All right, let's pray before we get started. Father God, thank you that we have men and women that have run their race before us and that we can learn from. Thank you that even though our course is different, we have the same guide, the same spirit that says, here's the way, walk in it. Thank you that we can depend that your words will never fail, that your love for your people will never fail, and that we will make it to the end of our race as well. Thank you for this comfort. Give us grace tonight to learn and apply what we learn. We thank you and we pray in the Lord Jesus' name, amen. Okay, everybody can hear me okay, right? All right. Yes. Tonight, we're going to talk about one of my favorites, actually, they've all been one of my favorites. So it's hard to, to say that wouldn't have it mean anything. But before we get started, I want to talk about, as usual, the context. And a reminder of when all this that we're going to be learning about is happening and what's going on in the world. And I know it sounds like I'm pontificating when I go through this, but it really is important to remember what was happening in the world at large. I think if you don't You can, things without context can mean any number of things. But once they're set in a context, you begin to understand what these things mean and how important they are. So I'm gonna give you some background and context once again. The early to mid 20th century, so it's not that far back, was a time of turmoil in the church and in the world. We've heard about the church, what Machen was going through in the U.S. and in the world. We had world wars that were happening. Those world wars and the denominational drift were a surprise to those that thought the world had progressed beyond such things. but were in reality the logical outward results of embracing the philosophy of the 18th and 19th centuries. The inward results were even more devastating, as rationalism promised the world that the power of the human mind was great enough to unravel Hand in hand with that view of man and the discoveries he made and continued to make came the naturalistic view that there was no need for a God. We can explain everything without the need to refer back to God. For the vast majority of people in the developed portions of the world at that time, the march of science seemed to have the inexorable momentum of rightness and progress behind it. And therefore, anything that harkened back to a pre-scientific view was considered not only outdated, but wrong and even harmful to the individual and to society. Now, many thought this was an exhilarating time of growth for the human race and an opportunity to remove the religious baggage that had been hindering the fulfillment of human potential for centuries, and to bring about a new and better world through the application of scientific principles to the individual, which gave birth to psychology. and applying those same principles to cultures, which gave birth to sociology. But some found that the logically consistent way of living in a purely material universe without God was not the joy of being free from moral accountability as they had hoped, but the despair of living without purpose or hope in a desolate, and meaningless world. Even the terminology of the hard sciences, and by that I mean physics, math, astronomy, things like that, versus psychology and sociology, which are more the soft sciences. So the terminology of the hard sciences during this time was an indication of the rudderless drift of the world away from the concreteness of true and false toward a misty realm of questions without answers and answers without questions. So now, please don't check out on me. I'm not gonna get too obtuse here. Probably the most important of these terms was introduced in the early part of the 20th century when science was revolutionized by the implications of Albert Einstein's that explained a great many things in the physical world based on the fact that scientifically measured results could change relative to the point of view of the observer. Unfortunately, however, the concept of relativity morphed into relativism in the social and moral realm and opened the door for the departure from absolute truth to relative truth. The second term, which is actually more disturbing for science and in the long run for the world, was coined a few years later by a young physicist named Werner Heisenberg, who found that there was a, quote, indeterminacy or inexactness, end quote, when measuring any phenomena in nature. And that exactness could not be improved upon due to the underlying structure of the physical world itself. While this doesn't sound particularly frightening, the implications were startling. It meant that primarily at the subatomic level, scientists could never know with certainty the absolute position and speed of an object such as an electron or a proton. One or the other could be known, but never both because, according to Heisenberg, that's just the way the universe is built. In order to understand and describe what was going on in this realm, Heisenberg invented a new mathematical discipline called quantum mechanics that relied not on precision and exactness in measurements, but on probabilities and what some have even called irrationalities to account for the nature of the universe at that level. In this realm, things could happen without a cause and could be in multiple places at one time. They could appear where they never used, where nothing ever used to be before. Into the confusion of scientists and non-scientists alike, he named this fundamental characteristic of the universe, the uncertainty principle. which is still the accepted approach by science to this very day, though reluctantly because it seems to undercut the exactness and validity of what science claims to be able to do. So we have relativity and uncertainty. These words were the gifts of the brightest minds in science in the early 20th century, And they say that we are living in a physical world that is different based on the point of view of the observer, and that even when the differences are factored in, the world can never be measured with an absolute precision. As we can all imagine, because we've seen it played out, the world reasoned that if even the fabric of physical reality could not be measured with certainty, and the results were only valid based on the point of view of the