LETTERS
[p. 287] LETTERS
ISLINGTON, N.
November 2nd, 1867.
My Dear Brother, — Will you pardon a few lines from one in years and the faith much younger than yourself, and whose only excuse must be the thought and wish to serve in love God’s saints?
I have seen your letter to — — and am constrained to write to you what I judge and have no doubt is, in the main, the truth as to the points you raise. If I understand you, you sum up the whole penalty due on God’s part to sin and sinners in one word, namely, the judgment pronounced to Adam — ‘death’. You connect with this what Paul says of the gentiles — “dead in trespasses and sins” and you sum up the work of Christ in grace in the same one word ‘death’. Now the evil of this is, that what is pronounced as a penalty against sin, namely, death, is confounded with what is a moral condition (”dead in trespasses and sins”) which is a very different thing; and more than this, in connecting the work of Christ with it, there is a fear of connecting Him with our moral condition, which, even when in our position (that is as a Man in flesh) and as “made sin” by God, He was apart from entirely.
I find that, in the main, two results of Christ’s death and blood-shedding flow out to man, namely, present reconciliation to God, and remission of sins; and moreover it proved God’s righteousness in passing over sins before Christ died. Now all this is connected with this world. Sin existed — by man it entered into the world — death also as the result — death passed over all, for all have sinned. Now if while still in this world I am reconciled to God, it must be by foreclosing the existence in which I have sinned against [p. 288] Him. This the gospel offers to me, telling me that I have died with Christ — the consequence is that even here by a new life, in the power of faith and of the Holy Spirit, I find an entrance into a new and heavenly order of things, into which Christ has entered as Man, and which Scripture calls the new existence (”newness of life”). But the ground of this is that the first existence (”life of flesh”) as before God with its sins, is closed. Again if I were a Jew looking for life in the earth and blessing, I should see that the sins of the people whereby they had forfeited life, had brought death to Christ, and as a consequence of His death, that the penalty of death was lifted off from the people, and they established in life and blessing on earth, their sins forgiven, because Christ had suffered the penalty. Now all this is connected with grace triumphing over the power of Satan in the very scene where Satan has corrupted God’s creation, and lorded it, by the power of death, over God’s people. It does not go beyond this world. The believer sees an end of the first Adam existent in the death of Christ — stands reconciled through it to God, and is in a new life as a heavenly thing in the face of the world. The Jewish nation hereafter, with the penalty of death lifted off, are established in life and blessing, sins being forgiven, in the presence of Christ — but all within the limits of this world — complete triumph over Satan, and the power of death, through the death of Christ.
But for certain purposes I find that Old Testament scripture mostly limits itself to this world, because it reveals God’s ways in it. Except for glimpses I find but little light on what is beyond, so death, which is but the beginning of the assertion of God’s absolute rights over the sinner, is seen as the end of sin. It is the breaking of the link with life in the scene with which, mainly, God and Scripture are there viewed as dealing. But when I come to the New Testament scripture and see the eternal life entered upon the [p. 289] scene, and speaking of a life right above and beyond this scene by its very nature, I find that though He can warn the Jews that they will die in their sins, yet He speaks in the same gospel of results of sin, beyond death, this is resurrection to judgment. Again, I find the truth declared, “it is appointed to men once to die, and after that the judgment”. Again I find men raised from the first death, judged, put under the second death, and death cast into the lake of fire. Again, I find the revelation in the gospel, of the judgment of the secrets of men’s hearts by Jesus Christ and of wrath of God from heaven, upon all unrighteousness and ungodliness of men; again, that God will reward every man according to his works — indignation, wrath, tribulation and anguish on every soul of man that doeth evil. Here I find God dealing with sin and sinners according to the exigencies of His own nature; but, although the works for which they are dealt with were done in this world, yet the action and dealing and results are eternal, and beyond altogether the course of this world. Hence the certainty of eternal punishment. The freeing me from the assertion of God’s rights upon me in this world (that is death), so that I can consider myself dead with Christ, or if I were a Jew might count upon life on earth, could not be, unless these eternal consequences had been met by Christ, and sin and sins dealt with in Him according to the exigencies of God’s holiness. The consequence is that I find a class of texts referring to Christ in regard to sin and sins (the latter having more especial reference to the act of God’s people before Christ died) in connection with which death is not expressly mentioned, and these are the passages that connect sin with Christ. I will quote those which occur to me.
