Others like be complete Features >>
About the Book
"BE COMPLETE" by Warren W. Wiersbe is a practical guide on how to live a fulfilled and balanced Christian life by exploring the Book of Colossians. The author encourages readers to seek completion in Christ by examining the themes of faith, humility, and spiritual growth. Through insightful commentary and engaging storytelling, Wiersbe offers timeless principles for achieving spiritual wholeness and contentment in a world filled with distractions and challenges.
Charles Finney
Childhood and Teen years
Charles Grandison Finney was born the year after Wesley died on 29th August, 1792 in Warren, Connecticut. In 1794 his family moved to New York state, eventually settling at Henderson, near Lake Ontario. Although he received only a brief formal education he decided to study law and joined the practice of a local lawyer, Benjamin Wright. He was also very musical, played the cello and directed the choir at the local Presbyterian Church pastured by Rev. George Gale.
His conversion
His conversion on October 10th 1821 reads like something out of the book of Acts. Smitten with conviction from Bible reading he decided to âsettle the question of my soulâs salvation at once, that if it were possible, I would make my peace with God.â (Autobiography)
This conviction increased to an unbearable level over the next couple of days and came to an head when he was suddenly confronted with an âinward voice.â He was inwardly questioned about his spiritual condition and finally received revelation about the finished work of Christ and his own need to give up his sins and submit to Christâs righteousness.
As he sought God in a nearby wood he was overwhelmed with an acute sense of his own wickedness and pride but finally submitted his life to Christ. Back at work that afternoon he was filled with a profound sense of tenderness, sweetness and peace. When work was over and he bade his employer goodnight, he then experienced a mighty baptism in the Holy Spirit, which was recorded as vividly as the day he experienced it, though it was penned some fifty years later.
The next morning Finney announced to a customer that he was leaving his law studies to become a preacher of the Gospel.
Charles Finney licensed to preach
He was licensed to preach in 1823 and ordained as an evangelist in 1824. His penetrating preaching was quite different from many local ministers and included an obvious attempt to break away from the traditional and, as he saw it, dead, orthodox Calvinism. He married to Lydia Andrews in October 1824 and was also joined by Daniel Nash (1774-1831), known popularly as âFather Nash.â Undoubtedly Nashâs special ministry of prayer played a great part in Finneyâs growing success as an evangelist.
Things really took off when he preached in his old church, where Rev. Gale still ministered. Numerous converts and critics followed! Similar results were experienced in nearby towns of Rome and Utica. Soon newspapers were reporting his campaigns and he began drawing large crowds with dramatic responses.
Soon he was preaching in the largest cities of the north with phenomenal results. Campaign after campaign secured thousands of converts.
The high point of Finneyâs revival career was reached at Rochester, New York, during his 1830-1 meetings. Shopkeepers closed their businesses and the whole city seemed to centre on the revivalist. Responding to his irresistible logic and passionate arguments many of his converts were lawyers, merchants and those from a higher income and professional status.
His Preaching
Finney openly preached a modified Calvinism, influenced with his own theology of conversion and used what were perceived to be ârevivalistic techniques.â
These âmeansâ included the use of the anxious bench (a special place for those under conviction), protracted meetings, women allowed to pray in mixed meetings, publicly naming those present resisting God in meetings and the hurried admission of new converts into church membership. Opponents viewed his preaching of the law as âscare tacticsâ and his persuasive appeals for sinners to come to Christ for salvation were seen as over-emphasising the responsibility of men and ignoring the sovereignty of God.
His theology and practise soon became known as the âNew Measuresâ and attracted many opponents from the Old School Presbyterians led by Asahel Nettleton (himself no stranger to true revival and , the revivalistic Congregationalists headed by Lyman Beecher.
Pastor at Chatham Street Chapel
Finney accepted an appointment as pastor of Chatham Street Chapel in New York City in 1832 where he remained until 1837. It was during this time that he delivered a series of sermons published in 1835 as âLectures on Revivals of Religion.â Here he clearly stated his views regarding revivals being products of the correct use of human means. Such was the controversy that he left the Presbyterian denomination and joined the Congregationalists in 1836.