observer, then it stood to reason that all of the myths, opinions, traditions, rules, and laws built up over the centuries in different cultures, or even over a span of time within the same culture, were just as likely to be uncertain and relative only to the point of view of the individual or the culture involved at that particular time. Once uncertainty was combined with relativity, In the moral realm, they together morphed in such a way that standards for truth, goodness, and beauty were deemed unknowable or inexact and therefore not universally binding on humanity. Now, regardless of whether we understand these theories or principles that happened over a century ago, or even aware of them, their consequences are still felt by everyone alive today. It was into this intellectual world of chaos, relativism, and uncertainty that the subject of our study was born, Dr. David Martin Lloyd-Jones. Now, as usual, I want to give you the sources I used in this study and remind you that this is just an introduction. There is such a body of work here that it's impossible to compress it down into an hour. But here's what I use. The first is D. Martin Lloyd-Jones, The First 40 Years by Ian Murray. This was published in 1982. It's the first of two volumes, and it covers Martin Lloyd-Jones early years through his installation as pastor of Westminster Chapel. Ian Murray spent much time with Martin Lloyd-Jones in his later years as he began this biography, and we are indebted to him for much that we know about the doctor's thinking and how he approached his ministry in these early years. Next, look at the size of this one. This is the second part, D. Martin Lloyd-Jones, The Fight of Faith. This volume traces the influence of MLJ, I'm gonna abbreviate and call him MLJ, if that's all right with everybody, throughout the reformed evangelical world and his stand for biblical truth during the key issues of the times. As Lloyd-Jones' assistant beginning in the 1950s, Ian Murray was an eyewitness to much of what is discussed here. For myself, as an engineer, these two volumes showed me that Martin Lloyd-Jones' view of biblical Christianity, far from being an emotionally moralistic and fuzzy proposition, was something that could be logically and rationally presented in a compelling and intellectually satisfying way. I highly recommend both of these books. Next, also by Ian Murray, Martin Lloyd-Jones, Messenger of Grace. This is a topical book with lessons from the lifelong ministry of Lloyd-Jones, including a summary of his legacies, which we'll look at later on. Next is Logic on Fire, which is a video about Martin Lloyd-Jones' life. It has interviews with his daughters, with his grandchildren, with many, many other people who have benefited from his ministry. There are several others on YouTube interviews about him, with him, that I encourage you to watch too. I haven't seen a bad one, so. It's on Amazon Prime, Kathy tells me. Logic on Fire. There have been additional works by others about Dr. Lloyd-Jones that have come out in the past decade, and while they may be of some value, I prefer, when possible, to learn straight from the horse's mouth, so to speak, and to let Ian Murray, who probably knew the doctor, as he was called, better than anyone, along with the doctor's own sermons, be my teachers. Now, in addition to these books, There are many collections of the doctor's sermons that have been printed over the years. Oh, excuse me, one I forgot is Memories of Sandfields. Now this is by the doctor's wife, Bethan Lloyd-Jones, and it is, look how thin it is. So I'm gonna recommend this to you because it's her memories of interesting people that they met when they first started out in ministry. and their conversion, and it's just a tremendously edifying books. And it's something you can read in a Sunday afternoon. So I highly recommend this to you. So in addition to those, we're gonna be referring to a couple of others. The first is preaching and preachers. This was a series of lectures that Martin Lloyd-Jones gave to students at Westminster Seminary in Philadelphia in 69. Remember, Westminster was founded by J. Gresham Machen, that was part of that study. The second is Christian Unity. These are sermons, part of his Ephesians series on chapter four, but it's specifically about unity. They were delivered from 1954 to 1963. This is an eight-part set. The next one is Joy Unspeakable, which is part of his longer series on the sermons on John's Gospel. This was delivered in 1964 through 1965. The fourth is Revival. which is a series of sermons delivered in 1959 to commemorate the 100-year anniversary of the Welsh Revival in 1859. And finally, Knowing the Times, which is a collection of topical sermons and addresses delivered at various times about the issues facing the evangelical church across the world. Highly recommend all of those. Now, some have said that his sermon series preached in 1963 and published in book form as The Cross was the most helpful book in their spiritual progress. Now, I can understand their choice because the historical life and work of Jesus had been downplayed for decades by liberalism in pulpits across the nation and on both sides of the Atlantic. and these sermons cut straight through that fuzzy thinking. However, I was blessed from the day of my conversion onward to have a full dose of preaching about the actual historical work of Jesus from my pastor, Steve Martin. So while I appreciate the value of this book, I was more interested in what being a Christian in the world looked like and how to persevere through the trials, tribulations, setbacks, and failures that happened to pilgrims on their way to Celestial City. For me then, the two books of his sermons that have been most helpful are Studies in the Sermon on the Mount, one of my all-time favorites. Kathy's given a thumbs up to that too. This is, it's in two volumes. I got a first edition here. That's why they're wrapped in plastic. These are two, this is my all time favorite about what is it like to live as a Christian in the world? The second is just as helpful and it's called Spiritual Depression, Its Causes and Cure. She's giving me a thumbs up on this one too. Needless to say, I highly recommend these books to anyone who is willing to admit their struggles and has a teachable heart. And for those of you who aren't aware, all of the 1600 sermons of his that were recorded at Westminster Chapel