Agape

QUESTION: Does agape always mean divine love in the New Testament?

ANSWER: It denotes Christian love to God and men, a love unknown to writers outside the New Testament, a love which chooses its object with decision of will, so that it becomes self-denying or compassionate. It is the distinctive peculiarity of the Christian life.

— from Steele's Answers p. 53.

A "Babbler"?

QUESTION: A bishop of the Methodist Episcopal Church insists that all the translators and lexicographers are mistaken when they represent that Paul was a "babbler" by the Athenians whom he met in the market place. He says they complimented Paul by calling him a spermologos, "a great conversationalist," full of seed-thoughts, and wise sayings, which he scattered broadcast in the agora to the delighted astonishment of the natives. Is this bishop correct?

ANSWER: The best scholars quote Homer, Plutarch, and Demosthenes in proof that σπερμολόγος (spermologos), seed-gatherer, is a term of contempt applied to loungers about the market-place picking up a subsistence by whatever may chance to fall from the loads of merchandise; hence a man beggarly and abject, living by flattery and buffoonery, an empty talker, an idle babbler.

— from Steele's Answers pp. 52, 53.

Can Anyone in the Flesh Please God?

QUESTION: Paul says in Rom. 8:9, "They that are in the flesh cannot please God." Since all who live on the earth are in the flesh, is it not impossible for any living man to please God?

ANSWER: The word flesh has both a good and a bad meaning. In this text flesh means the domination of evil inclinations. No man who is thus dominated can please God. But when the evil propensities are controlled by the regenerating Holy Spirit, God is pleased. Every man in the world may please God by repentance and faith in Jesus Christ. The flesh may not only be controlled but be crucified.

— from Steele's Answers p. 52.

The Natural Man

QUESTION: In 1 Cor. 4:12 Paul speaks of the natural man. What are his characteristics? Our preachers says he is regenerate.

"But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God:for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned." (1 Corinthians 2:14 KJV.)

ANSWER: He is not spiritual but wholly animal. He has a sensuous nature with its subjection to appetite and passion. In Jude 19 he is "sensual," "earthly" and "devilish." If a man is known by the company he keeps, the natural man must be a bad fellow in great need of regeneration and entire sanctification. Except in 1 Cor. 15:44 "natural" Greek "physical" is in the New Testament always used in a bad sense. The preacher is a blind guide. We fear that both he and his hearers will fall into a ditch hard to get out of.

— from Steele's Answers pp. 51, 52.

The Dancing Choir

QUESTION: What is the duty of a Methodist Episcopal pastor towards a choir who dance, play cards, attend theaters, and some drink beer?

ANSWER: The book of Discipline places the choir under the control of the pastor, who may if he wishes have a committee of which he is chairman, or he may have the sole direction. Let him discreetly use his power to weed out improper persons.

— from Steele's Answers p. 51.

The Error of Antinomianism

Theological errors move in cycles, some times of very long periods. They resemble those comets of unknown orbits which occasionally dash into our solar system; but they are not as harmless. Often they leave moral ruin in their track. Since all Christian truth is practical, and aims at the moral transformation of men, all negations of that truth are deleterious; they not only obscure the truth and obstruct its purifying effect, but they positively corrupt and destroy souls.

This is specially true of errors which release men from obligation to the law of God. After St. Paul had demonstrated the impossibility of justification by works compensative for sin, and had established the doctrine of justification through faith in Christ which works by love and purifies the heart, there started up a class of teachers who drew from Paul's teachings the fallacious inference that the law of God is abolished in the case of the believer, who is henceforth delivered from its authority as the rule of life.

Give Us a Spiritual Protestantism!

There are multitudes of nominal Christians who confidently assert that it is the highest presumption and folly to expect, in modern times, that full dispensation of the Spirit concerning which so many excellent things are spoken in the Scriptures. They brand as a fanatic the man who proclaims to a slumbering Church the presence of the Holy Ghost, ready to raise the spiritually dead, and to transfigure the spiritually living.

