

AN EXAMINATION OF SOME OF THE PROPOSITIONS PUT FORWARD IN A DOCUMENT ENTITLED "DISCERNING THE TIMES" BY ALAN F. DYER.

After returning to Tasmania from overseas recently I was given a copy of the document referred to above and I feel that some comments should be made about the same. I desire to do this in the Spirit of Christ. I would point out at the beginning that I have no personal animosity towards my brother in Christ, Alan Dyer.

At my last contact with him our relationship was cordial and brotherly. I might point out that this contact was some years ago, though I have not sought to avoid him, yet it seems that he, and others of his persuasion have chosen to take a different path to the "Ancient Paths" laid out for us in the word of God. (Jer.6;16 & 18;15.)

Though I have only love in my heart for him, yet I, (and many others) disagree very definitely with the propositions he puts forward and the changes that he advocates, hence this article.

He commences his paper by referring to, what I presume is a mildly pornographic video, which evidently sought to portray some of the pain felt by those in the Roman Catholic Church, at the changes taking place in that corrupt and false church. Such was obviously fictitious, and such things can never portray in a reasoned and factual way the real events, but are concocted to satisfy the perverted minds of many. One would have thought that an elder might have been better occupied, in seeking direction in these difficult times, from the pure and holy word of God. The Psalmist says, "Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path", it is the only sure guide as to faith and practice, but sadly, in his paper brother Alan makes only scant reference to the Holy Scriptures. We should not be surprised then that the ideas that he puts forward conflict with that word.

CHANGE

Change is a word that has been bandied about for the past decade, as if it has some divine authority, and has become the cloak for the introduction of so many things into those assemblies who have yielded to the subtle pressure of the merchants of change. The hymn writer associates decay with that word, "Change and decay in all around I see, O Thou who changest not abide with me!" It must surely occur to sober thinking believers that God does not change, "I am the LORD, I change not", (Mal.3;6), Jesus Christ, the SAME yesterday, today and forever, (Heb.13;8.), Thou art the SAME, and thy years shall not fail", (Heb.1;12.). Neither does God's word change, "Forever, Oh Lord, thy word is word settled in heaven" (Ps.119;89.)

The kind of change that is really needed is not a change of format, a substitution of the word of God with the bright ideas of modernist pseudo-intellectuals. The kind of change that is needed is a change of heart, a true turning back to the word of God, not away further from it as the paper would advise. A true hearted repentance, a confession and forsaking of sin, a separation from the world and its evils, a forsaking of the shameful apathy that has weakened the testimony of the assemblies over this past three decades. The eradication of the "Sunday Morning Only" philosophy, a return to the true observance of the Lord's Day. Let us cease to do evil and learn to do well!

Mr. Dyer speaks about the "dramatic changes" that are occurring in our State, as if these things are wonderful. He speaks of our generation as being more informed, more widely educated etc. The results of all this so-called progress can be seen in society, where murder is an almost daily occurrence, where sodomy, the sin that brought down the judgment of God on Sodom , Gomorrah and the cities of the plain, is legalized and most forms of immorality encouraged. Where respect for authority, age and experience has largely disappeared, where vocal minorities seem to carry the day. Where true wisdom is considered by many to be foolishness and old fashioned.

He asks: "What participation do our well educated, spiritually gifted women have in church life today?" I can't speak of his assembly, or of those who have yielded to the present modernistic pressures, but I know that in many assemblies where they have clung to the principles of the word of God, the sisters still have the honored place that God has ordained for them, and continue to exercise the gifts that God has given them, in the way that the word of God directs. They have a far more effective ministry than those who break the commands of the Lord, and seek to exercise authority over the man.

Our brother claims that the worldwide charismatic renewal has swept millions into the Kingdom of God. One would expect that those who are in the Kingdom of God, would be walking in loving obedience to the King. I have failed to find this with many whom I have met in different parts of the world. I have personally had the joy of leading many who had been "swept into the Kingdom of God", to a knowledge of Christ as their Savior and Lord, because they had not been truly saved. Allan seems to be mesmerized by the mirage of the charismatic movement. If you do away with the scandal of the cross, and preach a popular gospel, if you offer bribes in the way of promised healing, and mesmerize people with necromancy and soothsaying, of course you will attract many, like a kind of universal side-show. These people are like the crowds who followed the Lord during his ministry. They crowded around Him, came so close as to jostle Him, but in so doing kept others away. Of such the Lord Jesus said, "Ye seek me, ... because ye did eat of the loaves and were filled", John 6;26. Before that chapter closes many of those "disciples", went away back and walked no more with Him, (verse 66). This seems to be the characteristic of many of those who are "Swept into the Kingdom of God" by the charismatic movement. They are attracted by the excitement and the false claims about miracles, they have a false experience, then quickly fall away. They come and swell the congregations, boosting the egos of those who emphasize popularity, but they do not stay.

