Others like walking humbly with god Features >>
About the Book
"Walking Humbly With God" by John Owen is a collection of spiritual reflections and practical advice on cultivating humility in one's relationship with God. Through biblical wisdom and personal anecdotes, Owen emphasizes the importance of recognizing our own weaknesses and relying on God's grace for spiritual growth. This book serves as a guide for Christians seeking to deepen their humility and walk closely with God in their daily lives.
Andrew Fuller
Fuller was born in Soham, Cambridgeshire, England, where in 1775 he was ordained pastor of the Baptist church. Originally schooled in the hyper-Calvinist theology then prevalent in parts of the Particular Baptist denomination, he became convinced in 1775 that the hyper-Calvinist position was not scriptural. In 1785 he published The Gospel Worthy of All Acceptation, which did much to prepare his denomination for accepting this missionary obligation. As pastor in Kettering, Northamptonshire, from 1783, Fuller became firm friends with John Sutcliff of Olney, John Ryland of Northampton, and later the young William Carey. The strengthening missionary vision of this group bore fruit on October 2, 1792, when the Particular Baptist Society for Propagating the Gospel among the Heathen (later known as the Baptist Missionary Society) was formed in the home of one of Fuller’s deacons in Kettering. Fuller was appointed secretary. Until his death he combined the demands of a busy pastorate with managing the affairs of the BMS. He traveled extensively to raise funds for the society, especially in Scotland, which he visited five times.
Brian Stanley, “Fuller, Andrew,” in Biographical Dictionary of Christian Missions, ed. Gerald H. Anderson (New York: Macmillan Reference USA, 1998), 230-231.
This article is reprinted from Biographical Dictionary of Christian Missions, Macmillan Reference USA, copyright © 1998 Gerald H. Anderson, by permission of Macmillan Reference USA, New York, NY. All rights reserved.
Pastor, apologist, and promoter of missions
Though not university trained, Andrew Fuller was recognized by his contemporaries as the preeminent Baptist theologian of their day and was awarded honorary doctor of divinity degrees by both Princeton (1798) and Yale (1805). Fuller’s published works, preaching ministry and churchmanship was, perhaps, the primary mediating agency between the transatlantic evangelical revival and the English Particular (or “Calvinist”) Baptists who had distanced themselves from what was largely at the start an Anglican renewal movement. Fuller was also well known as a co-founder of the Baptist Missionary Society (or, the Particular Baptist Society for the Propagation of the Gospel Amongst the Heathen [est. 1792]), on whose behalf he itinerated regularly in the British Isles, lobbied the East India Company, and wrote numerous letters and magazine articles during his twenty-two year tenure as its first general secretary. He was an opponent of the British slave trade and, though a dissenting non-Anglican, an acquaintance of William Wilberforce and other members of the Clapham sect, who were key allies in Parliament. He was a pastors’ pastor who exerted no small influence for evangelical doctrine and a missionary vision through the many ordination sermons he preached. From 1782 until his death in 1815 he served as pastor of the Kettering Baptist Church and was frequent chairman of the Northamptonshire Association, a consortium which included the likes of William Carey, Samuel Pearce, John Sutcliffe, and John Ryland, Jr.
Fuller was born in 1754 at Wicken, Cambridgeshire, to non-conformist parents who worked a dairy farm. In 1775, six years after his own conversion experience, he was inducted as pastor of the forty-seven member church in Soham, where he had received his baptism and was a member. In 1776 he married his first wife, Sarah Gardiner, with whom he had eleven children, only three surviving beyond early childhood. Sarah would die in 1792, less than two months before the founding of the British Missionary Society (BMS). During this seven year pastorate, Fuller immersed himself in the literary culture of Anglo-American evangelical Calvinism. He cultivated his theological perspective and ministry philosophy by ardently studying the Scriptures alongside the works of the Reformers, seventeenth-century Puritans (especially John Owen), early English Baptists like John Bunyan and John Gill, as well as the writings of American Congregationalist philosopher-theologian and pastor, Jonathan Edwards. Fuller also acknowledged in his most popular book, The Gospel Worthy of All Acceptation (1781), the influence of the lives of John Eliot and David Brainerd, both late missionaries to the native Americans. The Gospel Worthy was Fuller’s remonstration against the hyper-Calvinism that negated the propriety of evangelistic appeals. By the 1790s, evangelical (or “strict”) Calvinism was known in England as “Fullerism” (vs. “High” or hyper-Calvinism). The Gospel its Own Witness (1800) was Fuller’s refutation of Deism. Fuller gained a reputation by these two books, especially, for publically, clearly and systematically opposing in print whatever widely held doctrines he believed were undermining the church and its mission.