are available to download and listen to for free at mljtrust.org. There's even an app that you can put on your phone that gives you direct access to the sermons. The audio quality of some is not great, but it's good enough to hear the doctor say, the words to which I should like to call your attention this morning are found in the book of Dot Dot Dot. and then he'll go off into a wonderful exposition of unity in the middle of a denominational division, or peace in the middle of World War II bombings in London, or revival in the middle of a very dead time for the church as a whole. His approach was not determined by circumstances in his city or country, or by the general attitudes of society, but by God's word as it applied to the circumstances and attitudes of society. Now, for those of you who are not familiar with the doctor, I will give a brief history of his life and then try to provide an account of his impact on Christianity across the world in the 20th century. Remember, this is just an introduction. Martin Lloyd-Jones was born in December of 1899, not last century, but the century before, in Cardiff, South Wales, but at the age of five, his family moved northwest to Longito, Cardiganshire, which was a location of the church built for the evangelist Daniel Rowlands, in 1763 after he was ejected from the Church of England for practicing Calvinistic Methodism. You may or may not have heard of him. The reason I'm putting it in here is Martin Lloyd-Jones recalls later about the church there during his childhood. He says, quote, while large congregations still met to worship on Sundays, morning and evening, it was the strong sense of tradition that accounted for Langitho had lost the fire and the rejoicing of the Methodist revival to the same extent as Westminster Abbey had lost the life and vitality of the early church. Now, his father was a Congregationalist that believed the best work of Christianity was to achieve social change through education and political action. His mother was committed to the Church of England, So it's no surprise that in these surroundings, Martin and his two brothers grew up with no clear idea of religion. However, to show how early appearances don't tell the whole story about someone's life, everyone in the village assumed that Martin's younger brother, Vincent, would grow up to be a minister because he never missed a meeting at the church, whether it was a worship service or a prayer meeting or any other type of meeting. Martin, on the other hand, they said, was much more interested in playing football with the village boys than anything else. In reality, Vincent became a high court judge, and his older brother Harold died in the influenza outbreak in 1918. Martin, the football player, became the minister. Their father's general store was the center of their family, and they all lived in bedrooms above it. One night when Martin was 11 years old and his mother and older brother were out of town, he and his younger brother were awakened by their father because the house was on fire. Martin's father literally threw him out of the window to be caught by three men waiting below and then climbed down a ladder hastily put in place with his brother. The building and the goods were a total loss and his father was never able to recover the business back to the point it was before the fire. And financial difficulties plagued the family for the rest of his life. It was not long after the fire that one of Martin's teachers told him that if he didn't apply himself to his studies, he would not get accepted to the county school. He realized then that with his father's financial situation, that would mean the end of his education. From that point forward, he began applying himself to reading and studying and placed second in the exam for placement in the county school. Though he did well in school, in his later years, he says of this time in his life, quote, I must add that I suffered at the same time from a greater sickness and a more painful one, which has remained with me all along life's path. That was hiraeth, which means, or translated, longing or homesickness. What is the reason for it? He continues. The psychologist cannot explain it. I believe that this again, like the circulation of the blood, belongs to a man's constitution. Be that as it may, longing is an awful thing, as also the feeling of loneliness. and of being destitute and unhappy, which stems from it. It is difficult to define this homesickness or longing, but to me, it means the consciousness of a man being out of his home area and that which is dear to him. That is why it can be felt even amongst a host of people and amidst nature's beauty. Now, recall J.C. Ryle said he still felt the pain even toward the end of his life of loss and loneliness. Now, this longing never left Martin Lloyd-Jones. And while I don't think it was the exact same thing that J.C. Ryle talked about, it may be close to what C.S. Lewis called, strangely enough, joy, which he defined, which C.S. Lewis defined as, quote, unsatisfied desire, which is itself more desirable than any other satisfaction. It might also equally well be called a particular kind of unhappiness or grief. So both he and Martin Lloyd-Jones appeared to have encountered it initially as a result of personal loss and sadness. I mentioned this to counter the image of Lloyd-Jones as an intellectual who was above mere human feelings. Now, as noted earlier, MLJ became a very good student, and he set his sights on becoming a doctor. He was accepted to medical school at St. Bartholomew's, which was the best medical school in Great Britain, at 16, and he graduated at 21. Lord Horder, was the physician to the king and several prime ministers, and he asked Martin Lloyd-Jones to be his assistant. Sir Patterson Ross, president of the Royal College of Surgeons said that Lloyd-Jones was one of the best clinicians he ever knew. Now, this explains a little bit about his approach to the scriptures and to teaching. It's one of the reasons that he appealed so much to me because he had a logical diagnostic mind that approached the scriptures, not as mystical fables, but as the truth from God. And therefore, he said, this is a rational proposition. How can I deliver it rationally and compellingly? So again, a great appeal to me, very logical and straightforward. Now, at this point, to Lord Hoarder, he had access to the great and mighty in