Punishment for Sin vs. Sin's Natural Consequences

QUESTION: (a) Explain the difference between the punishment of sin and it's natural consequences. (b) May not Matt. 25:46 and Rev. 22:11 be a statement of the same thing from different standpoints?

Matthew 25:46: "And these shall go away into everlasting punishment:but the righteous into life eternal." (KJV)

Revelation 22:11: "He that is unjust, let him be unjust still:and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still:and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him be holy still." (KJV)

ANSWER: (a) Punishment relates only to the guilt of sin. Forgiveness removes the liability to punishment. It does not remove regret for sin in time nor in eternity. In this sense sin casts a shadow into heaven itself. In other words you cannot forgive the sin which God has forgiven. Nor does God, who forgives a sinner in middle life, restore the blessings lost in his wasted youth, such as education, and intellectual power and possibly physical health lost by sins against his body. The prodigal son was received by his Father, but the money lost by riotous living was not restored in the form of a second division of the paternal estate. Then again others suffer in consequence of one man's sin whose forgiveness does not arrest these evil consequences, such as the poverty of the drunkard's wife and children. His reformation and conversion to Christ does not restore the farm which has gone down his throat and lodged in the till of the saloon. I speak with deliberation and reverence when I say that God cannot forgive the natural consequences of sin, because he cannot change the past. To do so would falsify history. He is a God of truth. He can no more change the past than he can change the multiplication table. (b) There is a sense in which sin is its own punishment, as virtue is its own reward. Yet as this reward differs from that which God will bestow in heaven, so this punishment must differ from that which he will inflict in hell. What this final reward is, and final punishment, has not yet been revealed. It awaits the Day of Judgement. Hence in preaching it may not be best to make this distinction between natural consequences and penalty. There is a poem relating to an impenitent sinner, the last verse of every stanza ending thus:

"To be left alone with memory

Is hell enough for me."

Yet I cannot believe that such expressions as "the wrath of God," "the Day of Judgment," and "eternal judgment" are rhetorical figures for the natural consequences of sin. In that case the final sentence of the Judge would be superfluous. The assertion that the moral law automatically inflicts penalty on transgressors is a doctrine which strongly leans toward the denial of the existence of a personal moral Governor. I lay no foundation for pantheism.

— from Steele's Answers pp. 49-51.

Operas and Sunday Pleasure Riding

QUESTION: What should be done with a Sunday school superintendent whose example it would not be safe to follow in the matter of operas and Sunday pleasure riding?

ANSWER: Kindly labor with him. If he will not reform, you may persuade him to resign.

— from Steele's Answers p. 49

A Damaged Reciever

QUESTION: How would you treat a truly converted and wholly consecrated man who has so long been seeking purity of heart as to become a painfully chronic seeker? It should be noted that he is not in a perfect physical condition.

ANSWER: The last fact noted may be the cause of this difficulty. In reference to chronic cases of lack of assurance, Wesley says: "I believe this is usually owing either to disorder of body, or ignorance of the gospel promises." I have seen a case of despair because of ill health. At Clifton Springs Sanitarium my attention was directed to a Christian woman in total spiritual darkness and great distress of mind because she had no communion with her Saviour [as] in former years. Said I to her: "Why are you here?" "Because," she replied, "the plastering fell from the ceiling of my schoolroom where I was teaching and struck my head."I then told her that her Savior was still speaking to her, but that her telephone receiver was damaged by the concussion and that restored health would bring back her lost communion with the skies. Years afterwards she assured me that this was her experience. Such cases are to be treated with great tenderness and sympathy. It is comforting to know that "God knoweth our frame."

— from Steele's Answers pp. 48, 49.

Do We Experience God?

The subtle suggestion is sometimes presented that this whole matter of Christian experience is all illusory — a phenomenon of our own minds under the influence of causes wholly within itself. The thoughtful believer is sometimes annoyed by the thought that God has nothing to do with inward religious emotions — that what seems to come from without, and to move so marvelously within the soul, assuring of pardon and cleansing from sin, really arises from the hidden depths of our mysterious nature while intently contemplating religious ideas, and that there is no manifestation of God at all as an objective existence.

