J. C. Ryle's book on the great Christian leaders of the Eighteenth Century is so inspiring it makes me want to abandone everythig and sp[end what little time I have left trying to become more like anyu of these men. As Ryle makes clear, it is certainly not that England in the eighteenth century was generally known for its high standards of Christian life but these men represent a revival that brought the level tup to something extraordinary. Doctrine and Christian life, holinjess etc. wree at a height of near perfection, in these men and probably many of those who were converted under them. If there are Christians who live at such a level today I don't know of any of them.
But that isn't what i started out to write here. I'm near the end of the book, on the last of the men he's going to discuss, a John Fletcher, and he's introduced this man with a remark about the meaning of Jesus' assurance His disciples that He was going to prepare a place for them, and that in His Father's house are many mansioions, which He follows with the remark that if it were not so He would have stold them, which I always thought very odd.
Itg is certainly odd in the context of the usual understanding of the concept of many mansions as we encounter it today, which has prommpted more recent translations to render it "dwelling places" as if "manions" was a translational error, simply because they can't make any sense of it and think all Jesus meant was the general message of preparaing a place for His disciples to live.
But I rarely accept the idea that the eminent scholars and holy men who put together the King James Bible wcould be charged with an error of translation., so I assumed it must mean more than just a dwelling place, there must be a reasons why the term "mansions" was chosen, mansions meaning of course very large houses. Why would He tell them there are many large houses in heaven, and add to it that if it were not so He would have told them? There would be no reason to add that if all He meant was a dwellibng place or a place for them to live. So what is meant by mansionjs or very large houses?
It hit methat what it must mean is that there will be different groups in heaven who live together in their own large houses. What groups? What came to my mind was groups of people with different spiritual gifts or shared understandings of some sort. The latter comes closes to what Ryle shows was the accepted meaning of the passage in his day, that it will be different theologies that occupy the different large houses, Calvinists, Arminians and so on. He aalso mentions that the idea had been distorted to include outright heresies as having their own houses, but of course he denounces that idea as heretics are not going to be in heaven at all. However, there will certainly be people who are definitiely Christians who nevertheless differ in some points that would make them compatible roommates with each other but not so much with people of other theologists.
I don't know if that view is going to turn out to be the correct one but it doesn't make sense of the term "mansions" which today's interpreteters want to throw out because they don't understand it. I'm very glad to see it justified by Ryle and now I'm looking forward to finding out just how we will be allotted our place in group living quarters.And this reminds me that in discussing a couple of the men earlier in the book he quotes them using the word "knowledge" of Hosea 4:8 to refer to knowledge of God or knowledge of Jesus Christ, while I've noted that at least three teachers I'm aware of have interpreted it to refer to knowledge of such things as poisons or other threats to human well being. I should have given the qhole quote before this but since I can't see well enough togo back and include it I'll add it here: it's where God says "My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge." This gets interpreted in terms of threats to our safety, lack of knowledge of our enemies or of pollutants that can harm us and that sort of thing. But as I've pointed out the context of the passage is the sins of the people and the destruction they are bringing on themselves by their lack of knowledge is God's judgments. We are destroyed by our lack of knowledge of what we need to know to be saved or what we need to know to avoid the wages of sin which is death.
So not only does it seem that there is a much lower standard of Christian life even when we're talking about the best of the best , but there's a low level of biblical interpretation.
I also noted that in the days of the men Ryle is writinbg about, and perhaps in Ryle's day too, the Sabbath was considered to be set aside as a day of rest and worship throughout the culture, just as it was in America until sometime in the sixties or seventies, I forget when, at which time businesses all startedd staying open and Sunday was no longer any kind of special day. Sabbath-breaking was a sin in the eyes of the men Ryle is writing about. How far we've come from such standards of life. It makes me wonder if along with abandoning the head covering for women our abandonment of the Sabbath is another reason for the deterionarition of the CChurch in the West that we should recover if we have any hope of regaining God's favor.