the land, like I said, kings and prime ministers. But during this time, he began to see that even those at the highest end of the social spectrum suffered with the same misery in their lives as those at the bottom. In going through Lord Hoarder's cases, couldn't be classified as a particular disease, but had causes typically outside the province of medicine. They had problems with their souls. Now, all this time, Floyd Jones had been going to church and considered himself a Christian based on his profession at the age of 14. But as he observed the world around him, And as he began to sense his own sinfulness, he became convicted and convinced that he had never been a Christian. He began to see that not only were his outwardly moral acts full of sinful pride, but his whole intellect was completely self-centered. He came to the point of seeing that his life and every part of his being was in rebellion against God. I will quote his own description of his conviction, quote, I am a Christian solely and entirely because of the grace of God and not because of anything I have thought or said or done. He brought me to know that I was dead, dead in trespasses and sins, a slave to the world and the flesh and the devil, but in me dwelleth no good thing, and that I was under the wrath of God and heading for eternal punishment. He brought me to see that the real cause of all my troubles and ills and that of all men was an evil and fallen nature which hated God and loved sin. My trouble was not only that I did things that were wrong, but that I myself was wrong at the very center of my being." As he found peace with God, He also found God pressing strongly on his spirit a sense of calling to preach the message of peace through the work of Christ. It is singularly strange that God used his time at the very heart of rationalism and scientific humanism at the pinnacle of medical science at St. Bartholomew's in London to show him the bankruptcy of science and psychology to heal the real problems with men's and women's souls. After struggling with this calling for over a year, he decided to leave his profession in medicine and become a pastor in a mission church in the small Welsh mining community of Aberavon. Now, To give you some context again, this was in 1925, 1926, which was the middle of the liberal modernist crisis that J. Gresham Machen was facing in America. And those who attended churches at that time in England were being fed the same watered down liberal message of optimistic platitudes and humanistic hope from pulpits around the nation. God, however, was equipping Lloyd-Jones in a way that would cause him to shine completely the wisdom of men and devote himself to the foolishness of preaching. He would, for the rest of his life, put his trust in the words of the Bible, in direct opposition to the currents of the church and society, believing that God could and would save his people by the faithful preaching of his word, without the additions and subtractions of men who were trying to make the offense of the cross more acceptable to a world of self-confident and self-absorbed sinners." Again, here in his own words, his move to Abereba, quote, When I came here, people said to me, why give up good work, a good profession, after all, the medical profession? Why give that up? If you had been a bookie, for instance, and wanted to give that up to preach the gospel, we should understand and agree with you and say you were doing a grand thing. But medicine, a good profession, healing the sick and relieving pain? One man even said this. If you were a solicitor and gave it up, I'd give you a pat on the back. But to give up medicine, oh, well. I felt like saying to them, if you knew more about the work of a doctor, you would understand. We spend most of our time rendering people fit to go back to their sin. I saw men on their sickbeds. I spoke to them of their immortal souls. They promised grand things. Then they got better and went back to their old sin. I saw I was helping those men to sin, and I decided that I would do no more of it. I want to heal souls. If a man has a diseased body and his soul is all right, he is all right to the end. But a man with a healthy body and diseased soul is all right for 60 years or so, and then he has to face an eternity of hell. Ah, yes. we have sometimes to give up those things which are good for that which is best of all, the joy of salvation and newness of life. At the beginning of his time at Sandfields, as the church there was called, he married Bethan Phillips, who gave up her own medical career, believe it or not, to become his lifelong helpmate and mother of their two children. I mentioned her because when she married him and moved with him to Aberavon, she thought she was a Christian also. She says in that book, Memories of Sandfields, quote, I was born into a Christian family, christened as a baby, confirming the christening on becoming a church member at 12 years old, and so I did not know what else was needed. I was afraid of God and afraid of dying and eschewed evil because of this. I tried to do all a Christian should do in such duties as church attendance, and I accepted the Bible as the word of God, but I had no inner peace or joy, and I knew nothing of the glorious release of the gospel. In those early years at Aberavon, I rejoiced to see men and women converted, drunkards, evil livers, all manner of types and backgrounds and all different ages. I rejoiced to see them, and I envied them and sometimes wished, when I saw their radiant faces and changed lives, that I had been a drunkard or worse, so that I could be converted. I never imagined that I needed to be converted, having always been a Christian, or that I could get more than I had already. In those first two years, God graciously used Martin's morning sermons to open my eyes and to show me myself and my needs. I came to know my sins forgiven and the peace of God in my heart," end quote. Reminds me a bit of Sarah Edwards as she came to know the Lord under Jonathan's ministry. Now, Lloyd-Jones' straightforward method of preaching directly to the conscience was something new that few, including his wife, had ever heard or experienced, not only in Sandfields, but across the country. And as he preached the simple gospel, many who assumed themselves to be Christians, and many of those who most certainly knew themselves not to be Christians, were convicted and