Oberlin College
The next year he became professor of theology at Oberlin College (Ohio) where he taught until his death. He was President here from 1851 until 1866, but still continued regular revival meetings in urban settings (twice in England, 1848, 1851) until 1860. During his stay at Oberlin he produced his, Lectures to Professing Christians (1836), Sermons on Important Subjects (1839) and his famous Memoirs.
The Father of Modern Revivalism
There is no doubt that Charles Grandison Finney well-deserves the title âThe Father of Modern Revivalism.â He was an evangelistic pioneer whose model was followed by a long line of revivalists from D. L. Moody to Billy Graham. His writing have made a massive impact on the entire evangelical world and particularly the âLectures on Revivalsâ which has, arguably, ignited more fires of revival than any other single piece literature in evangelical history.
This âPrince of Revivalistsâ passed away peacefully at Oberlin on Sunday, 16th August, 1875 aged almost 83 years.
Bibliography: I Will Pour Out My Spirit, R. E. Davies, 1997; Ed: A. Scott Moreau, Baker Evangelical Dictionary of World Missions, 2000; Dictionary of Evangelical Biography 1730-1860, Vol. 1, 1995.
Tony Cauchi
How Did Evil Begin
Why is there a Satan? Why does a being exist whose name means accuser â a âdevil,â which means slanderer, a âdeceiver of the whole worldâ (Revelation 12:9), a âruler of this worldâ (John 12:31; 14:30; 16:11), a âgod of this ageâ (2 Corinthians 4:4 NKJV), a âprince of the power of the airâ (Ephesians 2:2), a âBeelzebul, the prince of demonsâ (Matthew 12:24)? Where does he come from? How did it come about that he ever sinned? The letters of Jude and 2 Peter give us clues. Jude 6 says, âThe angels who did not stay within their own position of authority, but left their proper dwelling, he has kept in eternal chains under gloomy darkness until the judgment of the great day.â And 2 Peter 2:4 says, âGod did not spare angels when they sinned, but cast them into hell and committed them to chains of gloomy darkness to be kept until the judgment.â It appears, then, that some of Godâs holy angels (we may assume, in principle, that Satan is included, whether these verses refer to his original rebellion or a later one) âsinned,â or as Jude says, âdid not stay within their own position of authority.â In other words, the sin was a kind of insurrection, a desire for more power and more authority than they were appointed by God to have. So Satan and the other fallen angels originate as created holy angels who rebel against God, reject him as their all-satisfying King, and set out on a course of self-exaltation and presumed self-determination. They do not want to be subordinate. They do not want to be sent by God to serve others (Hebrews 1:14). They want to have final authority over themselves. And they want to exalt themselves above God. Most Popular Answer But these thoughts about the origin of Satan do not answer the question we began with: Why is there a Satan? They simply push the question back to the very beginning. Why did any holy angel sin? Here is the most popular answer of our modern era: All of Godâs creatures were created âfree moral agents.â If God had made them otherwise they would have been mere machines with no will of their own. . . . To be a âfree moral agentâ implies that one has the power of âchoice.â . . . As long as Satan chose the âWill of Godâ there was no âEvilâ in the Universe, but the moment he chose to follow his own Will, then he fell, and by persuading others to follow him he introduced âEvilâ into the Universe. (Clarence Larkin, The Spirit World, 12â14) There are at least two problems with this presumed answer: (1) it does not answer the question and (2) it assumes that God cannot exert sufficient influence on a morally responsible being so as to keep that being safe in the worship of God â to keep him from sinning. âFree Willâ Philosophy First, it does not answer the question, Why did any holy angel sin? To say that a perfect angel sinned because he had the power to do so is no answer. Why would a perfectly holy angel in Godâs infinitely beautiful presence suddenly be inclined to hate God? âFree willâ â that is, ultimate self-determination â is not an answer. It explains nothing. âFree willâ is a name put on a mystery. But it is not the biblical name. Because the Bible never teaches that there is such a thing as ultimate human, or ultimate demonic, self-determination. That is a philosophical notion forced onto the Bible, not taught by the Bible. In fact, that philosophical notion was one of Satanâs first designs for humanity â to persuade Adam and Eve that they could be ultimately self-determining, and that this would be good for them (Genesis 3:4â5). Both of those ideas were false. They could not become ultimately self-determining, and it was deadly for them to try. The human race has been ruined by these notions ever since. Slandering Godâs Saving Power Second, Larkinâs appeal to angelic self-determination assumes that God cannot exert sufficient influence on a morally responsible being so as to keep that being safe in the worship of God forever. Larkinâs deadly mistake is to assume that if God exerted such influence, the angels âwould have been mere machines with no will of their own.