To this we have two answers.

We Trust. God Works.

Guest blog by Hannah Whithall Smith (1832-1911):

There is a certain work to be accomplished. We are to be delivered from the power of sin, and are to be made perfect in every good work to do the will of God. ‘Beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord,’ we are to be actually ‘changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord.’ We are to be transformed by the renewing of our minds, that we may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God. 

A real work is to be wrought in us and upon us. Besetting sins are to be conquered. Evil habits are to be overcome. Wrong dispositions and feelings are to be rooted out, and holy tempers and emotions are to be begotten. A positive transformation is to take place. So at least the Bible teaches. 

Now somebody must do this. Either we must do it for ourselves, or another must do it for us. We have most of us tried to do it for ourselves at first, and have grievously failed; then we discover from the Scriptures and from our own experience that it is a work we are utterly unable to do for ourselves, but that the Lord Jesus Christ has come on purpose to do it, and that He will do it for all who put themselves wholly into His hand, and trust Him to do it. 

Now under these circumstances, what is the part of the believer, and what is the part of the Lord? Plainly the believer can do nothing but trust; while the Lord, in whom he trusts, actually does the work intrusted to Him. Trusting and doing are certainly contrastive things, and often contradictory; but are they contradictory in this case? Manifestly not, because it is two different parties that are concerned.

— edited from: The Christian's Secret of a Happy Life Chapter 1.

"O Ye of Little Faith"

The most surprising fact which came to the knowledge of Jesus was the weakness of his disciples' faith. Descended from heaven, written all over with proofs of his divinity, and bearing the great seal of God in his right hand — the miracle-working power — he stood unrecognized in the world. A little band of a dozen or more attach themselves to his fortunes, and avow faith in him; but often their perception of the wonderful beauty of his character was so dim, and their glimpses of his divinity were so brief, that they relapsed into distressing doubt, and were on the point of abandoning him forever.

The Spirit Bears Witness With Our Spirit

QUESTION: In Rom. 8:16 is it not more correct to say the Spirit bears witness to our spirit instead of with our spirit?

ANSWER: The Greek says "with," there being two concurring witnesses, our consciousness and the Spirit of God. This makes the certainty as strong as God can make it.

— from Steele's Answers p 48.

Must We Use Scriptural Terms?

QUESTION: Must we not use Scriptural terms in order to enter into any desired state of grace?

ANSWER: God can save a person grossly ignorant of such terms as he saved an Indian squaw convicted of sin who thought she must pray in English to the white man's God. She repeated the only two English words she knew, September and October, till she was assured of forgiveness by the witness of the Spirit. But if any well instructed person is ashamed of the words of Christ descriptive of any state of Christian experience he not only cannot enter into that grace, but it is said "of him will I be ashamed." Yet when perfection, or holiness, or perfect love, is confessed we should be studiously cautious to do it in such a way as to glorify God and not ourselves. A failure to do this has brought much needless reproach upon a good cause.

— from Steele's Answers pp. 47, 48.

Dr. Steele Discusses His Book "Antinomianism Revived"

This is the fourth in my ongoing series of necro-interviews with Holiness writers of the past. Today we talk with Dr. Daniel Steele about his 1887 book A Substitute for Holiness or Antinomianism Revived. This book is quite a bit different than the author's other books. In this book he writes to refute a theological error which was just then becoming popular in the Christian world — Dispensationalism. This is the view made popular in our day by such people as Hal Lindsey, Tim LaHaye (of the Left Behind books) and numerous others. For Dr. Steele this was far more than a purely speculative concern about the details of end time events. Read on, and you will see what I mean.

In the 20th Century the Dispensational system of interpretation of end time events became extremely popular in the Christian world — especially here in the United States. If anything, it has now become even more popular. It was originally spread through the Scofield Reference Bible, but since that time, there have been many other popular books and Christian films that have spread this view: Hal Lindsey's The Late, Great Planet Earth, the A Thief in the Night film (1972), and, most prominently, the Left Behind books by Tim LaHaye and Jerry Jenkins.