converted. He left Sandfields after 10 years in 1938 for health reasons, but after recovering was asked to be the associate pastor of Westminster Chapel in London under the aging Dr. Campbell Morgan. Now this is not Westminster Abbey, which is part of the Church of England. This is Westminster Chapel. He accepted and was to be installed on September 4 1939 but the service was canceled due to the declaration of war with Germany, the day before, and the expected bombing of London at any time. His ministry in London would be sustained throughout the war years, despite the difficulties the congregation faced in attending and finding shelter when the air raid sirens sounded, and the damage that the chapel itself received during the war, which wasn't great, but it was damaged partially. As the war continued, the message from liberal pulpits about the essential goodness of man message was still about man, about how he could be heroic, serene, and even happy despite the war. Their pastors complained that churches were not giving the people what they wanted, and that's why attendance was dropping. Lloyd-Jones, however, saw the problem differently and preached, quote, It is as the idea of judgment and the wrath of God have fallen into the background that our churches have become increasingly empty. The idea has gained currency that the love of God somehow covers everything and that it matters very little what we may do because the love of God will put everything right at the end. The more the church has accommodated her message to that greater has been the decline in attendance at places of worship," end quote. He stayed in the same pulpit for 30 years, from 1938 to 1968, when he retired once again for health reasons. After he recovered from surgery that year in 68, he continued to preach and to provide a voice of biblical orthodoxy in the midst of the declining church throughout his retirement up until the year before he died. The total difference in the content of his messages to anything else that was being preached was startling to people and ultimately was used by God for the salvation of many. He died March 1st, 1981 and was survived by his wife and daughters. Now, Since it isn't possible in this introduction to go into detail on all the various issues that were facing the church in those 30 years, and the role that he played as he spoke on behalf of biblical Christianity into the swirling liberal humanist decay, I will mention five of Lloyd-Jones' legacies taken from Ian Murray's book, Messenger of Grace, and from a recorded lecture of Ian Murray's in which he modified the list slightly. Number one, Martin Lloyd Jones lived as an example of what a Christian minister and pastor ought to be. In 1900, the minister had influence in a community. He was esteemed in the year 2000, The ministry is thought to be insignificant and unimportant and ridiculed by the media. Why? The ministry became a profession versus a calling. And those who chose it as a profession left the truth of the Bible to preach the ideas of men. As a result, God humbled the Christian ministry. But those who honor me, I will honor. God can restore and call men from unlikely places, as we see with Martin Lloyd-Jones, who was called from the citadel of humanism and evolutionary belief in such a way that there was no worldly explanation for his move. When someone praised him for his sacrifice and taking on the role of the minister, Lloyd-Jones says, quote, I gave up nothing. I received everything. I counted the highest honor God can bestow to be called to the ministry, end quote. Lloyd-Jones says in his book Preaching and Preachers, quote, a preacher is not a Christian who decides to preach. He does not just decide to do it. He does not even decide to take up preaching as a calling. Now that has often happened. There have been men who have rather liked the idea of being a minister. It seems to be an ideal type of life, a life with a fair amount of leisure, giving ample opportunity for reading, reading philosophy, theology, or anything they may want to read. If they happen to be poets, well, it is something that will give them ample time to write poetry. The same applies to essayists or novelists. This picture of the type of life lived by the minister has often appealed to young men, and there have been many who have gone into the ministry in that way. I need scarcely say that this is entirely wrong and quite foreign to the picture one gets in the scriptures, and also as one who, when you read the lives of the great preachers throughout the centuries, The answer to that false view is that preaching is never something that a man decides to do. What happens, rather, is that he becomes conscious of a call. This whole question of the call is not an easy matter, and all ministers have struggled with it because it is so vitally important for us. Am I called to be a preacher or not? How do I know? End quote. To learn more about those questions and his answers, I suggest you read the book, Preaching and Preachers. For me personally, I thank God for Lloyd-Jones because he encouraged and inspired my pastor, Steve Martin, when he felt that he was out of step with the evangelical world. Pastor Steve has told me he reads Lloyd-Jones' biography, two volumes, at least once a year and sometimes twice, and is always edified and encouraged. Just the other day, he told me of a quote he had recently read in the biography that ministered to him. I owe a debt to Martin Lloyd-Jones, and Ian Murray as his biographer, for helping my pastor persevere in order to help me persevere so I can be here to encourage you all to persevere. Number two legacy. Martin Lloyd-Jones preached that true Christianity is God-centered religion. He preached that God is sovereign and will bring all things to an end for his glory in the midst of sentimental, anecdotal, non-doctrinal sermons from liberal pulpits that were attempting to give comfort and satisfaction to man as their center. He preached that the gospel cross. It begins with God the Father and His man are brought into His presence. They see the need for the work of Jesus the Son on the cross. Sin and conversion can only be defined in terms of God. He said in his book, The Cross, quote, Jesus came because you and I and all mankind are guilty and under the condemnation of a holy God. All this nonsense about good men and bad men, moral and immoral men, it means nothing in the sight of