“God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh”.
“[p. 290] He hath made him to be sin for us who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him”.
“He appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself”.
These as to sin and now as to sins — “When he had by himself purged our sins, sat down”.
“Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many”.
“Who through the eternal spirit offered himself without spot to God”.
“Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree”.
To whom did He offer Himself, to death or to God? Now what strikes one in all these passages is that though they may end in death, they refer to some distinct dealing between God and Christ, where sin was dealt with in Christ, according to all the claims of God’s nature, and as to the guilt of it, finally and eternally put away — and what confirms me in the faith of this is the finding that there was a moment when Christ was forsaken by God. It is this that makes sure and eternally secure to me, the present results of His death and blood shedding, and secures too, triumph for man over Satan, and the eternal putting out of God’s sight of sin, and a creation in righteousness and true holiness.
F E. Raven.
ROYAL NAVAL COLLEGE,
GREENWICH, S.E.
1900.
... And now I will try and answer your enquiries, and will begin by showing in a few words how, as it appears to me the subject of life is presented in Scripture.
[p. 291] From Adam to Moses death reigned universally (Romans 5: 14), then the law came in which (though ordained to life) was the ministry of death (2 Corinthians 3: 7). In Habakkuk 2: 3, 4, we have the idea presented that Christ might tarry as to His coming, but ever to be waited for; and in the meantime the just shall live by faith. (This we see made good in Romans and Hebrews). Then Christ came that the sheep might have life and might have it very abundantly. Death was annulled and life and incorruptibility brought to light. Then the Spirit was given (John 20) as a breath of inward life, to be a well of water in saints, making good in them what Christ had acquired for them by redemption. They now live in the Spirit as children of God. As regards saints in the millennium the coming of the Lord will release the elect from the presence of death, they will be placed by Him under the new covenant and the law written in their hearts. Thus I judge they will live in a regenerated earth.
Underneath all that I have said in all dispensations was the work of the Spirit in new birth. A craving for God (which proved moral affinity) was begotten by God’s power in man’s soul, and faith enjoyed some degree of light from God. I have no objection (and this is well known) to its being said as has been commonly done, that souls in such a condition were spiritually alive (as a human expression) but it is to me incontestable that what Scripture designates as “life” is connected always with an entirely new footing for man acquired for him and administered by Christ in which he is released from the pressure of death. We pass out of death into life.
Such expressions as “born again”, “born of God” as in the epistles I do not identify exactly with what the Lord says to Nicodemus in John 3, and for the reason that when the epistles were written the gospel had been preached, and the spiritual origin of saints [p. 292] is traced back to that. The Lord speaks in John 3 as things stood then and in reference to the kingdom.
I trust you are all well and remain with our love in the Lord.
Affectionately and faithfully yours,
F E. Raven.
ROYAL NAVAL COLLEGE,
GREENWICH, S.E.
Mr. Henry Taylor. February 27th, 1890.
My Dear Brother, — In reply to yours of 25th I send a line to try and explain what I mean by ‘mixed conditions’. The truth is that a christian is of new creation before he has done with the old; he is heavenly before he has done with the earthly; he has eternal life before he has done with his responsible life as a man down here. Hence while on the one hand we are a new creation in Christ where old things have passed away and all things have become new, on the other hand we have to run a race, to continue in the faith, to see that sin and flesh do not reign in us. In Ephesians we see our new creation state, in Romans our responsible life as still here in old creation condition and circumstances, but justified and indwelt by the Spirit. This makes the mixed condition, and it is of all moment to see these things in their distinctness or we fail to see either the true character of the new creation order — or to appreciate the grace by which we are supported in our responsible life while here. It is somewhat like a dissolving view; the new picture has come on to the scene before the old has completely passed away.
I trust this may help to make the matter plain.