This view is known popularly as the "pre-trib" view. Many Christians today have never heard any other view. It teaches that God works differently in different dispensations, but is best known for it's distinctive doctrine of the Rapture — that Christ will come to take his followers out of the world before a great end time Tribulation period. (I have written against this teaching myself: Rapture Theology.)

As I understand it, this view of the end times was just beginning to take hold of the Christian world in your day, Dr. Steele.

Can Law Alone Save?

QUESTION: Explain Galatians 3:22-25 and answer the question, Can a sinner come to Christ through the constraint of the law alone without faith in Christ?

22 But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.  23 But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed.  24 Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.  25 But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.  (KJV)

ANSWER: Paul teaches the opposite, that law can only show the sinner's guilt, but cannot remove it; just as the straight-edge used by the carpenter cannot straighten out the crooks which it reveals. If the legalist or moralist could find perfect rest of soul in his own good works, he would never feel the need of the Saviour to give him rest. He must despair of salvation on the ground that he has perfectly kept the law before he will plant his feet on the new ground, faith in Christ. He will then render glad obedience to him as his Benefactor and will no longer need a pedagogue or child-leader to drag his unwilling feet. Love to the Lawgiver has taken the place of fear of the law. But law is still his rule of life. Believing in Christ is what is meant by coming to Christ. By faith he is united with Christ and by faith he stands. He is freed from the moral law as the ground of acceptance with God and also as a motive to good works, which will now spontaneously appear as the fruit of faith. This is what we mean when we say the believer is not freed from the law as the rule of life.

— from Steele's Answers pp. 46, 47.

Editor's Note: Mark H. Mann on the Theology of Daniel Steele, etc.

It's amazing what one finds by just clicking around the Internet.

Today I found an interesting and perceptive brief overview of Daniel Steele's theology of Christian holiness over at Google books.

It is a section from the first chapter of Perfecting Grace: Holiness, Human Being, and the Sciences by Mark H. Mann (Professor of Theology @ Point Loma Nazarene University)>

It is entitled "Daniel Steele and the Theology of the Holiness Movement" and it begins on page 29 of the book.

I think Mann is correct that Steele embraced Pentecostal terminology because of his embrace of John Fletcher's doctrine of Dispensations. If we don't get that, we miss what's going on in his thinking. See: The Three Dispensations. Pentecostalism as we know it today did not arise until after 1900 & the Azusa Street revival, so Steele's use of this kind of terminology was unrelated to that. It grew out of the teachings of Fletcher, who was read side-by-side with Wesley among the early Methodist preachers.

Anyway the book is here: Perfecting Grace: Holiness, Human Being, and the Sciences by Mark H. Mann. The section on Daniel Steele begins on page 29.

But, be sure to read the whole chapter. I think it's quite perceptive.

— Craig L. Adams

Seek Nothing Less Than the Divine Presence

There is a great deal that is shadowy and dubious about the communion that many have with God. They have no such consciousness of having met and conversed with God, as they have of their communications with men. There has been no bright and animating manifestation of God to their souls. They have not felt the power of his present majesty; nor have his Divine perfections taken hold upon them as by a special revelation. They know that God is revealed in his word as gracious and merciful toward the race of men; but they have not considered that it is the province of faith to single out the believer, and bring him by himself into the presence of his Maker.

The Communion of the Holy Spirit

It is not by accident that, in the apostolic benediction, "the communion of the Holy Ghost" comes last. It is the crowning blessing of the Triune God. Without it the "grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God," could not be satisfactorily and joyfully known. These might exist as a matter of inference from the gracious dispositions and holy aspirations of the soul. They cannot be immediately known by a knowledge excluding all doubt, except as they are uncovered by the Holy Ghost. "He shall receive of mine and show it unto you." "He shall testify of me."