God. In the sight of God, the most respectable non-Christian is as damned and as hopeless as the vilest reprobate and sinner. There is no difference. Respectability does not count with God. is nothing in the sight of God. It is filthy rags, it is nothing. Yes, but then you say, well, why cannot God forget this? Why does the love of God not forgive a man who says he's sorry and who just says he's sorry and repents? Well, God unlike us is light and in him is no darkness at all. God is just, God is holy, God is righteous. Of course that means nothing to us. How can we think of holiness? We ugly, foul, vile, sinful creatures. No, we do not understand the righteousness of God. That is why modern man does not believe in the blood of the cross. He does not know what righteousness is. He does not know what justice is or what law is. He does not believe in discipline. His world is becoming a hell for that reason. But God is righteous. He is the lawgiver. He is holy. He is of so pure countenance that he cannot even look upon sin. And God cannot pretend that he has not seen it. God sees sin. He sees everything. He must punish sin. His own holy nature insists upon it, and he has told us abundantly that he is going to do so. So here's the problem. Man is a guilty sinner. God is a holy God. How can the two be brought together? The answer is the cross of Christ. So you take that type of preaching against the really fuzzy feel-good, man is a good creature, and you see that people were startled by it. It was just something they hadn't heard for years. He began preaching in a way that was utterly remarkable and considered old-fashioned and even harmful. It was not intended to congratulate morality or praise good intentions. It was not trying to build up man, but to tear down his self-respectability and bringing to the feet of God in absolute humiliation. God had intervened in Lloyd-Jones' life and taught him the emptiness of human pride and selfishness. He was forever convinced that God alone sought sinners and saved them. With God on the throne, it changed the whole approach to preaching versus having man on the throne with sermons trying to make people happy and not offend. He left to God the consequences of faithful preaching against the pride of man. And as a consequence, it made him bold in proclaiming God's grace. Calvinism made him unpopular, but he wanted everyone else to know the truth that could set them free. Third legacy, Martin Lloyd Jones believed the local church is the primary means of evangelism. In the early 20th century, it was assumed that organizations and interdenominational societies were the only way to make a difference. Small churches couldn't command public attention the way big events could, especially if there were celebrities involved. The idea was widespread, now listen to this, that most people are likely to be converted apart from the local church. That was the current thinking. Only in large crowds at crusade-type meetings was there any expectation for success in reaching society. In contrast to that, Lloyd-Jones believed that when the message is preached among believers, the Spirit anoints the preaching, and any unsaved people in the congregation would witness the power within the church. God's word faithfully preached will transform not only believers, but unbelievers as well, so that the body will show the effects of the reality of God's grace and begin to speak of it to their neighbors, spreading in an organic rather than programmatic way. Legacy number four, Martyn Lloyd-Jones spoke to his generation and beyond. Think for a moment about when he started his ministry. It was in 1927 on the eve of the Great Depression. And he was in a coal mining town that was poor as dirt already. And he saw children without breakfast or shoes. And as he preached God's word, it changed lives in all different types of situations. And hope was given to communities, not only his communities, but surrounding communities. As an example of his fearlessness and disagreeing with those in power, Lloyd-Jones was scheduled to speak at a meeting. And the Chancellor of the Exchequer of Great Britain, which is kind of like the Chairman of the Treasury, had opened the meeting with remarks about the need for prayer for the nation in order to improve moral standards. When Lloyd-Jones got up, he said in a rebuke to the chancellor that, quote, prayer is not a device for a means of improving national life. God doesn't exist for us, but we live for God, end quote. He said that England needed repentance and regeneration, not better morals, and only the power of biblical preaching could change hearts. As evidence of his impact beyond his country and his times, after his death, a tape ministry was established to send tapes of his sermons and got to the point of sending out over 50,000 tapes a year. But now, with the MLJ Trust, people are able to listen to his sermons online or download them and share them for free, so it isn't possible to know how many people are still benefiting from his ministry. As many of you can attest, his books have been very helpful. Those in prison or on voyages at sea have read them and been convicted, as have many others who had never heard of him before stumbling Mary told me that Martin Lloyd Jones sermons and the printed versions of his sermons are two different things. Not that they contain different things, but that the sermons were delivered in real time and had an immediacy and an urgency about them. that was very compelling to those who listened, convicting them and carrying them along with irresistible force to the throne of God. Even the recordings don't do him justice, he said. The books, however, allow a concentrated study of his ideas, concepts, and logic that the doctor used in his sermons, which is also of great benefit to those of us who have never visited Westminster Chapel. As I said earlier, Pastor Steve benefited tremendously from his sermons, and therefore Kathy and I, and everyone under his ministry, benefited as well. Number five, Martin Lloyd Jones understood the times. He looked at the broad picture of the church. He traveled the whole United Kingdom, the US, and the world. He knew the state of the churches in the UK better than anyone. its decline in numbers, its lack of joy, its deadness. The question on everyone's mind was how to address it. Evangelism through evangelistic campaigns said some, but Lloyd-Jones