Your affectionate brother,
F E. Raven.
[p. 293] GREENWICH,
October 23rd, 1891.
My Dear Brother, — I certainly owe you an apology for not having written sooner — but I have been very much occupied one way and another since I saw you at Birkenhead. As far as I remember the brother was not right in his having pressed on you ‘obedience’ that is to the judgment (so called) arrived at by Bexhill. Now I need hardly say that no one can rightly call in question the decision of a meeting on any matter properly within its jurisdiction. We do not ‘deny’ the decision of the meeting — but we recognise the authority of our Lord — and, further, any meeting is justified in protecting itself by declining to receive into its fellowship a person coming from a meeting lying under strong suspicion of sheltering evil — but one meeting has no sort of authority to pronounce an authoritative judgment on another meeting — and call on others to obey — for the Lord is equally in both meetings, and it is an invasion of His rights. It may become manifest that the Lord has left a particular meeting and no one should then receive from or commend to it, but even then no one would venture to pronounce authoritative judgment though it is true we virtually refuse it by declining to receive from or commend to it.
Bexhill presumed authoritatively to reject Greenwich and they expect every other meeting to bow to what they have done. They had nothing before them but what was before everyone else. If this principle were to be admitted, any unsatisfactory meeting which chose to be first in the field might pronounce on the most momentous questions and issue a decision which is to bind every assembly on earth. It would be worse than popery.
A brother within an assembly is to hear what the assembly says, but I do not see that the assembly has a [p. 294] voice of authority on matters lying outside its jurisdiction, and if not the admonition to you to obey has not much weight, we ought strenuously to resist false ecclesiastical principles.
Very glad you are having cheer at St. Ives. With love in the Lord,
Yours affectionately,
F E. Raven.
GREENWICH,
February 24th, 1892.
Dear Miss White, — I am glad to answer your letter to the best of my ability.
The term ‘eternal life’ in the New Testament is evidently taken up from the Old, and what was in the minds of the Jews. John 5: 39 is a clear proof of this. In Psalm 133: 3 we learn it is blessing, promised for Israel, commanded of God in Zion. I believe the main thought of it to be liberation from the power of sin and the penalty of death. Israel will enjoy this in the kingdom (for which they will be born again). We have it in the relationship of children with the Father, for which not only are we born again but Christ lives in us in the power of the Spirit. The blessing is revealed in Christ who has annulled death and brought life and incorruptibility to light, but I can see no such idea in Scripture as its being an essential title of the Son.
In the gospel of John the Lord is never said to be ‘eternal life’ for the reason, I believe, that He is presented to us in the divine aspect of His Person — “The Word became flesh”.
In the epistle He is seen mainly on the mediatorial side as Man (the apostle declared what was from the beginning, seen, heard and handled) — and in chapter 5,
[p. 295] where the Spirit is spoken of as witness (to His glory as last Adam) we find Him called “the true God and eternal life”, and it is the only time He is spoken of as “eternal life”. There is in Him the full revelation of the blessing. He is it, and we have it in Him risen and glorified.
In Him was life in John 1 is what characterised Him as a divine Person and I do not care to mix that up with what is given us; though it be perfectly true that what He is as Man is morally what He ever was as divine and thus is also true in us for He is our life. It appears to me in the main to be a question of rightly dividing Scripture. There is one essential difference between Christ and us, and that is that He has life in Himself; and we live as having been made alive (in our souls) by His power.
Believe me,
Affectionately yours in Christ,
F E. Raven.
ROYAL NAVAL COLLEGE,
GREENWICH, S.E.
February 26th, 1894.
My Dear Brother, — I hasten to answer your letter, and to express my sympathy with you in the very trying condition of things existing at St. Ives. I had not heard, till a day or two ago, of the activity of evil that was going on there. At the same time I must say that it appears to me very sad to witness the lightness with which saints can be carried away from a fellowship which they have enjoyed for long by attacks on supposed statements of some brother which they have not concerned themselves to examine. I do not think that it bears witness to a soul under the influence of grace.
[p. 296] As to the points referred to in your letter I can only say that Mr. H. in his own ignorance is appealing to the like ignorance of others — and himself deceived is seeking to deceive others.