Brother Alan makes much of the God-given privilege of self government, but in a subtle way even this is under attack, not in open defiant interference, but by seditious means. By means of "Shepherd Seminars", and "Leadership Training Courses", where young people who are largely immature and ill-established are subjected to a form of brainwashing with these modernistic ideas. Where they are taught a form of guerrilla warfare, taught how to overthrow their elders, how to get their own way. Not as the scripture says "to remember them who have the rule over you,... whose faith follow," Heb.13;7, "Obey those them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves..." Heb.13;17. These are some of the things that he would have us believe must be changed.

Further he speaks with strong disapproval, bordering on condemnation, of those who are not prepared to accept his ideas. It is sad in the extreme when it becomes necessary in order to maintain a good conscience, for one to leave those whom they love, but it is certainly not unscriptural to do so. However, the scripture commands us to "Mark those who cause divisions and offenses contrary to the doctrine you have learned; and avoid them", Rom. 16;17. I would ask: "Who has caused the divisions?" All that these dear brethren wished to do was to pursue a path of obedience to the word of God, to cling to the doctrines that they had learned. I am afraid that the author of "Discerning the Times", has done more to divide the assemblies in Tasmania than perhaps anyone else. I am sorry to have to say so, but there are many who share the same judgment. Not only to divide assemblies, but also families. He has been quoted to me by reliable, responsible brethren as saying that he would not darken the doors of some assemblies, those who have resisted his ideas. It would seem that he may be guilty of the very thing that he accuses others of doing.

If our early brethren had followed the principles that Mr. Dyer advocates, there would have been no brethren movement. They all came out of the established church, or the many denominations. They did not come out to establish another denomination, but to gather to the name of the Lord Jesus alone. To quote Anthony Norris Groves out of context and use him to support his own ideas of compromise, is to misrepresent the brother. Mr. Groves uses the word, "evils" in the sense of "imperfections", as a reading of the context will show. History testifies to the fact that he was never one to compromise with evil.

The brethren exist as a testimony against denominationalism, and they accept no other name than that name alone to which they gather - the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. He speaks rather scathingly of the "peas in the pod" uniformity that has characterized those who gathered to the name of the Lord Jesus. We might ask, "How was this achieved - How is it that often believers on different continents who had no contact with each other were found to be doing the same things, in the same way, with minor cultural differences?" There were no outward constraints, no magazines to circulate ideas and induce conformity. It was because they were guided by the word of God, and led by the Spirit of God. If we return to that infallible guide, then once again there will once again be an expression of the unity of the body. The Charismatic and Pentecostal movements that our brother applauds are even more divided than the brethren. Once there was only the C.R. Crusade and the Apostolic Church in Burnie, but now I am told that there are 7 different groups. I have ministered in small villages in India where there have been as many as five different Pentecostal groups, all claiming to be filled with, and led by the Holy Spirit, but having no fellowship with each other, and openly opposed to each other.

The paper suggests that other evangelical denominations have scrutinized the brethren and snitched everything of value. The denominations have robbed the brethren of nothing. The fact is that the brethren have no monopoly on the truth, it is the property of the whole church. Perhaps they have seen how that God honors His word, and blesses those who follow it. The undeniable fact is that the more any company of believers comes closer to the word of God, the more like the brethren they become. On one occasion a pastor in an independent Evangelical Church in Singapore commented to me, "We seem to be coming to be more and more like the brethren". Sad to say it is such as Mr. Dyer who would rob the saints of those distinctive features that have made them so effective over the past one-and-a-half centuries.

He cites the case of Abraham being told to leave Ur, and the pain that it caused him, but what he is asking us to do is to return to Ur, to go back to the things that our Godly forbears judged to be wrong in the light of God's word, things which we too have seen to be wrong.