said evangelism was not the first thing. The greatest need, he said, was that the church has to be revived. There needed to be repentance and real faith in the pulpits. His book on revival did not deny the great need facing his country and the world, but it did deny that the world could be changed by any other method other than biblical preaching. And in order to do that, the churches had to repent and return to the pure gospel and their first love. He had this to say about Genesis 26, 17 and 18, quote, and this is the Bible, quote, and Isaac digged the wells of water which they had digged in the days of Abraham his father, end quote. Then Lloyd-Jones said, quote, the kind of thing you read constantly in the books and religious journals is what we need, they say, is a message for this atomic age, and therefore we must all be engaging in a quest for truth, a search for the message that is needed. So we call in the prospectors, we look to the scientists, we look to philosophy and then psychology has its contribution to make. We call for the latest knowledge and learning, we want the very last advance in science and in culture in every shape and form. The whole idea is that the world is in a very serious predicament, and therefore it behooves all men of understanding to come together and pool their resources, call a congress of world faiths, bring in everybody who believes in any religion and worships any sort of God. At the present time, the thing that is most obvious about the life of the church in general is the multiplicity of consciences. There they are, trying to find the formula, trying to discover some word, trying to discover some message. It's this atomic age we're in. We must have a message for it. Instead of doing what Isaac did, he continued, we are calling in the prospectors, the water diviners, trying to see if we can discover a source or supply of water somewhere that will enable us to continue. But Isaac did nothing of the kind. He digged again the well of water, which they had digged in the days of Abraham. There is no need for us to prospect and send for the water diviners. Isaac said, my immediate need is to make certain we have a supply. The man who experiments in the midst of a crisis is a fool. He goes further. The basic assumption is that our problems are new, that they are quite unique, that the church and the world have never been confronted by such problems before. Now this is, of all the fallacies, the most fatal. And for these reasons, God is the same today as he was 1,000 years ago or 6,000 years ago, and man is the same. It is to me most incredible and incomprehensible that anybody who has ever read the Bible at all, or even indeed human history, could possibly dispute this even for a second. Look at the major social problems confronting us today, and you will find all of them in the Bible. So we are not confronted by a new problem. No, listen to the wisdom of Isaac. See the urgency of his position and remember that Abraham was a man that could find water and knew what he was doing. The history of the past has a great deal to tell us. Now, I may not have given you the whole sermon, but the gist was, Isaac knew what he needed to do in a crisis, and that was to go back to where water was found. Lloyd-Jones' point is, in our crisis, we don't need to experiment with new stuff, we need to go back to the old paths. So, how did the church respond to his plea for returning to the old paths? they denounced him with technicalities and said he was reckless with his interpretation of scripture, that Isaac was not trying to dig up revival at all, but merely needed water, that his was a poor exegesis and should not be put out to the congregation. Now, it's pathetic to me how badly they missed the point there, but that was how they were treating him at the time. He was being marginalized. Now, others said that the churches needed to stand together. They said this because of the decline of morals. This was no time to be divided over secondary issues. And they began forming non-denominational evangelistic associations, which ultimately led to the ecumenical movement. which matured into Evangelicals and Catholics Together movement. Lloyd-Jones agreed with the need for unity, even the visible unity of churches, but he said, before you can talk about unity, you have to talk about what, or rather who, you are united to. And unless the churches were biblically united with Christ, they were merely a worldly association or special interest club that tries to deliver man's best ideas about morality. Unity, as he defined it, was false unless it was built on the biblical foundation of a crucified and risen Christ. And he believed that rather than helping the situation, a false unity paralyzes and destroys the work of the true church. His concern was that if Bible believing Christians didn't stand together, then they would be overrun by a deviant and increasingly secular church with a message that was unrecognizable and with nothing about it that was distinctively Christian. He was constantly bombarded by those wanting a larger sphere of Christian witness and could not understand his reasons for not participating. He provided his rationale clearly in his sermon on Ephesians 4, 2 and 3. When speaking about the desire that all denominations should unite to fight communism and humanism, that they should put aside their doctrine in order to enhance their fellowship, Lloyd-Jones said, quote, clearly we must examine this attitude and must keep this modern idea of unity in our minds as we follow the apostles' teaching in this chapter. We must stress at once one thing, which is of the utmost importance. Whatever be the unity of which the apostles directly from all that has been said in the first three chapters of the epistle. You must not start in chapter four of the epistle to the Ephesians. To do so is to violate the context and to ignore the word therefore. In other words, you cannot have the Christian unity unless it is based on the great doctrines outlined in chapters one through three. So if anyone comes to you and says, it does not much matter what you believe, if we call ourselves Christians or if we believe in God in any sense, come let us all work together. You should say in reply, quote, but my dear sir, what about chapter one to three of the epistle to the Ephesians? I know of no unity except that which is the outcome of and the offspring of