Scriptures About Women and Ministry

QUESTION: Explain:

(a) 1 Corinthians 11:1-16:

 1 Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ.  2 Now I praise you, brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances, as I delivered them to you.  3 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.  4 Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head.  5 But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven.  6 For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered.  7 For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man.  8 For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man.  9 Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.  10 For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels.  11 Nevertheless neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man, in the Lord.  12 For as the woman is of the man, even so is the man also by the woman; but all things of God.  13 Judge in yourselves: is it comely that a woman pray unto God uncovered?  14 Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?  15 But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering.  16 But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God." (KJV)

(b) 1 Corinthians 14:35, 36:

35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church. 36 What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only? (KJV)

(c) 1 Timothy 2:11, 12:

11 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. 12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.

ANSWER: (a) This indirectly permits a woman to pray and to prophesy or preach by prescribing the manner. (b) Having thus permitted her praying and speaking in public, it is not like Paul to absolutely forbid her in the same letter. What he does prohibit is the interruption of the preacher by asking questions. Our missionaries in the Orient are thus often interrupted when preaching to women. (c) This teaches that there can be two captains on one deck and designates the man as captain and the woman as mate. In Rom. 16:1 Paul calls Phoebe a deacon (that is Greek) of the church at Cenchrea. In I Tim. 2:3-11 the qualities of women deacons are indicated, and deacons in addition to caring for the poor and sick, preached the Gospel, as did Stephen. In Rom. 16. Paul sends greetings to seven women, most of them by name, as fellow laborers "in the Lord." If women are not to use their gift of speech for Christ, who has broken their galling and heavy yoke, what a mistake God made when he endowed Frances E. Willard and other women with extraordinary persuasive address!

— from Steele's Answers p. 46.

Confessing Christ

A confessing mouth always attends a believing heart.

"Come and hear, all ye that fear God, and I will declare what he hath done for my soul."

This declaration, constantly put forth by living men, is perpetual testimonial to the spiritual medicine advertised in the word of God. A specific held up before the public from year to year, unaccompanied by attested cures, comes to be distrusted and neglected. Hence even the blood of sprinkling, potent to cleanse the heart from all unrighteousness, needs something more than the advertisement of the inspired penman; it needs the joyful voice of the healed leper, crying, "It hath cleansed me!"

Partakers of the Divine Nature?

QUESTION: In what sense are regenerated persons partakers of the Divine nature?

ANSWER: This is another figure for denoting a moral likeness to God. They who have Christian love, holiness, justice, and truth have a nature like God's nature. To insist that they literally have his nature is to insist that they are gods. Many difficulties are surmounted and many errors are avoided by the exercise of reason in discriminating between the literal and the metaphorical in the Holy Scriptures.

— from Steele's Answers p. 45.

In What Sense Was Adam a Son of God?

QUESTION: Luke 3:36 declares "Adam was the son of God." Must not a son be a partaker of the nature of his father?

ANSWER: Yes, if he is a real son. Adam was a figurative, not a real, son of God. He has but one son. All others who are like him in moral character are metaphorical sons of God. If they lose their similarity to him by ceasing to love what he loves and to hate what he hates, they lose their sonship and become figurative children of the devil because they have become like him.

— from Steele's Answers p. 45.

Accounts of the Resurrection

QUESTION: In the account of the resurrection of Jesus, Matthew and Mark say that there was one angel, or rather "an angel," but Luke and John say there were two. Please harmonize.

ANSWER: There is no discrepancy here, nor in the number of Marys at the tomb — two being mentioned by Matthew, Mark and Luke, while John speaks of Mary Magdalene alone. Similar instances are the demoniacs of Gadara, and the blind men at Jericho; where, in both cases, Matthew speaks of two persons, but Mark and Luke mention only one. Something peculiar in one rendered him more prominent than the other. When Lafayette revisited America in 1824, he was everywhere received with joy and much was said about him in the daily papers; some of which did not mention his son, who was with him, eclipsed not by the shadow of his father, but by his glory as a Major General in Washington's army. This is the sound rule of interpretation in such cases: "He who speaks of the larger number includes the smaller; he who mentions the smaller does not deny the larger."

— from Steele's Answers pp. 44, 45.