Watchman Nee is cited as a forerunner to the charismatic movement. What a doubtful honor is thus accorded to this great saint of God? It has been my privilege to know and have fellowship with some who were associated with the Little Flock Movement when in China, and I found them to be people of real spiritual depth, and quality. They were Godly in their lives, and would have nothing of the novelties that are being offered, even pressed upon us. It is suggested that the Charismatic movement has offered a generation of new Christians "contemporary and meaningful ways of worshipping and glorifying God." I have been present in such meetings, having been invited to preach there, (I have never refused an invitation to preach the gospel), and it was as much as I could do to remain there. I just thanked God that heaven would never be like that. I find that these people know practically nothing about worship. I also found that the gospel is not preached among them, and when I was enabled to preach the gospel in the power of the Holy Spirit, there was a great response of people wanting to accept Christ as their Savior. Nor is the truth of the word of the word of God taught among them. My dear brethren, if this is the kind of thing that you are being led into, then beware. I counsel you to reject it and be like Naboth who said when Ahab offered him a "change", "The Lord forbid me, that I should give the inheritance of my fathers unto thee. 1 Kings 21;3. Let me now refer to the participation of women in the assemblies. Are we to believe that ours is the first generation to discover the worth and usefulness of Godly sisters? Mr. Dyer seems to have appointed himself as a defender of the rights of women. He has suddenly discovered that they have spiritual gifts, and are educated, which in his view seems to elevate them above those whom he regards as the poor downtrodden sisters of past generations. I have a great respect for, and appreciation of Godly sisters and their prayers and ministry. I gladly testify to the fact that I have been wonderfully blessed through the prayers, fellowship and wise but comely counsel of senior Godly sisters. I have a dear prayer partner in Madras, a medical doctor, who rises at 3.30 a.m. every morning, and gives herself to prayer and the study of God's word. She prays for me every day. She is a gifted evangelist, and has led many to Christ, but has never left the God-given place that is appointed to all sisters in the wisdom of God. She is well-taught in the word and would never swallow the things suggested in "Discerning the Times". Yet, to my knowledge, never has she tried to teach or exercise authority over me, or any other brother. I can recall others, the late Mrs. Ruth Quilliam was a sister who had light beyond many of the Brethren in Circular Head, and I enjoyed the sweetest fellowship with her, from which I profited much. Yet never did she leave her God given place, nor did she rebel against her lot, nor strive to display her superior knowledge to others. Yet brother Alan would despise such as being behind the times. It is possible that there may be some sisters in his own assembly whom he would love to push onto the pulpit, but they have the spirituality and the courage to resist such pressures. It is perfectly clear from the Holy Scriptures that the part of women in the public gatherings of the assembly is to be silent, they are twice commanded thus. 1 Cor. 14;34 could not be clearer. The Greek word for speak is Laleo, which means "to speak, to utter words, to preach, say, speak (after), talk, tell, utter". This verse has been a great hindrance over the centuries to those women who have rebelled against the ordering of God, and the place that God in His wisdom has given them. The paper states "The problem is not so much what the Bible says, but how we interpret what the Bible says". This is true, what the Bible says could not be clearer. But then he adds: "How do we move from a 1st-century document to a 21st-century application". This supposes that the scriptures are out of date, that somehow the Eternal God, whose word it is, did not foresee the wonderful developments of our age, that in the space of a generation women would become so much more enlightened, and that He would have to entrust them with more spiritual gifts, thereby creating a problem for Himself??? The truth is that this first century document is the word of God, and like its author is timeless and changeless. Such a plain statement as our verse states needs no interpretation, it stands as written, and is to be accepted as the Lord's commandment, 1. Cor.14;37. Mr. Dyer quotes verse 39, "Wherefore, brethren, covet to prophesy, and forbid not to speak in tongues," and asks, "Where are these same enthusiasts for literal interpretation now?", and suggests that they are running out the back door and scrambling over the bottom fence. When one stands on the word of God, there is no need or desire to run away from the position one takes. The whole chapter is written to encourage sound and profitable ministry, and to discourage the confusion that the carnal Corinthians had introduced into the assembly. He discouraged them from "Speaking into the air", verse 9. It is stated in verse 33, "For God is not the author of confusion but of peace, as in all the assemblies of the saints", other assemblies were not troubled by this doubtful phenomenon, but were going on in peace. The adoption of what is suggested in "Discerning the Times", will lead the saints into that same confusion. But the paper makes no reference to 1.Tim.2;9-15, where what is stated in 1 Cor. 14, is reinforced where it is stated twice that the woman is to learn in silence, (quietness), (verse 11), and to be in silence, (quietness), (verse 12). Here Paul states the reason, and traces it to God's ordering. This whole epistle is instruction about proper behavior, in God's House (ch.3;15). Bro. Wilfred Ashton has produced a paper in which he makes a deep and scriptural study of the "Women's Role", in the assembly. I would suggest to my brethren to get a copy of that document and see what the scriptures really do teach on this important subject. The suggestion that Paul made a difference between educated women and others, that he had a different rule for the one than the other must surely be objectionable to the student of the Bible and the lover of scripture. Where does brother Alan get his information regarding their education? Certainly not from the scriptures, only by presuming and injecting his own thoughts into what is written. In his desire to drive the believers down the charismatic road, Mr. Dyer sits in judgment on Mr. Enoch Coppin, whom he admits was "A leading evangelist and renowned Bible teacher who led thousands to the Lord". There are still many living today, and many in are in Glory, who thank God for that brother, and for what God did through him. I wonder if it will be so for us when we have left this scene. Will we be remembered as those who were the channels of God's blessing, or as those who brought sorrow and confusion to the saints of God. Perhaps there was an element of the prophetic in Mr. Coppin's warnings. I personally would not go so far as to state that the whole of Pentecostalism is the work of the Devil, but it is a glaring and undeniable fact that the Devil has used it mightily, and is still using it mightily to deceive and delude many precious souls, and to scatter and divide those believers who have received a heritage of truth from faithful and godly men, and have sought to defend that truth in the past, and to stand for truth and order. Regarding the "gifts of the Holy Spirit", 1 Cor. 13 ; 8-12, is not the only passage on which we base our rejection of the false claims and confusion of the charismatic movement. But as to that passage, the views that have been held and advanced by many respected Bible teachers, Allan makes the sweeping assertion that "Today this view is rejected by every leading Bible scholar in the land". He must be very widely read to be able to make such a sweeping statement, but perhaps those are considered by him to be "Leading Bible Scholars" who agree with his own point of view . Regarding the "Gifts of the Holy Spirit", 1 Cor. 13;8-12, is not the only passage on which we base our rejection of the false claims and confusion of the charismatic movement. But as to that passage , the views that have been held and advanced by many respected Bible teachers, he (Mr. Dyer), makes the sweeping assertion that "Today this view is rejected by every leading Bible scholar in the land". He must indeed be very widely read to be able to make such a statement, but doubtful point of view. Recently I was in Dubai, in the United Arab Emirates, where I met a brother from N.S.W. who had gone there to establish an independent evangelical Church, (much on Assembly lines). He was not from among the assemblies, but had non-denominational connections. He gave me a paper entitled "The Two Mirrors", this paper put forward the same views that Allan says have been rejected. The truth is that what is held by those who oppose his views is based on a far wider foundation that one verse. I have just published a booklet entitled "The Fullness Of The Holy Spirit", in which I have sought to bring out what the Holy Scriptures do teach on this subject, and copies are freely available to all who desire them.