The ‘monstrosity’ referred to a sentence of Major Macarthy and simply meant that is was a monstrous statement. It was that the Lord never ceased to be the exhibition of eternal life from the babe in the manger to the throne of the Father. This sentence has been so much discussed that I do not think I need say anything as to it.
As regards the babe in the manger being God manifest in the flesh, the matter arose thus. A sister (Miss Kingscote) wrote to ask me if I would admit that that blessed babe was God manifest in the flesh. I answered that I wholly objected to such a method of treating Scripture — in putting together passages of scripture which have no immediate connection and making them thus combined a kind of article or test of orthodoxy. In Luke 2: 7 we read that Mary brought forth her firstborn son and wrapped Him in swaddling clothes and laid Him in a manger, and I, with every christian, hold that the babe was the Son of God. In 1 Timothy 3: 16 we read God has been manifested in the flesh — that is, as I understand it, has been made manifest; the light and grace and character and works of God have been made manifest in flesh — as Christ as Man — hence I can understand that the world is guilty in having both seen and hated both Christ and His Father — I maintain the truth of the two passages — but I do not believe that the one is the synonym of the other. As to the idea of death being the only punishment of Old Testament sinners I never said or thought anything of the kind. It is true that in the Old Testament death is because God’s governmental dealings are in view, but I should hold in regard to all that it is appointed to men once to die and after that the judgment.
[p. 297] I think this persistent effort to make out evil is very terrible and certainly not of God. It appears to me to constitute the life of those who have left us. I trust that in spite of all you may be much encouraged.
With love in the Lord,
Believe me,
Your affectionate brother,
F E. Raven.
10, CROOMS HILL,
GREENWICH,
Dr. Roberts. May 10th, 1900.
My Dear Brother, — I thought you might be interested to know that I had a capital journey home yesterday, without being at all ill. I found all well at home. I am sorry for the little friction that occurred in Dublin, and trust that the brothers in Rathmines may be wise in dealing with the Colonel, though it is clear to me that his spirit is all wrong. My impression is that the crucial point is the question of the communication of life. This is put for the work of the Spirit in the believer. I judge that eternal life is the energy of life in Christ which can hold all evil in control, so that man should not be affected by it. It is evident that this is not communicated to anyone, but in the presence of Christ man is able to abide in perfect sense of divine blessing and security from evil. I am unable to find any scripture which connects the idea of eternal life with heaven.
Kindly give my love in the Lord to your wife and sister, I retain the sense of your care of me.
Believe me, your affectionate brother,
F E. Raven.
[p. 298] W Moore. September 12th, 1900.
In regard to what came up in Dublin, I may say that one point pressed on us was the continuance of the thought of eternal life to heaven. In proof of this the verse John 17: 3 was quoted, I said that it did not prove anything beyond the present, for it presented the character which eternal life takes for us now, knowledge is a thing for the present, when the perfect is come then knowledge will vanish away, knowledge is that in which there is no progress, and when we know even as we are known, then knowledge will have no place. I only used this to show that the argument drawn from the verse in question is not conclusive. It appears that knowledge is the form which eternal life takes to us in contrast to that in which it will be enjoyed by the saints in the millennium. As to the point of ‘communication of life’, I see that the Spirit is life, and if this is what is meant by the communication of life, then I have no objection. But antecedent to the communication of the Spirit I cannot see the communication of anything but a work of God in a man by which his eyes are opened, so that he can apprehend a testimony of God. It may be that others mean the same thing as I do, but if so, why do they not drop human forms of expression and adopt those found in Scripture? Scripture speaks of a work in a man, he is born again, or new created, or quickened, I do not see that this is the communication of anything to him, though it may have been spoken of innocently enough in this way. I do not believe it is just to speak of a man being alive to God until he loves, or life is just below the level of the law and if a man loves it is the result of the Spirit having made him acquainted with the love of God. The antecedent work of God is in view of this end.
[p. 299] 22, GRAND PARADE,
ST. LEONARDS,
May 7th, 1901.