â This too is a philosophical assumption forced on the Bible, not taught by the Bible. In fact, the Bible pervasively teaches the opposite â that God can and does exert sufficient influence on morally responsible beings (his children!) to keep them safe in the worship of God forever. When the Bible says, for example, that God will âcause [us] to walk in [his] statutesâ (Ezekiel 36:27), and that he is âworking in us that which is pleasing in his sightâ (Hebrews 13:21), and that he âworks in [us], both to will and to work for his good pleasureâ (Philippians 2:13), and that the work he began in us he âwill bring . . . to completion at the day of Jesus Christâ (Philippians 1:6), and that he âwill sustain [us] to the end, guiltless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christâ (1 Corinthians 1:8), and that âthose whom he justified he also glorifiedâ (Romans 8:30) â when God says all this, he means for us to stop talking nonsense about such glorious influence turning us into machines. It doesnât. It is life-giving grace. It is effective. It keeps us safe forever. And to call it machine-making is slanderous. If God did not exert sovereign influence over our wayward hearts, we would all fall away. Prone to wander, Lord, I feel it, Prone to leave the God I love. Hereâs my heart, oh, take and seal it, Seal it for Thy courts above. âIf God did not exert sovereign influence over our wayward hearts, we would all fall away.â Godâs âsealingâ (Ephesians 1:13) â his decisive, keeping influence â does not turn us into machines. It keeps us safe in the worship of God forever. No one who is justified will fail to be glorified (Romans 8:30). Heaven will never see an insurrection among the saints. Not because we are better than the angels, but because the blood of Jesus secured the new covenant for Godâs elect, where God says, âI will put the fear of me in their hearts, that they may not turn from meâ (Jeremiah 32:40). He bought this pledge for his children by his blood. They will not commit treason. Let us praise such sovereign, merciful, keeping influence. God save us from slandering his saving power. It is false when Larkin assumes that God could not have kept his holy angels from sinning â safe in the worship of God. It is false to assume that such sovereign influence would make angels, or humans, into robots. It doesnât. Redemptionâs Stage What then is the answer to the question, Why did any holy angel sin? The answer is that God had a wise and gracious purpose. That is why it happened. Some of Godâs holy angels sinned because their fall would set in motion a history of redemption that would fulfill the infinitely wise purposes of God in creation. All the âunsearchable . . . judgmentsâ and all the âinscrutable . . . waysâ of God flow from the depths of his wisdom (Romans 11:33). âO Lord, how manifold are your works! In wisdom have you made them allâ (Psalm 104:24). He is âthe only wise Godâ (Romans 16:27). All that happens from eternity to eternity happens according to the wisdom of the one âwho works all things according to the counsel of his willâ (Ephesians 1:11). And we know it was a gracious purpose because Godâs plan before the creation of the world was to show grace to unworthy sinners. Sin came into being as part of a plan to show grace to sinners. â[God] saved us and called us to a holy calling, not because of our works but because of his own purpose and grace, which he gave us in Christ Jesus before the ages beganâ (2 Timothy 1:9). The plan before creation was that Christ would be the Lamb slain for sinners â sinners whose names were âwritten before the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb who was slainâ (Revelation 13:8). Christ slain for sinners was the plan before any human sinned. Two Unassailable Truths But notice what question I am not answering here. I am not answering the question, How did the first sin happen in the heart of a holy angel? The why question I have answered by saying the first sin happened as part of Godâs wisdom and purposes and planning. But that assumes God was able to see to it that the first sin happened without himself being a sinner, and without making the first sinning angel into a machine. I do not know the answer to the question of how God did this. This, to me, is one of the great mysteries of biblical teaching that I cannot explain â how God governs the will of sinful beings, yet, in doing so, does not sin, and does not take away their responsibility. I see that it is true, because the Bible teaches it, but how God does