In the Northamptonshire Assocation Fuller was a member of a thriving intellectual community most influenced by Edwards. In 1784 John Sutcliff initiated a “concerts of prayer” movement similar to the program suggested by Edwards in An Humble Attempt to Promote Explicit Agreement and Visible Union of God’s People in Extraordinary Prayer (1748). Baptist congregations prayed monthly for the spread of the gospel and the kingdom of Christ to the ends of the earth through all denominations. In 1791, Sutcliff, Fuller and Samuel Pearce each preached at significant events (Sutcliff and Fuller at the association meeting of pastors, Pearce at William Carey’s ordination) on the duty of the church to evangelize the whole inhabitable globe. Fuller based his appeal on the eternal truth of the gospel, the eternal relevance of the gospel, the eternal power of the gospel, and the circumstances of the age that made missionary endeavors possible and obligatory.(1) Carey’s much touted association sermon from Isaiah 54:2-3 in May of 1792 did not arise in a vacuum. The influence was mutual between Carey and Fuller, both being influenced by Robert Hall, Sr. and Samuel Pearce (who had been inspired by the Methodist Thomas Coke in Birmingham).
On October 2, 1792, the BMS was formed with Fuller its first secretary and the assumption that its support would come largely from the churches of the Northamptonshire Association. When the society sent Carey and John Thomas to India the following year, Fuller preached their commissioning service from John 20:21 (“As the Father has sent me, even so I [Christ] am sending you.”). Fuller believed the mission’s raison d’être was the uniqueness of Christ and Christian responsibility to proclaim him. Bible translation and evangelism should take priority. Hindus were not desiring or seeking the Christian Scriptures. But to ignore and neglect anyone in an unconverted state is inconsistent with the love of God and man. In addition, God had promised the messiah the inheritance of the nations (An Apology for the Late Christian Missions to India, 1808). The church is obligated to employ means and make an effort as the means God uses to fulfill that promise to Christ. Obstacles are merely a test to sincerity of faith.
Fuller spent up to ten hours per day in correspondence and reporting for the BMS. He contributed articles to Evangelical Magazine, Missionary Magazine, Quarterly Magazine, Protestant Dissenters’ Magazine, Biblical Magazine, and Theological Miscellany. He sought financial support via letters and by an average of three months of vigorous itineration each year among various evangelical churches in Scotland, Ireland, Wales and England. John Ryland, Jr. wrote of Fuller’s style, that he, “…always disliked violent pressing for contributions, and attempting to outvie other societies: he chose rather to tell a plain, unvarnished tale; and he generally told it with good effect.”(2) Through written correspondence he “pastored” the missionaries in the field while maintaining a decentralized approach to mission administration. He believed the missionaries were more capable of governing themselves and that the time required for correspondence made central control impractical anyway.
The security of the unlicensed Baptist missionary society’s place in the British Empire was frequently tenuous up to 1813. Fuller occasionally had to petition Parliament or the Board of Control for continued tolerance of the BMS. Muslim irritation at the Christian missionary presence and the conversion of some Indians from Islam had been blamed for the Vellore Mutiny of 1806. Thomas Twining had openly claimed efforts at conversion were contradictory to “the mild and tolerant spirit of Christianity.” Fuller responded to Twining and other English defenders of Hinduism with his three-part Apology for the Late Christian Missions to India (1808) in which he argued for a toleration of religion that allows all religious views as well as efforts to persuade through reasonable means. He attributed several social ills, like ritual infanticide and sati, to Hinduism, and commended the missionaries for trying to put an end to such practices. Fuller was also a critic of the “detestable traffic” of the African slave trade, asserting it made England deserving of ruin at the hands of the French (from whose invasion he urged prayer that God would mercifully protect England). The prosperity of the empire should not come at the expense of other human beings. Patriotism must “harmonize” with “good will toward [other] men.”(3) On the other hand, Fuller often counseled BMS missionaries not to become “entangled” in political concerns which were “only affairs of this life” and endangered colonial toleration of the mission.(4) Because Jesus accomplished “moral revolution” in the heart, loyalty to the British government, rather than republicanism, should be encouraged as far as it is compatible with Christian commitments.(5)
Fuller, the pastor of families in England and abroad, counseled missionary families to nurture a deep spirituality for the sake of attaining the character commensurate with the nature of the gospel and their mission. Fuller knew the vicissitudes of even the Christian heart, and the “spiritual advantage” of engaging in mission. Reflecting in his diary on July 18, 1794, he wrote:
Within the last year or two, we have formed a missionary society; and have been enabled to send out two of our brethren to the East Indies. My heart has been greatly interested in this work. Surely I never felt more genuine love to God and to his cause in my life. I bless God that his work has been a means of reviving my soul. If nothing comes of it, I and many others have obtained a spiritual advantage.(6)
Fuller died in 1815. The epitaph stone for Fuller in the Kettering meeting house says he devoted his life for the prosperity of the BMS.(7) One biographer has said Fuller “lived and died a martyr to the mission.”(8) After December, 1794, he was assisted in life by his second wife, Ann Coles. Fuller also spent himself itinerating for the British and Foreign Bible Society after it was founded in 1804. His many occasional writings and sermon manuscripts reveal a love for the gospel message itself and the life-orienting impact of Bible texts such as Matthew 28:16-20 and Mark 16:15-16; John 12:36 and 20:21; and Romans 10:9, 14-17. Fuller is noted today for making a significant contribution to the revitalization of Particular (Calvinist) Baptist life in late eighteenth century England as well as for being a key figure in the historic turn toward a proliferation of free Protestant missionary societies at the beginning of the Great Century.
isn’t she beautiful: the role of physical attraction in dating
How significant should physical attraction be in the pursuit of marriage? Or, what role, if any, should physical appearance play in Christian dating? Guys have come to me over the years asking about this. Usually he respects or admires a godly young woman (or, maybe more often, other people in his life think he should  admire her more), and yet he’s not physically attracted to her. She’s not his “type,” he says. “Should I still pursue her?” What would you say to him? I would say, “No.” Or at least, “Not yet.” Given the common assumptions and practices in our society today, including the church, I do not believe a man (or woman) should begin a dating relationship with someone to whom they are not physically attracted. If he admires other things about her, I’m all for him befriending  her and getting to know her in safe, unambiguous, non-flirtatious ways (probably in groups). But I believe physical attraction, at least in the vast majority of cases, is one critical piece in discerning whether to date or marry someone. That being said, I also believe that physical attraction is far deeper and more dynamic, even spiritual, than we tend to think. It’s not static or objective. Real, meaningful, durable attraction is far more than physical. A man or woman’s physical appearance only plays one role in what makes them attractive or appealing. Its role is massive initially, say the very first time you see someone, when all you know about them is what you see, before you even know their name or hear their voice. But its role will necessarily evolve the more you learn about someone. After you’ve learned more about them — by asking their friends, or by hearing them talk, or by watching the way they live — you’ll never see them again as just the person you saw at first. The more we learn about them, the more their appearance is filled, for better or for worse, with new and deeper meaning — with their personality, their convictions, their sense of humor, their faith. The once-stunning girl may lose most of her charm, and the easily overlooked girl may become undeniably beautiful. They each look exactly the same as before, and yet they don’t. You see them, even their physical appearance, differently now. Physical (and Flexible) Attraction Don’t believe me? Ask sixty-year-old love birds if they’re still “physically attracted” to each other. Some of them are more attracted to each other than ever, and it’s not  because they’re gaining weight, losing their hair, or having more trouble getting around. It’s because their appearance, in the eyes of their beloved, is increasingly filled with a deepening appreciation for the beauty in the other. They see something different in each other’s eyes. The hands are worn, but familiar and safe. The wrinkles are the years of faithfulness and bliss spent together. Their love not only looks beyond the surface, but sees the surface with new eyes. “True love not only looks beyond the surface, but sees the surface with new eyes.” On the other side, that celebrity you think is so  hot right now can lose all of his or her appeal overnight, literally in one headline. The heartthrob guy beats his girlfriend, or the magazine-cover woman sleeps with three more guys. It’s suddenly harder to even look at pictures of them anymore. They each look exactly the same, but they don’t. You see the same pictures differently now — same hair, same eyes, same figure — all suddenly unappealing, unattractive. Physical attraction is real, but flexible. God has wired us to appreciate beauty in his design — to find men (for women) or women (for men) physically appealing — and that is a real and important element in our pursuit of marriage, and eventually in our flourishing within the covenant. God gave us physical senses and desires for our good. But that’s only one piece of what makes people attractive, and it is not the main piece — nowhere close. Mutual faith in Jesus Christ should be the most arrestingly attractive thing about any potential spouse. Beauty Is Vain This may be the most important thing to learn about physical (or