My Dear Mrs. Turpin, — I thank you very much for your kind note which I received before I left home, but allowed to remain unanswered till I should be here. I am sure too that I appreciate your forbearance in the desire not to add to the work of my wife. She has found her time taken up with attending on me and replying to kind enquirers both at the house and by letter. I am sure that I have the prayers of many of the saints who would gladly see me restored to health again. It may be that the Lord in His mercy in regard to my wife and family may see fit to prolong my life, but I feel that the attack is serious, and the trying symptoms are very unready to abate. I am troubled with a persistent cough, and shortness of breath on the least exertion which makes me feel very weak. We reached this on Wednesday, and I am glad of the change, I can be out more in the air than I should be at home, and this is beneficial. You can understand that it is in measure trying to lead an idle life, but even this may be a necessary exercise for I have felt the danger at times of living on meetings or service. I think that I realise the importance of that which is ministered being life in the soul of the one that ministers. The words of the servant should savour of life. I have tried to fill a gap among brethren, and the time must come sooner or later when one must be withdrawn, and saints will have to learn to depend on the Lord. Many of us have felt the danger of leaning on props, though they may be very good props. You will excuse my sending you but few lines, but I should like to catch this evening’s post. With our love in the Lord, believe me,
Affectionately yours in Christ,
F E. Raven.
[p. 300] 10, CROOMS HILL,
GREENWICH,
February 7th, 1902.
My Dear Brother, — I am pleased to answer your letter, and am very glad to see that you seized the thought that I sought to present on Tuesday evening. It seems to me evident that a child is born into certain conditions which are essential to life, and that those conditions are permanent and abiding while, as to the child, changes may come in. And I think that it is thus with us spiritually. The beginning is that one is born again, and then the soul is enlightened through the gospel, then the Spirit is given, and the person lives morally in the Spirit. Thus there is life in the sense that the believer is morally alive to God. This is the state of the believer, but then, as in natural things, the living is dependent on certain conditions which are permanent and abiding and unchangeable, and into these the believer is born and can enter into them morally because he is alive. These conditions are I think found in the epistle of John, they consist in the rule of Christ (as in natural things the earth is subject to the rule of the sun) for Christ is the Sun of righteousness, then in the moral atmosphere which exists among the brethren, and which has its character and impulse in the love of Christ, then in the full light of the love of God in its application to us down here. All these abide and are not subject to change though we may change and pass away from this scene. It is of all moment that we have life, that is in the sense of being alive in the Spirit, the Lord said, “I am come that they might have life and have it more abundantly”. But this is not the thought which the expression ‘eternal life’ conveys to my mind. I think that all the difficulty goes when one distinguishes between the fact of a person having life in the sense of being alive, and the conditions which are essential to [p. 301] life. The work of the Spirit in us is that which is really life, and it is that which enables us to enter into the conditions in which eternal life consists. The Lord said, “the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up unto everlasting life”. I entirely go with you in your saying that if we entered more into the reality of eternal life We should not have much difficulty in understanding the doctrine. I hope that I have answered your questions and desiring you prosperity in the things of the Lord, remain,
Your affectionate brother,
F E. Raven.
4, WEST PARK TERRACE,
SCARBOROUGH,
August 22nd, 1902.
