Student cracks code of shorthand manuscripts left by Baptist 'patron saint'
Coded documents left by one of the founders of the modern missionary movement have been deciphered by a student at the University of St Andrews.
Baptist leader Andrew Fuller (1754-1815) was a supporter of William Carey, the first modern missionary to India, and hugely influential in the growth of the Baptist movement.
Fuller was a profoundly signficant figure in the Baptist story, he told Christian Today. 'First, he wrote the book that brought Particular Baptists into the evangelical movement, overcoming hard-line Calvinism,' he said. 'All contemporary British Baptists are his heirs....
June A. Nadolny wrote: 1. "The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?" - Jer.17:9
2. "Let the words of my mouth, and the meditation of my heart, *be acceptable* in thy sight, O LORD, my strength, and my redeemer." - Ps 19:14
Take care sister. May you walk in the light of His countenance and may we each prove the sufficiency of His grace in our earthly pilgrimage. In Christian fellowship, June
Thanks, June
1.The verse of Jeremiah is amply justified by the obtuse conclusions some draw out without proper understanding. Christ had a lot of this happening during his earthly ministry, as we see in the Gospels.
2.Certainly it can be said of John UK what people had said of another John, "John did no miracle: but all things that John spake of this man (Jesus) *were true*
He battled against error, and some passing as orthodox 'evangelicals' are glad of his "fall" or jugde him for his faults, which he had, missing the big picture! The lamentable thing is that in spite of his flaws he was a voice for truth. 'O, let our words be acceptable in your sight of God'
One can tell enemy from foe by the way we act re. the sins of others, either expose them or cover them. The thermometer of love shows up.
B.McCausland wrote: Dear June, God can make events as this work for our good; so whining us from the 'good' of sermons, or Christian discussions, he can draw and bless us into the 'best' of his own word instead, not for novelties, personal fancies, petty talk or debate, but to dig deep into himself, for which there are no comparable substitutes whatsoever, no matter how good a preacher, or a Christian fellowship might be, though helping aids such be in Christian experience.
Amen sister.
"And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose." - Rom. 8:28
" . . and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ." - 1 John 1:3b
Re the heart of man . . "The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?" - Jer. 17:9
It is good to take the psalmist's prayer for our own:
"Let the words of my mouth, and the meditation of my heart, be acceptable in thy sight, O LORD, my strength, and my redeemer." - Psalm 19:14
Take care sister. May you walk in the light of His countenance and may we each prove the sufficiency of His grace in our earthly pilgrimage.
B. McCausland wrote: ..... Regretfully, and unfairly, what he got in the end seems a 'merciless' dismissal at the hands of some of his "brethren" who fell on him in his exasperation. "Love covers multitude of faults"
Who are these “brethren” you accuse of mercilessly dismissing John UK?
Lurker and James, who were the targets of his unrelenting attacks have not responded in the manner you described and in fact he didn’t view them as brethren but as heretics!!
UPS and Christopher have been gracious and a few others pointed out his apparent inability to apologize sincerely, which accusation is borne out in his last post.
June A. Nadolny wrote: "Love covers a multitude of faults" B Mc We must keep John in our prayers. for John-UK's encouragement: Prov.18:24b “... there is a friend that sticketh closer than a brother”
Dear June, God can make events as this work for our good; so whining us from the 'good' of sermons, or Christian discussions, he can draw and bless us into the 'best' of his own word instead, not for novelties, personal fancies, petty talk or debate, but to dig deep into himself, for which there are no comparable substitutes whatsoever, no matter how good a preacher, or a Christian fellowship might be, though helping aids such be in Christian experience. May the Lord be pleased to grant John robust growth inside the perfect refuge and companionship of God, the true gentleman he is to those that walk upright. And the same to you dear sister.
Man's heart is an unfathomable mine of destruction, who can contain it? Only by the mercies of God, when walking in the secret of his presence and in the strength of his might, such can be subdued. Man cannot change man; even Christ left some to their own, "... the Pharisees were offended, after they heard this saying ... he said, let them alone" Running the race by faith and grace, Kind regards
B.McCausland . . you have expressed that which I could not find adequate words for. The passage re: Joseph seems especially relevant.
"John UK is a sincere, yet imperfect man. If his remarks got out of hand of late, it should be acknowledged that we have seen far worse behaviour from his accusers here in the past who often used blatant insult as a norm, yet all this going unchecked.
John did not misrepresent as a norm. He took time to ask and to proceed accordingly. Regretfully, and unfairly, what he got in the end seems a 'merciless' dismissal at the hands of some of his "brethren" who fell on him in his exasperation."
As you say, "Love covers a multitude of faults"
B Mc We must keep John in our prayers.
Posting for John-UK's encouragement:
Prov. 18:24b “. . . there is a friend that sticketh closer than a brother.”
Matthew Henry commentary:
In our troubles we expect comfort and relief from our relations,
but sometimes there is a friend, that is nothing akin to us, the bonds of whose esteem and love prove stronger than those of nature, and, when it comes to the trial, will do more for us than a brother will.
Christ is a friend to all believers that sticks closer than a brother; to him therefore let them show themselves friendly.
Perhaps the words spoken about the patriarch of old may have a place here,
"Joseph is a fruitful bough, ... by a well; whose branches run over the wall: The archers have sorely grieved him, and shot at him, ... But his bow abode in strength, and the arms of his hands were made strong by the hands of the mighty God of Jacob; from ... the shepherd, the stone of Israel"
John UK is a sincere, yet imperfect man. If his remarks got out of hand of late, it should be acknowledged that we have seen far worse behaviour from his accusers here in the past who often used blatant insult as a norm, yet all this going unchecked.