Brother Alan makes an interesting comparison between what he calls "Two denominations", the "Assemblies of God", and the assemblies of brethren. He praises the former, and condemns the latter. I do not regard the assemblies that we love as a denomination, but as stated earlier in this paper believe that they are gathered to the name of the Lord Jesus alone, they should be rightly said to be non-denominational. Our brother and those of his opinion have tried in the past to pressure the assemblies to adopt a name that can be applied to all, i.e. "Assemblies of Christian Brethren". Thank God that there are still those who cling to the scriptural principle of the independence and autonomy of the local church. He claims that the Assemblies of God, "Allow the HOLY SPIRIT to be free to work...", but at the same time has to admit that the same denomination has "All its faults and excesses". Is he suggesting that the Holy Spirit has changed, that He is no longer grieved by the allowance and practice of sin? Is He no longer quenched by the toleration of the world, and the denial of what God has taught us in the Holy Scriptures? We might rightly ask then, "Which spirit is it that promotes such rapid growth?"

He then accuses the brethren of restricting the Holy Spirit, and denying Him many of His former activities. It is sad to see how that Mr. Dyer has swallowed the Pentecostal propaganda. The brethren who have held to the truth, are only doing what they have done for 150 years, and it would be a very biased mind that would try to deny that the assemblies have been a mighty power for God for one-and-a-half centuries. They are found in almost every part of the world, and their testimony is still owned and blessed of God. In spite of Alan's claims, souls are still being saved, baptized and received into fellowship. How is it that such solid bible believing Christians, have at this late stage begun to "deny the Holy Spirit many of His liberties?" The truth is that the brethren still as they always have done, recognize, love and reverence the third person of the Trinity, and acknowledge Him as the only guide into all truth. They still desire that He may fill, and use them, as a witness to a perishing world.

He tells us that "We have got to get the power and enabling of the Holy Spirit back amongst us". We may ask, "Has he succeeded in doing that in his own assembly?". In the judgment of mature witnesses it would not seem to be so. There is only one way to get the "Power and enabling of the Holy Spirit" amongst us, and that is by the return to the clear principles of the word of God - to a life of personal holiness, to a life of total commitment to Christ. God says "Return unto me and I will return unto you" Mal.3;7, "Draw near to God and He will draw near to you." James 4;8.

Let us listen to the voice of the Good Shepherd, and refuse to listen to the voice of the stranger, or the hireling, "whose own the sheep are not".

C.E.Wigg,

P.O.Yolla, Tasmania

Australia. 7325. May 1993.