My Dear Broomhead, — I have been looking for an opportunity of writing to you, as I shall be very glad to know how you are all going on. We have been here a fortnight, the season is quiet, and this holds good as regards the visitors amongst brethren. This is to me rather an occasion of thankfulness, as there is less excitement. We have been having very cold unsettled weather, and at present there is not much sign of permanent change. One would be glad if it were warmer and finer on account of the children, who are constantly getting wet. The Elliotts are at Filey from Croydon, but I cannot think of any other visitors from down south. We have been, and all here, anxious about Miss Lily Forrest, who has had to undergo a severe operation for an internal tumour, she is at a nursing home at Leeds, and so far is doing well. There is also a brother named Denny here from Biggleswade, whose wife has had a paralytic stroke while here. He seems a nice man, but they have been [p. 302] fearful of a repetition of the attack. I hope this may not occur. I have seen John Brown a time or two, he seems nice and bright. Things are much the same at Whitby, there does not seem to have been any accessions to the meeting. Young from Hull is there, one feels much for him in his home difficulties, and there does not seem much cohesion in the meeting at Hull. It is difficult to mix oil and water. I hope that the baby is getting on, and that the food is continuing to suit it, also that Mrs. Skeffington is gaining strength. We shall be very glad of a line as to this. I suppose that the departure of Chesterfield is now a fact. I hope that you have been able to make some arrangement to take up his responsibilities. I heard that you had a very good meeting at Croydon for E. J. McBride. We shall all miss him, though I have no doubt that he will be of real service to the saints in Australia. I wish I could have been at the meeting. I hear by the way that a project is on foot for a conference of evangelists, to be put under the auspices of Reynolds and Trench, but to which the presence of such as you and I would not be welcome, as we are regarded, at least I, as not being in sympathy with gospel work. I have said that if the meeting is to consider the truth of the gospel, it would be well to invite those of diverse sentiments, but if the object is to discuss methods of carrying on the work, the meeting is undesirable, as tending to interfere with individuality of service, and in a word looking like a party move. But they will not listen to me. I have not heard from Reynolds as to whether he intends to go, and have not written to him, as I would not influence him in any way. But I am a bit afraid of these evangelists for I think that some of them would be disposed to rule us. A brother told Miss Stoney that the only bond that remained amongst us was the gospel. If he meant by this that the gospel is Christ, and that He is the only bond, I should be inclined to agree, but to say [p. 303] that there was never any other. I hope that you are keeping better and that Mrs. Broomhead and your daughters are well, and with our kind love in the Lord, remain,
Your affectionate brother,
F E. Raven.
4, WEST PARK TERRACE,
SCARBOROUGH.
August 29th, 1902.
My Dear Broomhead, — Many thanks for your letter to hand this morning. I am very glad to hear a better account of the Skeffingtons, and that there is a reasonable expectation of the baby getting on. I suppose from the fact of your having been away that you are yourself better, and for this I am thankful. I am now sending a line to say that I have written to Morford, and have had a reply to the effect that he will take the preachings for four Sundays beginning with September 21st. Our month here will be up on September 9th, and they will not be content that I should leave before that. I shall therefore be available for Sunday the 14th — thus there will be the next two Sundays to provide for. I understand that you will be there for the next, and I will count on you to provide for the other. I will not make any arrangement for after Morford, as I would rather leave the matter in your hands. I do not quite understand whether you go away in the next week, or the week after. If the latter I shall possibly see you. We shall be home on the Tuesday. Kindly send me a card before then to let me know when you leave, as I would make an effort to see you. In regard to the proposed meeting of evangelists, I have had a letter from T.H.R. in which he tells me that Pollock wrote him, asking him if he would be present, and he replied that he would not if [p. 304] there were the intention of ignoring me, then Pollock wrote to me politely telling me that I was not wanted, but that they would like me to sanction the meeting, so as to enable them to get Reynolds. I think that the latter is firm enough, and sees that it is a party move. Who can they get to invite? for if the invitation does not come from persons having a responsible place in some meeting it is evidently a party move, and I can hardly believe that any brother with anything in any meeting would be content to commit themselves to the intentional exclusion of any. I do not like the business at all, and the less so that it produces a feeling in one’s mind that you cannot trust those that are fair enough to your face, for if I were to meet any of these brothers they would be pleasant enough. However, God is over all, and neither they nor I can do anything against the truth. I send you the draft of the reply that I sent Pollock. I may be wrong in my surmise, but I have an idea that Mace is behind it, and I think that A. Cutting is in it. With love in the Lord to Mrs. Broomhead and yourself; believe me,
Your affectionate brother,
F E. Raven.
4, WEST PARK TERRACE,
SCARBOROUGH.
September 3rd, 1902.
