Others like body of christ: a reality Features >>
Has Christianity Failed You
Unchurching (Christianity Without Churchianity)
Basic Elements Of The Christian Life Vol II
In The School Of Christ - Lessons On Holiness In John 13–17
The Freedom Of Self Forgetfulness
Love Not The World
Jealousy: The Sin No One Talks About
Founded On The Rock
Spirit-Controlled Temperament
Humility
About the Book
"Body of Christ: A Reality" by Watchman Nee explores the concept of the Body of Christ as presented in the Bible, emphasizing the importance of believers understanding and experiencing this spiritual reality in their lives. Nee provides insightful and practical teachings on how Christians can function effectively as members of the Body of Christ, working together in unity and love to fulfill God's purposes on earth. Through this book, readers are encouraged to deepen their relationship with Christ and with one another, leading to a more vibrant and impactful Christian community.
Richard Sibbes
Richard Sibbes was born in Tostock, Suffolk, four miles from Bury St. Edmunds, in 1577.[1] He is the eldest son of Paul Sibbes and Joane. His father was a wheelwright who hoped Sibbes would be in the same field of occupation. Instead of following the footsteps of his father, young Sibbes, out of love for reading, would choose books over wooden wheels.[2] Truly enough, throughout his lifetime, books were part of Sibbes’ life.[3] Proof of this interest to books is his accomplishments as a lecturer [pastor], fellow tutor, vicar, and for obtaining various degrees in his academic education.
Sibbes’ legacy of his seven-volume work was collected by A. B. Grosart which was published from 1862 to 1864.[4] Sibbes’ ministries and his works spread throughout England even after his death. However, he was never married.
Sibbes died on July 5, 1635, in his chambers at Gray’s Inn.[5] J. I. Packer noted that Sibbes’ left more than two million words on paper after his death.[6]
Educational Background
Sibbes’ started studying at St. John’s College, Cambridge when he was eighteen, in 1595. He then proceeded to finish a Bachelor of Arts in 1599. He received a fellowship grant in 1601. Sibbes continued studying, finishing a Master of Arts degree by 1602.
Sibbes became a prominent preacher in Cambridge and got the endorsement to apply for a Bachelor of Divinity. After his defense and fulfilling the requirements, he earned this degree in 1610.[7] Furthermore, in almost two decades, Sibbes received his Doctor of Divinity in 1627 after returning from London for his mastership at St. Katherine.[8]
Ministerial Experience and Vocation
Sibbes’ conversion happened after hearing Paul Bayne’s sermon in 1603. Bayne succeeded William Perkins at St. Andrews, Cambridge.[9] During Sibbes’ stay in Cambridge, as a fellow, he handled and supervised five to six students for a tutorial.[10] Sibbes held various vocations such as being chaplain, lecturer, and got a promotion from mere fellow to senior fellowship. After being a senior dean at St. John, Sibbes became the master of St. Katherine’s College in 1626.[11]
As a preacher, Sibbes received his ordination in Norwich, in 1607. He became the minister of Thurston in 1608. Later, in 1610, Sibbes accepted the offer as a lecturer of Holy Trinity Church, Cambridge until he was called to be a lecturer at Gray’s Inn, London, in 1617.[12] This lectureship lasts until his death.
Even during Sibbes’ mastership at St. Katherine, he remained a lecturer at Gray’s Inn. In 1633, through the appointment of King Charles I, Sibbes became the vicar of Holy Trinity Church, Cambridge. The positions held by Sibbes were mastership at St. Katherine, a lecturer at Gray’s Inn, and vicar of Holy Trinity Church.
Influence of the Heavenly Doctor
Throughout Sibbes ministries, prominence followed as he influenced many Puritan ministers. Sibbes, as an influencer, is known to be the “pastor of pastors,” not just in the Church of England but even to Presbyterians and Independent Congregationalists.[13] Sibbes was responsible for John Cotton’s conversion in 1612.[14]
Moreover, he persuaded John Preston’s style in preaching, transforming from witty sermons to more plain but spiritual preaching.[15] Sibbes’ book, The Bruised Reed, encouraged Richard Baxter to gain settled-conviction on his conversion.[16] Likewise, Sibbes helped Thomas Goodwin, the chief editor of most of his works, to keep away from Arminianism.[17]
Sibbes’ ministry extends even to common people. Humphrey Mills, a layman, shared his testimony about Sibbes’ ministry. Mills was spiritually refreshed and brought to peace and joy after hearing Sibbes’ “sweet soul-melting Gospel-sermons.”[18] Sibbes’ encouragement did not end in the days of Puritans. Martyn Lloyd-Jones, one of the greatest preachers in the twentieth century, was grateful for Sibbes’ works. Lloyd-Jones, in his spiritual dryness, said that Sibbes’ books “quietened, soothed, comforted, encouraged, and healed [him].”[19]
Sibbes was a renowned Puritan throughout Cambridge, London, and even to Amsterdam. Mainly because of his various offices plus broad networks outside the church. He remained a moderate Puritan perceiving the Church of England as the true church. Sibbes encouraged other Separatists to return and warned the moderates not to dissent.