sexual) attraction: that at its richest and fullest, it is not only or even mainly physical (eyes, hair, and figure). “Charm is deceitful, and beauty is vain, but a woman who fears the Lord is to be praised” (Proverbs 31:30). Why does Solomon even need to say that? Because physical beauty and charm are naturally appealing. But without faith, they’re fading, and fast. You can look at a picture in an ad or on an app and decide whether someone’s physical appearance is appealing to you, but that’s like buying a house based on a picture from the front yard. Most people want to enjoy how the front of their house looks, but that doesn’t typically break the list of the top ten or fifteen things they’re looking for in a home. How many bedrooms and bathrooms? Have the appliances been updated in the last five or ten years? What kind of shape is the foundation in? The outside may be most important to some people, but they’re probably people who haven’t owned a home before. The inside of a house — space, appliances, interior design — can cover a multitude of sins outside. But no amount of paint and creativity outside can fix serious issues inside. “Godliness should be the most attractive thing about the most attractive people.” So, let’s ask the question another way. Should a Christian man pursue a Christian woman to whom he is  physically attracted? I might say, “No.” That is, if all you know or like about her is what you see. I would encourage you to befriend her and get to know her in safe, unambiguous, non-flirtatious ways (probably in groups), until you know whether there is real beauty behind her face and everything else anyone can see. Have you seen enough of her faith, her spiritual strength and maturity, her Christlikeness to know if her beauty is real and durable, or superficial and fading? Better with Age I would not encourage a man to pursue a godly woman whom he’s not attracted to physically, but I won’t let the conversation end there, either. I’ll give him a few other questions to ask himself. For instance, if she really is a godly woman, why might you be more attracted to the unbelieving girl in your algebra class? Or (for the women), if he really is a godly man, why might you be more attracted to the ungodly guy at work? As godly men and women, we should find godliness incredibly attractive. In fact, in our eyes and hearts, it should be the most attractive thing about the most attractive people. That doesn’t mean that if you’re a Christian, you should find every Christian man or woman attractive. But it should mean there’s a theme or trend in your attractions. In our day, it seems wise, in general, for men and women to date someone to whom they are attracted. And  Christian men and women should be cultivating hearts that are more attracted to faith and character than anything else. The world around us will preach that physical beauty is everything, but we know and desire better. Of all the people in the world, we should be the most free from enslavement to physical appearances and sexual titillation. Our eyes should be increasingly drawn to modesty, not immodesty. As we put on the eyes and heart of Christ, we should increasingly be able to see through all the temporary and fading appearances to the things that are truly beautiful — the qualities in each other that imitate Jesus and anticipate heaven. The qualities that get better with age. My Hope for Men What’s my hope for Christian men? “It is my prayer that your love may abound more and more, with knowledge and all discernment, so that you may approve what is excellent, and so be pure and blameless for the day of Christ, filled with the fruit of righteousness that comes through Jesus Christ, to the glory and praise of God” (Philippians 1:9–11). I want our men (and women) to be known for recognizing and approving what is truly excellent and beautiful, that there would be a strange and durable purity to our pursuits of marriage. What an awesome thing it would be if the world was confused today by your interest in a Christian woman whom they find less physically attractive, only to have it make perfect sense  twenty-five years later when you’re happily married (and more attracted to each other than ever) — and they’re five months into their fifth marriage. “Christians should be cultivating hearts that are more attracted to faith and character than anything else.” If you’re a Christian, and you’re not as attracted to godliness as you want to be, or if you feel yourself fixated on physical beauty, what should you do? Confess that to a brother. Bring someone in to sift through those desires with you, someone who can help you apply the gospel with grace and truth. And then start looking for evidences of grace in godly women. It’s easy to notice physical features — almost any man in the world is capable of that — but discipline yourself to notice and appreciate true beauty, which is not flaunted, but buried in a woman’s heart and expressed in things like patience, kindness, and selflessness. Say a prayer of thanks for what you see in women like that, and then share it with your friend. Turn the world’s crude locker-room conversations on their head by commending true and lasting beauty with humility and respect. Learn the vanity of physical beauty (by itself) and the lies lacing flirtatious charm and flattery, and train your heart and mind to praise and desire the woman whose heart is hot for Jesus.