My Dear Brother, — The question of illustrations is one that sometimes presents difficulty, for it involves a clear knowledge of that you wish to illustrate. A man that can use simple and telling illustrations is a master of his subject. One has to allow a certain latitude in the use of such things, and to judge of them by whether they make plain the main idea, without looking for perfection in every detail. In the use of them one [p. 305] has to consider well what impression they will be calculated to produce on the minds of those that hear them. Now in the particular case to which you refer, the illustration of the Sculptor and the block would probably leave the impression on the mind that the believer was the block on which the Sculptor wrought, and I do not think that you would intend to convey this. I think too that it is too heavy an illustration of a spiritual idea. As regards the truth of things, I think that it is rather that we are formed in Christ, than that Christ is formed in us. The apostle Paul certainly speaks to the Galatians of travailing in birth until Christ were formed in them, but I judge this to mean in the sense of a writing, as in the case of the Corinthians, so that they were distinctly christian, and not half Jews. The formative work of the Spirit in us is, I think, to form us in Christ, that is in the order of material, if one might so say. It gives me the idea of a potter, who forms a vessel in what material he pleases. Hence the illustration of a potter appears to me suitable. The working of things undoubtedly is that He brings the soul under the influence of the effulgence of God in Christ, and we, being affected by this, are morally transformed. Christ creates of two in Himself one new man. The words ‘in Himself’ are important as bringing in what I have spoken of, that is the idea of a potter. We are acted on, but it is to form us in another. With this comes that of which you speak, the breaking to pieces oftentimes of the earthen vessel. It is in this way the matter presents itself to me, and any thing that serves to illustrate it is welcome, though the work is so strange that it has not many illustrations in natural things. I am very glad to hear of your doings, and sympathise with your difficulties. I can understand what you say as to the mind of the North of Ireland man. One thing is that you will be well instructed in patience, I suppose that you have heard of the proposed conference of evangelists,
[p. 306] they have behaved shabbily toward me, in proposing to exclude me. I think that they make a mistake, for they ought to maintain that the gospel is the interest of all, and not simply of those that preach it. I dread the thought of a gospel party amongst us. I hope that all your family is well. We are here till next Tuesday, when I return home to start in the following week for America. With love in the Lord, believe me,
Your affectionate brother,
F E. Raven.
4, WEST PARK TERRACE,
SCARBOROUGH,
September 8th, 1902.
My Dear Brother, — I am still inclined to think that what expresses the result of the Spirit’s work in the believer is the thought of his being formed in Christ. He has to grow up to the Head in all things. This involves a positive formation in him, but of a moral kind, so that it is he that is formed. I understand the expression “Christ in you” in Romans 8 to be dependent on the Spirit of Christ being in us, so that I would say of any one that has the Spirit of Christ that Christ is in him. And of course there is a work antecedent to this, there is the work of the Spirit in new birth, and faith. There is that, looked at abstractly, which is wholly new and of God. It is consequent on this that the Spirit dwells, and renews. But all this renewal I judge to be moral, that is an effect produced on the believer himself. He is transformed. It is a result of the light being presented to him. I see the sovereign work of God at the beginning in new birth,
[p. 307] and at the end in the raising up or quickening of the body, all between is wrought morally, that is through the effect of the truth. I think that any believer who has the Spirit might identify himself with what is of God in him, and say that he is not in the flesh but in the Spirit and could speak of Christ living in him; and yet he has to be built up in Christ. And this is the effect of the truth being digested into his moral being. He comes to know that the contrary element is himself, and that is the flesh, but then he is not in it, and so judges it as not himself. That is, not his true self with God. I think that what God regards is the individual, it is he that is born again or new created, and in this sense there is danger in being too abstract, though many things can only be apprehended abstractly while things are as they are now.
In regard to what you say as to opposition to the gospel I can only say that it has never come before me, nor do I think that it would be countenanced by any right-thinking people. It appears to me that the gospel is the great interest of all, and that this should be insisted on, and that if prayer is desired in a special way, it should be on the part of the spiritual, and not on the part of the evangelists. Service is essentially individual as the result of gift. Romans 12 is clear as to this, and each servant should carry out his service in responsibility to the Lord, and any banding together of any particular class of servants is highly undesirable, and tending to form a party through some special interest, and there is no such thing properly. May the good Lord keep us. With love in the Lord, believe me,
Your affectionate brother,
F E. Raven.