all the great doctrines which the apostle lays down in those chapters. Whatever this unity may be, we are compelled to say that it must be theological. It must be doctrinal. It must be based upon an understanding of the truth. Now, this is response to everybody saying, we need fellowship. Doctrine will divide us. We just want fellowship. We need to get together. He was pretty pointed in what he thought of that. Now, their response was to thoroughly denounce him in any theology that was not broad enough or loving enough to embrace the goodwill of men of different beliefs. His was a constrained spirit, they said, that did not have the good of humanity in view, and it was antithetical to the work Christ wanted to accomplish. A professor at Durham University said, quote, Dr. Martin Lloyd-Jones is trying to persuade us that there are precise doctrinal distinguishing marks of Christians, that we can distinguish him who believes from him who does not believe. In this respect, he has learned nothing from the greatest evangelical theologian of modern times, Carl Barth, there is no greater scandal in this complex situation than the refusal of Christians to accept their fellow Christians, end quote. Yeah, Dr. J.I. Packer said in disagreement with Lloyd-Jones, our concern must be as wide as God's. It is not an overstatement to say that Lloyd-Jones was alone in a fierce war with liberalism that continued throughout his preaching career and even into his retirement after the pulpit. Now, I'm gonna add a number six. Martin Lloyd-Jones believed the growth of the church depends entirely on the spirit. Many said that the best way to bring the church back to prominence and to restore its influence was to promote scholarship amongst its ministers so they could gain credibility by engaging the deeper philosophical teachings of the age. Others said that bringing important people into the church with their testimonies would give the church credibility. But Lloyd-Jones said that what the church needed was the Holy Spirit falling upon churches and anointing its pastors. John Knox once said that God gave the Spirit to plain men, and because of that, they had power. Lloyd-Jones was in an evangelistic meeting once, where there was no hint or expectation of revival. And while it was depressing to him, he realized that it was due to a false understanding of what produces growth. Lloyd-Jones believed the spirit was absolutely necessary to change hearts and to move men to pray, preach, and evangelize. His grandson has said that Lloyd-Jones preaching was not, quote, seeker friendly. In fact, he was seeker unfriendly, end quote. Lloyd-Jones believed if the spirit is at work, you do not need all the artificial accoutrements that so many people think we need today. He felt that a non-Christian ought to be uncomfortable in church because they need to realize their need for the gospel, and that is the work of the spirit. His book, Joy Unspeakable, which I mentioned earlier, was intended as an encouragement to be filled with the spirit in the biblical sense, not just a conversion, which was the generally accepted belief at the time, but as in the older days, with special blessings of the outpouring of the spirit to churches and during revivals to individuals and at other times for witnessing for the service to the church. He says, quote, our greatest danger I feel today is to quench the spirit. This is no age to advocate restraint. The church today does not need to be restrained. She needs to be aroused. She needs to be awakened. And she needs to be filled with a spirit of glory. She is failing the modern world, end quote. Just as the ecumenical movement was a deviation from the biblical model of unity, the charismatic movement, which began about 10 years after these sermons were preached, was a deviation that focused on the display of gifts of the Spirit rather than being filled with the Spirit for service to the church. Lloyd-Jones had warned in those earlier sermons, quote, gifts are not the main thing, and any movement which becomes excited about the gifts is repeating the error of the church in Corinth, end quote. In both the ecumenical and charismatic movements, Lloyd-Jones was portrayed by the media and by the ecclesiastical community across denominations as one hopelessly out of step with the times and one that was doing his best to undermine the good work of the church. Like Spurgeon, he declined to be a member of several associations because of the reasons we've addressed above. And like Calvin and Edwards, though he cared for the souls of his congregation, he knew that he had an even deeper and greater responsibility, which was to faithfully preach what God has said without adding anything to it or subtracting anything from it. It is worth noting the fact that in both the charismatic and the unity movements, one of those that differed with Lloyd-Jones was J.I. whose support of unity went so far as to adopt the ECT statement, and whose treatment of the work of the spirit went further into the charismatic camp than Lloyd-Jones. It's interesting that Packer was a theologian and not a preacher. And as so often happens when closed up in the academic environment, he seemed to want to include much that was claimed as Christian. While Lloyd-Jones as a pastor, and even later as a worldwide speaker, but still with a pastor's protective heart, was careful to protect his sheep from the teachings of goats, and even worse, from wolves. It was Lloyd-Jones' respect for the Bible and belief in the power of the Spirit to apply the word faithfully preached that demonstrated his love for his congregation. Before we close, I want to remind you once again that this is not hero worship. But the Bible says we are to, quote, remember them who have spoken unto you the word of God. I cannot think of anyone else in the 20th century that stood so alone and preached such God-honoring sermons as Mark and Lloyd-Jones. His message and his voice remain with me from all his sermons I've listened to over the years. I look forward to talking with him and thanking him for his faithful preaching in the age to come. Now, let us thank God that he gave us such men as Lloyd-Jones to the church and realize that he can do it again. Let us also be thankful for other faithful pastors and especially for our pastor, and ask God to encourage him and to give him more of his spirit for blessing in his work. Amen. Okay, Jerry.