LUKEWARMNESS

LUKEWARMNESS

Since the first decline of the church, there is nothing that the saint should more fear than anything bordering on lukewarmness, because that is the condition of the church characteristically when it shall be spued out of Christ’s mouth (Revelation 3: 16), when it shall for ever cease to be for Him here on earth; and the moment we see anything in ourselves tending to this lukewarmness, we should earnestly attend to His word, “be zealous ... and repent”. To do this would be not only to refuse and denounce all neutrality, but to be valiant for the truth. Repentance does not only denounce the wrong, but it scrupulously and earnestly attests and maintains the right.

Now the snare in lukewarmness is this, that there is nothing exactly to offend the conscience; there is no denial of, or opposition to, the truth, but on the contrary an apparent reception of it, going along with it, but in such a partial, imperfect way that a great deal is permitted which would have been refused if one had been walking earnestly in the truth. There is an admission of truth, and there is an acceptance in general of the place in which the truth sets one, but there is no testimony to its power and control. The lukewarm one accepts the truth and the position which the truth prescribes, but in such a loose way that the sound is uncertain, and the distinctness and peculiarity which would necessarily flow from an honest, earnest maintenance of the truth is lost and frustrated. “If the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle?” Hence, there is more damage ^[p. 63] done to the truth than if it had never been accepted at all. If it had not been accepted, there it would have remained, and it might be said, if it were, it would produce such and such effects. But when it has been accepted, and there is no true effect because of the looseness or lukewarmness with which it is held, then the truth is compromised, and its value and efficacy practically denied. Just as, if one should accept a physician’s prescriptions and yet never use them, no effect would of course be produced on the patient; and the skill of the physician would be more compromised than if his prescriptions had not been accepted. The Lord says, “I would thou wert cold or hot” — either not accepting at all, or accepting earnestly and vigorously; for then the truth is not compromised. What could please Satan more than to see saints holding truths which produced no effect? It would be a greater exultation to him in one sense than open infidelity, for it would tell more on believers, for thereby would be proved the powerlessness of the truth of God on the conscience. The great aim of Satan is that the word should bring forth no fruit to perfection. It is bad enough when he can draw away and delude souls from yielding to the power of it, blinding their eyes lest the light should shine for them; but how much worse when he can succeed in making saints indifferent about the truth, making them lukewarm, causing them to treat the truth as if it were not of vital, eternal value. What could more effectually undermine the truth than that one as assenting to it, and accepting the position which it prescribed, should be as unaffected and uncontrolled by it as if he had never heard it; nay, that he should slip into things under its cover which he could not do with impunity if he were not concealed under the garb of high profession? The apostle Paul warns Timothy of those who shall have the form of godliness, but deny the power thereof; and in every time it has been the lukewarm who have brought the ^[p. 64] deepest shame and reproach on the people of God. Lukewarm is from cold to hot, but not hot enough. It is one who asserts and accepts, but in a lifeless and indifferent way; holds on as if there were no power or vitality in that which he holds; he has reached, but for no purpose, and has not turned it to account; in a word, it is the slothful man who will not roast that which he took in hunting. Ham was lukewarm; Genesis 9: 22. He saw in the person of his father the failure and apostasy in which he was involved, and felt no shame, took no steps to check or abate it; he was not zealous for the truth and position of government on the earth in which they were set. He did not deny either, but he was not governed by any due sense of the gravity and responsibility of either, and he was accursed. Lot was lukewarm; Genesis 13. He was in the land, but he was not zealous to maintain the claims of God on him in that position. Had he returned to Mesopotamia, he would have been a backslider; but he did not; he retained the position but forewent the claims that belonged to it. The children of Israel were lukewarm when they made a league with the inhabitants of Canaan from which all their sorrows in the land sprung, as had been predicted; Judges 2: 2. For four hundred and ninety years they were lukewarm in neglecting to keep the sabbatical year, for which they were carried into captivity; 2 Chronicles 36: 21. Saul was lukewarm when he saved Agag king of the Amalekites (1 Samuel 15), and thus forfeited the kingdom. The great and distinctive mark of the weakness of even the good kings of Israel was that they were lukewarm; the high places were not taken down; 1 Kings 3: 2; 1 Kings 15: 14, etc. It was not so much what they had done as what they had left undone. That man was lukewarm who said to our Lord, when called to follow Him, “Let me first go bid them farewell, which are at home at my house”, Luke 9: 61. He was lukewarm who said, “I go, sir: and went not”, Matthew 21: 30. All are lukewarm who,

^[p. 65] having put their hand to the plough, look back; Luke 9: 62. Peter was lukewarm when he separated from the gentiles in the fear of man, and “walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel”, Galatians 2: 11 - 14. Barnabas was lukewarm when he took with him Mark; Acts 15: 37. All in Asia were lukewarm when they turned away from Paul; 2 Timothy 1: 15. They had not turned away from christianity, but they took the place which the mass of saints take now, owning Christ as Saviour, but overlooking Paul and the church on earth in heavenly standing, power, and hope.

Now when the church characteristically sinks into this indifference about truth — this open and avowed declaration of admission and acceptance of truth, without insisting on its claims and efficacy — it can necessarily no longer be in any way fit as a vessel for God on earth, and its removal from the place of testimony must immediately ensue; therefore it is in its Laodicean, its lukewarm, state that it is spued out of Christ’s mouth as that which is nauseous and useless. If Jeremiah could mourn in his day that there was none valiant for the truth, how much more should we, when so much truth has been given us! When the church was first set up on earth as Christ’s and of Him, it was the pillar and base of the truth; and then no lukewarmness or indifference about anything of Christ obtained in the church. If there had, in any degree, then indeed all sense of its own proper dignity as the pillar and base of the truth, as of and for Christ here, would have been lost. And this has, alas! been lost. We can no longer assume this dignity. But surely no saint would like to show himself, because of his lukewarmness, unworthy and unfit for the dignity. Moreover, it is by the Spirit of truth that the church is united to Christ the Head, and the members one to another; and if He be disregarded, where is the power to uphold us, or to guide us into all truth? Surely, however fair the appearance may be, however we may say, “I am rich, and increased with goods”, we are hurrying on to an irretrievable catastrophe.

If any divine quality more than another ought to characterise a member of Christ, it is to be valiant for the truth; for he understands in himself the heart of Christ as expressed by the apostle, “I have no greater joy than to hear that my children walk in truth”. May we live so in His love, that it may be the joy of our hearts to walk here according to His mind in unswerving faithfulness to Him.