[p. 308] 10, CROOMS HILL,
GREENWICH,
December 15th, 1902.
My Dear Brother, — I am glad to give you such answers to your questions as I am able. There is much difficulty in speaking about quickening as a process, for Scripture never speaks of it in that light. On the one hand divine persons are said to quicken, and certain people are said to have been quickened. Thus it is only spoken of in connection with the One who does it, and the result in the one who is the subject of it. So no one can say much as to the operation in itself, nor is it necessary. We have to judge of persons on other ground, that is as to faith and the possession of the Spirit. Scripture does not seek to bring new birth and quickening together, and the reason may be that new birth never goes beyond earth, and quickening is necessary for heaven. For that we must live in a new state altogether, and so we are said to be quickened with Christ. Hence, so far as I can see, quickening is a work of God in a man by the Spirit by which he can live in the same sphere of affection as Christ. And the thought must go on to the body, so that the state may be complete. Now we are quickened together with Christ. I do not think that you will gain much by mixing this up with new birth, which stands in connection with a man coming under the moral sway of God. Each is looked at as complete in itself and not as part of anything else. This is evident in the Ephesians. I think that if all these expressions are looked at in their moral bearing the difficulty disappears. The difficulty arises from the attempt to construe them in a natural way. Then as to the question of eternal life, Scripture does not appear to connect it either with new birth or with quickening. It appears to be connected with Christ and faith, and the Spirit. The question of a person [p. 309] being a christian is determined by the possession of the Spirit, and the Spirit is the One of whom the believer is to reap eternal life. But if the believer has not reaped it, you could not unchristianise him. I do not know that quickening is an expression that applies exclusively to christians, for in a national way it will apply to Israel. They will be quickened out of the dust. But the connection in the New Testament is peculiar, and relates to our being in a state in which we can live together with Christ. I hope that you may be helped with those with whom you are in controversy. With conceit there is little hope. I return your letter as you wish. With love in the Lord, believe me,
Your affectionate brother,
F E. Raven.
10, CROOMS HILL,
GREENWICH,
February 13th, 1903.
Mrs. C. A. Markham,
Cranford.
My Dear Miss Mary, — On my return home from a few days’ absence I found your card and was very glad to be reminded of you. I felt a sensation of regret that we did not avail ourselves of the opportunity of seeing the place of your work. It looks pleasing enough in the picture, on the bank of the river. I hope that you are prospering in every way, and that in spite of the temptation that college life must present, you are able to keep your head above water.
There is no doubt that in these days the young are exposed to a good deal that tests their faith in going through the educational courses. Unbelief seems almost to be taken for granted, as though lawlessness of mind could be right. Man may be a very intelligent [p. 310] being, but he did not acquire his own intelligence, and he is but a creature, with limits placed on him beyond which he has no right to transgress. However, the common idea is that there is nothing in the universe on which the mind of man may not exert itself, and that the idea of revelation is an absurdity. I earnestly trust that you may be kept simple in faith ...
With kind love to yourself, and all at home, believe me,
Affectionately yours in Christ,
F E. Raven.
10, CROOMS HILL,
GREENWICH,
March 20th, 1903.
Dr. Roberts.
My Dear Brother, — I send just a line to acknowledge receipt of your kind note, and will ask you on my behalf to thank the brothers at Dublin for their invitation to me to visit them when in Ireland. I will not give any definite answer at present as my arrangements are not sufficiently defined as yet. I will be prepared to leave the matter in the hands of Mr. Malcolm Greeves, and will mention the matter to him this evening as he is in London. I thank you much too for your kind offer of hospitality, as to which I will defer any reply for the moment, I can only say that I hope that we may find you better than you were last year. I am curious to see if Boyd will be allowed to come to Dublin, and if so, how his ministry will be accepted. I hear that he has been very well received in Edinburgh, though some there might not be in entire sympathy with him. He is a valuable man. I hope that Mrs. Roberts is well, and with love in the Lord, remain,
Your affectionate brother,
F E. Raven.