Yet many historians and scholars misinterpreted Sibbes in his theology and ministry. Thankfully, Mark Dever, in his recent work, argues contrary to many historians that Sibbes was dismissed in his ministry. Dever also concludes that Sibbes did not drift away from Calvinism, claiming that he was a thoroughly Reformed preacher and never became non-conformist, rather a moderate puritan.[20]
Sibbes, through his works, are still penetrating churches and seminaries up to this day. Recently, his seven-volume set was published by The Banner of Truth Trust in 2001. The best introduction for Sibbes’ works, personally, is his The Bruised Reed and the Smoking Flax. For Michael Reeves’ opinion, Sibbes is “the best introduction to the Puritans…. Reading him is like sitting in the sunshine: he gets into your heart and warms it to Christ.”[21]
References
[1] Alexander B. Grosart, “Memoir of Richard Sibbes, D.D.,” in Richard Sibbes, The Works of Richard Sibbes, ed. Alexander Grosart, 7 vols. (1862-1864; reprint, Carlisle, Pennsylvania: The Banner of Truth Trust, 2001), 1:xxvii.
[2] Joel Beeke, “Richard Sibbes on Entertaining the Holy Spirit,” in The Beauty and Glory of the Holy Spirit, ed. Joel Beeke and Joseph Pipa Jr. (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Reformation Heritage Books, 2012), 228. Cf. Joel Beeke and Mark Jones, A Puritan Theology: Doctrine for Life (Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 2012), chap. 36, Kindle.
[3] Joel Beeke and Randall Pederson, Meet the Puritans (Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 2006), 534-5.
[4] Mark Dever, “The Works of Richard Sibbes,” in You Must Read: Books that Have Shaped Our Lives (Carlisle, PA: The Banner of Truth Trust, 2015), 154.
[5] Grosart, “Memoir,” in Sibbes, Works, 1:cxxxi.
[6] J. I. Packer, foreword to Richard Sibbes: Puritanism and Calvinism in Late Elizabethan and Early Stuart England, by Mark E. Dever (Macon, Georgia: Mercer University Press, 2000), ix.
[7] Dever, Richard Sibbes, 37-38. Bachelor of Divinity, according to Dr. Shawn Wright is equivalent with Master of Divinity today, “Lectures in English Puritanism” (The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, Louisville, KY, Spring 2020), but the process is different. Dever noted in his work that Sibbes undergone two public preaching, one in English and another in Latin, and two defense topics chosen by the panelists.
[8] Grosart, “Memoir,” in Sibbes, Works, 1:cxi.
[9] Beeke and Pederson, Meet the Puritans, 534-5.
[10] Dever, Richard Sibbes, 30-31.
[11] Dever, 31-34, 46.
[12] Beeke and Pederson, Meet the Puritans, 534-6.
[13] Beeke, “Richard Sibbes on Entertaining the Holy Spirit,” 230.
[14] Dever, Richard Sibbes, 40.
[15] Beeke and Pederson, Meet the Puritans, 535-7.
[16] Richard Baxter, The Autobiography of Richard Baxter (Bedford St., London: J.M. Dent & Sons Ltd., 1931), 7. Baxter’s father bought Sibbes’ book from a peddler and gave it to Richard Baxter. Cf. Timothy K. Beougher, Richard Baxter and Conversion: A Study of the Puritan Concept of Becoming a Christian (Scotland, UK: Christian Focus Publications, 2007), 21.
[17] Dever, Richard Sibbes, 41.