this remains a mystery. Recall that above I said that âfree willâ â ultimate self-determination â is the name some people put on this mystery. Then I added that this is not the biblical name. Because the Bible never teaches that there is such a thing as ultimate self-determination, except in God. The Bible doesnât give the mystery a name. Rather it teaches two truths again and again: God governs the hearts and minds of all sinful beings without himself sinning, and they are truly and justly accountable for all their sins. Sovereign over Satan Since we are not told explicitly how things transpired in the fall of Satan, it is illuminating to study how God relates to Satanâs will now. Is God helpless when a satanic will chooses to do evil? Can God restrain that will? Or would that only turn the will into a machine? The biblical answer is that God has the right and power to restrain Satan anytime he pleases. Consider these examples. 1. Though Satan is called âthe ruler of this worldâ (John 12:31), Daniel 4:17 says, âThe Most High rules the kingdom of men and gives it to whom he will.â Satanâs world rule is subordinate to Godâs. 2. Though unclean spirits are everywhere doing deceptive and murderous things, Jesus Christ has all authority over them. âHe commands even the unclean spirits, and they obey himâ (Mark 1:27). 3. Satan is a roaring lion, prowling and seeking someone to devour (1 Peter 5:8). Peter explains that the jaws of this lion are, in fact, the sufferings of persecution: âResist him, firm in your faith, knowing that the same kinds of suffering are being experienced by your brotherhood throughout the worldâ (1 Peter 5:9). But this suffering, Peter says, does not happen apart from Godâs sovereign will: âIt is better to suffer for doing good, if that should be Godâs willâ (1 Peter 3:17). 4. Satan is a murderer from the beginning (John 8:44). But God decides, finally, who lives and who dies and when: âIf the Lord wills, we will live and do this or thatâ (James 4:15). 5. When Satan aims to destroy Job and prove that God is not his treasure, he must get permission from God before he attacks his possessions (Job 1:12) or his body (Job 2:6). 6. Satan is the great tempter. He wants us to sin. Luke tells us that Satan was behind Peterâs three denials. âSatan demanded to have you, that he might sift you like wheatâ (Luke 22:31). But Jesus is sovereign over this tempterâs work, and its outcome. He says to Peter, âI have prayed for you that your faith may not fail. And when you have turned again, strengthen your brothersâ (Luke 22:32). Not âif you turn,â but âwhen you turn.â Christ rules over all of Satanâs designs. Satan aims to fail Peter. Jesus aims to fit him for leadership. 7. Paul says in 2 Corinthians 4:4 that Satan âhas blinded the minds of the unbelievers.â But two verses later, God removes that blindness. âGod, who said, âLet light shine out of darkness,â has shone in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christâ (2 Corinthians 4:6). So now back to the question about the origin of Satanâs sinfulness. Is God helpless before the will of his own angels? Is there a power outside himself that limits his rule over their choices and plans? My conclusion is that, from cover to cover, the Bible presents God as governing Satan and his demons. He has the right and power to restrain them any time he pleases. Guarding the Mystery The sum of the matter, then, about where a sinful Satan came from is this: He was a holy angel who mysteriously came to prefer self-exaltation over God-exaltation. He fell into the delusion that ultimate self-determination was possible for a finite creature, and that it was preferable to submitting to God. This fall was part of Godâs all-wise plan. It did not take him off guard. How God saw to it that this part of his plan came to pass, without himself sinning and without turning Satan into a machine, I do not know. âFrom cover to cover, the Bible presents God as governing Satan and his demons.â Trying to explain this mystery with so-called âfree willâ â that is, ultimate self-determination â is unbiblical and vacuous. It is unbiblical because the idea that any of Godâs creatures has ultimate self-determination is not taught anywhere in the Bible. And it is vacuous because it does not explain anything. Simply asserting that a holy angel had the âpower of choiceâ offers no explanation of why a perfectly holy being in Godâs infinitely beautiful presence would suddenly be inclined to hate God. We should probably take our cue from the reticence of the Bible to speak about Satanâs origin. He is there in the first pages of the Bible with no explanation. The mystery of his first sin remains just that. We surround it and guard it with biblical truth, lest unbiblical and vacuous explanations spread like a smog over the Scriptures and obscure the glory of Godâs saving purposes. Article by John Piper Founder & Teacher, desiringGod.org