If he strove of late bravely against cardinal error, he was left alone to do so, only to become in the end the single target of those that condemned him. If he took extreme pains to clarify James' senseless arguments for days and weeks with much patience and kindness, his detractors ignore this, not only leaving him alone in his efforts, but dropping on him as a due of fire.
John did not misrepresent as a norm. He took time to ask and to proceed accordingly. Regretfully, and unfairly, what he got in the end seems a 'merciless' dismissal at the hands of some of his "brethren" who fell on him in his exasperation.
Cont. "Then said the Jews among themselves, Whither will he go, that we shall not find him? will he go unto *the dispersed* among the Gentiles, and teach the Gentiles?
The true Jews united in the expectation of a coming Messiah, the Christus of the Greek language, as even a Samaritan woman could quote.
John, not sure why you ask this question, but bland/blank statements as this do not suit the genre of divine revelation, as the context defines the meaning of terms, which can be used in more than one sense, say figuratively, literally, retorically, as a type, as an illustration of simply with different, but close, meaning.
For instance, the term judgment can mean more than one thing in Scripture. It can mean retribution, a veridic, a path to obtain justice, or a concious approval of what is right. The context will guide.
So with Jew, it is much more than a biological ascentry, it is a spiritual culture brought to pass in order to frame the plan of redemption. Christ defined it this way: "salvation is of the Jews", not meaning that they are the originators of salvation, but that their intrinsic existence had the one purpose of channeling of the means of salvation, by type, ordinances, history, revelation, and witness.
This is what binded Jews together where ever they were dispersed, be a Jew born in Pontus as Aquila, or born in Alexandria as Apollos, -a Jew with a Greek name, or from Tarsus as Paul. It was 'spiritual culture' that linked them all. See, "Then said the Jews among themselves, Whither will he go, that we shall not find him? will he go unto *the dispersed*
B. McCausland wrote: Cont. ... The immense ethnic mixer present at Pentecost. Lastly, Paul, pertaining to a family from 'Judah' in exile in Tarsus, declares himself as a true *Israelite* from the tribe of Benjamin, though he generally uses the term 'Jew' in his theological treatises to epitomise the figure of an ethnic Hebrew or Abraham's descendant.
Thank you sister, so are you saying that when we read "Jew" in the NT (except for the "true Jews" which June mentioned earlier, thank you) we are looking at ethnic Hebrews or physical descendants of Abraham?
Cont. ... The immense ethnic mixer present at Pentecost.
Lastly, Paul, pertaining to a family from 'Judah' in exile in Tarsus, declares himself as a true *Israelite* from the tribe of Benjamin, though he generally uses the term 'Jew' in his theological treatises to epitomise the figure of an ethnic Hebrew or Abraham's descendant.
John, adding here some comments re the 10 tribes The misunderstanding surrounding the Gentile/Jew issue owes much to dispensationalism, which exacerbates an unbiblical unbalance between these ethnicities.
Firstly, the term Gentiles throughout the OT means *peoples* or nations, not really *none-Jew* as it is often portrayed, while all along there are repeated statements affirming God's good will towards the *nations* (goyhim, Gentiles) very contrary to the misconstrued mutual exclusiveness of each other. A quick scan for the term Gentiles will reveal this.
Secondly, affirming your point most of the disciples were from the so called 'Galilee of the Gentiles', (say the 10 tribes) this expresion alluding to the fact of divers coexisting peoples, yet they considered themselves as true Israelites as Christ himself stated about Nathaniel, which fact explains the mocking remarks Galileeans suffered, as "can any good come from ..."
Thirdly, the nation of Israel when Jesus came, and before, was far from a pure exclusive Jewish state. It was rather an ethnic melting pot. E.g. we see the Syriophenician woman, Greeks wishing to see Jesus, Roman officers seeking Christ's favour, proselites as the Eunuch, and many other hints throughout the Gospels, but most clearly the immense ethnic
Basically, what Andrew Fuller opposed, and what mainstream evangelical Reformed believers oppose, was a kind of hyper-Calvinism, that emphasised election so extremely, that they negated evangelism.
It was one of these hyper Calvinist elders at a Baptist meeting that tried to silence Willliam Carey when he was appealing for the need to preach the gospel to the whole world with the comment that if people were meant to hear the Gospel then God would do it in His own way.
William Carey referred this elder to the Great Commission, and not long after went out to his lifelong missionary work in India, never to return.
It is because of William Carey, and the people that supported him like Andrew Fuller that the Bible is translated into many Indian languages, and that India has multitudes of Christians, despite its Hindu, Muslim, Sikh and Jain history.
Benjamin wrote: Thanks John I enjoyed reading your post. I also am in the dark as to what a “hardline Calvinist” is?
Thank you Benjamin. You can come out into the light now, they are simply hyper Calvinists, who take the sovereignty of God to such an extreme they never call on men to repent or believe the gospel.
Coded documents left by one of the founders of the modern missionary movement have been deciphered by a student at the University of St Andrews.
Baptist leader Andrew Fuller (1754-1815) was a supporter of William Carey, the first modern missionary to India, and hugely influential in the growth of the Baptist movement.
Fuller was a profoundly signficant figure in the Baptist story, he told Christian Today. 'First, he wrote the book that brought Particular Baptists into the evangelical movement, overcoming hard-line Calvinism,' he said. 'All contemporary British Baptists are his heirs. ...
Amen and Amen. Andrew Fuller was one of many who sought a better way than hardline Calvinism. It is interesting news because today at meeting (five hours) I explained what it means to be a Particular Baptist (like myself). The original group had the full title Strict and Particular Baptist. They were strict about who could receive the bread and wine (limited to the church), they believed in Particular Redemption (that Jesus specifically died for those given him in covenant by God the Father) and Baptist (because they believed in believer's baptism by immersion).
COMMENTS 
locked 
System Notice