[18] Ronald Frost, “The Bruised Reed by Richard Sibbes (1577-1635)” in Kelly M. Kapic and Randal C. Gleason, The Devoted Life: An Invitation to the Puritan Classics (Downers Grove, IL: Intervarsity Press, 2004), 80-81. Quoting from a collection of Puritan testimonials by John Rogers, Ohel or Bethshemesh, A Tarbernacle for the Sun (London, n.p., 1653), 410.
[19] D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones, Preaching and Preachers (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1972), 175. Cf. Publisher’s Foreword to The Bruised Reed, by Richard Sibbes, x.
[20] Dever, Richard Sibbes, 211-8.
[21] Michael Reeves, “A Short Biography of Richard Sibbes,” in Richard Sibbes, Christ it Best; or, St. Paul’s Strait (Carlisle, PA: Banner of Truth Trust, 2012), 66.
The Blissful and Trivial Life - How Entertainment Deprives a Soul
When we, as a society, stopped reading and started watching, we began thinking and talking less — at least with the same substance or effectiveness. That was the bright red flag Neil Postman began waving in the sixties, captured for future generations in his classic work, Amusing Ourselves to Death. The book was published in 1985, the year before I was born. With the introduction of the television, Postman observed, entertainment did not merely become a bigger and bigger part of our lives — it became our lives. And everything else in our lives — news, politics, education, even religion — was increasingly forced to perform on its stage. Suddenly, everything had to be entertaining. Newspapers gave way to “the nightly news”; classroom lessons made their way to Sesame Street; worship services transformed into televised concerts with TED talks. “The television slowly taught us that nothing was worth our time unless it was entertaining.” The television slowly taught us that nothing was worth our time unless it was entertaining. And anything entertaining, almost by definition, requires less of us — less thinking, less study, less work. Entertainment, after all, isn’t meant to be taken seriously. But when everything is entertainment, doesn’t that mean little, if anything, can be taken seriously? For those who take the glory of God seriously, and our joy in him seriously, that becomes a very serious question. What Will Ruin Society? Postman warned about this devolution long before others noticed what was happening. He writes, [George] Orwell warns that we will be overcome by an externally imposed oppression. But in [Aldous] Huxley’s vision, no Big Brother is required to deprive people of their autonomy, maturity, and history. As he saw it, people will come to love their oppression, to adore the technologies that undo their capacities to think. What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one. . . . In short, Orwell feared that what we hate will ruin us. Huxley feared that what we love will ruin us. This book is about the possibility that Huxley, not Orwell, was right. (Amusing Ourselves to Death, xix) When he wrote those words, television had only been around for thirty years (invented much earlier, but not common in households until the fifties). The internet would not become publicly available until the 90s. Social media didn’t come along for another fifteen years (and really didn’t become widespread until the iPhone in 2007, several years after Postman died). If Postman was right about the early years of television, how much more today — a day when we no longer have to schedule time to sit and watch our favorite shows, but carry our entertainment with us literally everywhere we go? If entertainment could control our lives from a small box in the living room, how much more so when it’s nearly surgically attached to us on our phones? Postman, I believe, was more correct than even he realized — and the implications are not just social or cultural, but spiritual. Irrelevance Binds Us What makes television such a terror to the collective mind of a culture? Postman begins by arguing that the “medium is the metaphor.” Meaning, any given medium — whether text, television, or social media — doesn’t only distribute content, but unavoidably shapes the content. How we consume, he argues, is as important as what we consume. Mediums determine how we take in information. For instance, over time typography (despite its own limitations) generally taught us to follow arguments, test conclusions, and expose contradiction. Television, by contrast, consistently does away with arguments, strips away context, and darts from one image to the next. Television, however, not only teaches us a new way to process information, but it also floods us with information and from far beyond our everyday lives. The telegraph, of course, had begun doing this with words long before the television, but notice what was happening then, even with the telegraph: In the information world created by telegraphy, everything became everyone’s business. For the first time, we were sent information which answered no question we had asked, and which, in any case, did not permit the right of reply. We may say then that the contribution of the telegraph to public discourse was to dignify irrelevance and amplify impotence. (68–69) For the most part, the kind of information that would interest people in both Los Angeles and Minneapolis, would need to be nonessential to life in either place (irrelevance), and all the more so with news from around the globe. Stories had to transcend ordinary life in a real place (part of the appeal for people looking to escape the malaise of ordinary life). And, for the most part, the information had to be the kind of information neither could do anything about (impotence). Postman asks a pointed question of all our media consumption: “How often does it occur that information provided you on morning radio or television, or in the morning newspaper, causes you to alter your plans for the day, or to take some action you would not otherwise have taken, or provides insight into some problem you are required to solve?” (68). Television only made the irrelevance that much more accessible and that much more appealing (actual images and videos of celebrities doing everyday activities as opposed to the short descriptions the telegraph could produce). And how much more is this the case through social media? We know more and more about our favorite athletes, actors, and musicians and yet often less and less about our neighbors and the places where we might actually make a difference. Worth a Thousand Images But isn’t a picture worth a thousand words? In 1921, the marketer Fred Bernard famously said so, promoting the use of images for advertising on the side of streetcars. He was probably right as far as streetcars go. If you want to make a memorable impression on someone in a couple seconds, by all means use a picture — but is this effective communication or just effective marketing? Maybe it’s more accurate to say a picture is worth a thousand more sales, or clicks, or likes. Even then, though, can a picture really convey what a consumer needs to know about a new phone, or clothing line, or dish soap? For serious shoppers, haven’t we learned that one coherent sentence of honest description might be worth a thousand pictures? Postman saw that as images overtake words as the dominant form of communication in a society, communication invariably suffers. “I will try to demonstrate that as typography move to the periphery of our culture and television takes to place at the center, the seriousness, clarity and, above all, value of public discourse dangerously declines” (29). We descend into “a vast triviality,” he says. We get sillier. As he attempts to summarize his warning to the ever-entertained, he says, “Our Ministry of Culture is Huxleyan, not Orwellian. It does everything possible to encourage us to watch continuously. But what we watch is a medium which presented information in a form that renders it simplistic, nonsubstantive, nonhistorical, and noncontextual; That is to say, information packaged as entertainment. In America, we are never denied the opportunity to amuse ourselves” (141). In the Beginning Was the Word According to Neil Postman, America (and much of the modern world) has laid our collective minds on the altar of entertainment. But why should followers of Christ care about television (or websites or social media)? Should we spend much time worrying about how much we watch and how little we read? Yes, because the fullest Christian life is firmly anchored in words and sentences and paragraphs. When God revealed himself to his chosen people, of all the infinite ways he could have done so, he chose to unveil himself with words. “Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son” (Hebrews 1:1–2). God didn’t build a gallery or start a YouTube channel, he wrote a Book (2 Timothy 3:16). “In the beginning was the Word. . . . And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth” (John 1:1, 14). From the beginning, God has put the Word, his Son, at the center of reality, and, in doing so, he has given words unusual power and importance in anticipating, explaining, and celebrating him. Yes, the heavens are declaring the glory of God (Psalm 19:1). Yes, his eternal power and divine nature have been seen, from the beginning, in the things that have been made (Romans 1:20). But “faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ” (Romans 10:17). For now, faith looks “not to the things that are seen but to the things that are unseen. For the things that are seen are transient, but the things that are unseen are eternal” (2 Corinthians 4:18). And we look to the unseen through words. We may see God in mountains and oceans and galaxies, but we only know him savingly through sentences. He wrote the story that way. Serious Joy in Silly Days If the way we’re using entertainment erodes our ability to reflect, reason, and savor truth, it erodes our ability to know and enjoy Jesus. “Blessed is the man . . . [whose] delight is in the law of the Lord, and on his law he meditates day and night” (Psalm 1:1–2). If we lose the ability to think, we lose the ability to meditate. And if we lose the ability to meditate, we lose our path to meaningful happiness. The life of the mind, and heart, is a pivotal battleground in the pursuit of real and abundant life. “The life of the mind is a pivotal battleground in the pursuit of real and abundant life.” The medium is not the enemy — television and YouTube and Instagram are not the enemy. But if Postman was right, the medium can be wielded by our world, our flesh, and our enemy when we soak up entertainment and ignore the consequences. What, if any, of your entertainment habits need to be curbed or redirected for the sake of your soul? What are ways you are seeking to cultivate the spiritual gift of your mind — slower Bible study or memorization, reading substantive books, meaningful conversation with friends, more time in unhurried reflection and meditation? As we learn to guard and nurture our minds as our God-given pathways to God, the kinds of mindless entertainment that are undoing millions today will be far less appealing and far less dangerous. And we will find pleasures deeper, and far more enduring, than what we see on our screens. Article by Marshall Segal Staff writer, desiringGod.org