Book Review: Philip H. Eveson – Baptised with Heavenly Power

Christian Focus Publications, 2025. 421 pages. £17.99.

Philip H. Eveson is well known to many readers of Affinity. For many years he was Principal of the London Theological Seminary (LTS), and has written several books, including commentaries on Genesis, Leviticus, Psalms, and Chronicles. His life has been influenced by D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones (MLJ) from his early days, having first heard him preach when a young boy, having later attended the Westminster Fellowship, and due to MLJ’s involvement in the establishment of LTS, now renamed London Seminary. In addition, Eveson’s involvement in the training of ministers, as well as his preaching and pastoral work, has required him to consider and discuss the matters raised in this book over many years. He displays a great familiarity with MLJ’s output. In short, it would be hard to find a person better equipped to write such a volume.

The book came into being in response to concerns raised in South Korea that MLJ’s teaching on the work of the Holy Spirit in the life of the believer and in the Church placed him outside the Reformed camp. It is to the blessing of the wider church that the results of Eveson’s work have been published by Christian Focus Publications and distributed more widely.

MLJ (1899-1981) was an enormously influential preacher and Christian leader in the UK and around the world. He left a successful medical career and pastored two churches, first in a small South Wales town between the wars, and subsequently in Westminster Chapel, London from 1939 to 1968. Regarded by many as the greatest preacher they ever heard, and by some as one of the greatest preachers since the Reformation, his personal influence, and the influence of his books around the world, has been considerable and looks set to continue.

In learning from MLJ, it is important to recognise that he was a preacher. In addition to his recorded sermons, his published works almost without exception are in the form of sermons. As such, they do not present definitive, well-rounded, treatments of their subjects. They were addressed to the specific context of the occasion, and they present various stylistic factors that must be borne in mind such as hyperbole and overstatement. Eveson navigates this issue well. 

Similarly, Eveson does a good job of bringing to our attention developments in MLJ’s thinking in the relevant areas.

The book is divided into four sections, which will be addressed in turn.

Part One: Theological Background

Here Eveson establishes MLJ’s clear Reformed credentials, detailing his Reformed
soteriology and strong ecclesiology. While accused of being variously an Arminian and a hyper-Calvinist, he was in reality a convinced Calvinist who held to the free offer of the gospel. MLJ moved from an infant baptist to a credo-Baptist position, but did not insist on immersion as a necessary mode. Similarly, he steered between a memorialist and a high sacramentarian view of baptism by holding that it signifies, seals and exhibits grace, this exhibition not being mechanical, but “by assuring and confirming to those who participate what they already believe and know.” He had a strong concern for Church purity, and his approach to Church unity was thus anti-ecumenical. He believed that true Church unity must be based on the gospel, and so was to be broader than the confines of Calvinism. 

His indebtedness was to the Welsh Calvinistic Methodist tradition, informed by the mainstream evangelical Puritans. This Reformed position stressed the end of theology to be the personal knowledge of God and emphasised evangelistic preaching and assurance of salvation. MLJ regarded Calvinism and Methodism as being complementary, Calvinism preventing Methodism declining into mysticism, and Methodism preventing Calvinism from becoming intellectual, scholastic and harsh, neglecting prayer. He saw a healthy advance in the Methodist period, with its greater emphasis on revival and the direct witness of the Spirit.

As recurs throughout the book, MLJ had a grand vision based on a broad understanding of Scripture and the history of the Church. He was never tempted to follow contemporary fads which failed to live up to the standards of spirituality and godliness of his Methodist precursors. His desire was to see God at work in similar ways in his own day. This experiential emphasis dominates his thinking: “Calvinism of necessity leads to an emphasis on the action and activity of God the Holy Spirit. The whole emphasis is on what God does to us.”

Part Two: The Theology of the Holy Spirit

This section is the one most likely to attract attention, but it is vital that MLJ’s teaching on this subject is seen in the context of his overall position. Eveson details MLJ’s view of water baptism, and its sealing function. He then moves on to consider the Baptism of the Holy Spirit as similarly serving a sealing function – authenticating the believer to himself in assurance, and authenticating the believer to others in witness.

This baptism is presented as a pouring out of the Holy Spirit by the ascended Christ upon his people and is something separate from and subsequent to regeneration. This baptism can be repeated, as seen in Acts 4. As regards terminology, where ‘baptism’ is used the primary focus is on power to witness. Where ‘sealing’ and ‘earnest’ are used, the primary focus is on assurance, with ‘sealing’ assuring us that we are the inheritors, and the ‘earnest’ assuring us of the inheritance itself, a foretaste of future glory rather than merely a pledge.

There is some intriguing discussion of the differing views of MLJ and John Stott, who published his Baptism and Fullness while MLJ was preaching on John 1, during which series he gave his final extended treatment of the issue. Matters addressed include:

the role of agency: in regeneration the Holy Spirit is the agent (the one who baptises), and this is seen in 1 Corinthians 12:13, whereas in post-conversion baptism of the Spirit the Lord Jesus Christ is the agent. MLJ takes 1 Corinthians 12:13, Romans 6:3-4 and Ephesians 4:4 to refer to the spiritual reality which water baptism signifies;

the unique and repeatable elements of Pentecost. While MLJ saw Pentecost as having a unique place in salvation-history, he also stressed the repeatable elements of assurance and power for witness by the pouring out of the Spirit by the ascended Christ. In this context, there is an interesting discussion of the beginnings of the New Testament Church, and the significance of John 20:22-23;

the role of narrative passages such as Acts. Whereas Stott held that these passages should not govern doctrine and practice, but should be regarded as illustrative, MLJ held that such passages did have a part in establishing doctrine and were indicative of the general experience of the Churches to whom the epistles were written. He cites Galatians 3:2 to show that receiving the Spirit, a phrase used a number of times in Acts, was the Galatians’ common experience;

the different uses of ‘filling’ with the Spirit in the New Testament, its general sense being to be under the influence and power of the Spirit.

The overall picture given is one that is consistent with the Reformed tradition of many Puritans and the Calvinistic Methodists. It is noticeable that, during those periods, difference of interpretation of the relevant biblical passages were accepted among brothers without acrimony or accusation. Sadly, that has not always been true in recent decades. Accusations of MLJ advocating a ‘Christ plus’ teaching, or being a Pentecostalist or crypto-Charismatic have not been either helpful or fair. MLJ’s distinction from Pentecostalism and the Charismatic movement of his period are identified in the book. As for the ‘Christ plus’ accusation, it fails to appreciate the role of the Holy Spirit in the application of redemption. MLJ’s position was not that we need more than Christ, but that we need more of Christ. There are such things as growing in grace, having more assurance, and preaching that is more powerful, and these things come as the Holy Spirit communicates to us more of the Lord Jesus Christ himself and what he himself has secured for us. In fact, this experiential element, that the salvation of Christ and fellowship with God must be experienced, is really the issue at the heart of the whole book, and at the heart of MLJ’s ministry. 

Regarding assurance of salvation, MLJ saw assurance as deriving from a number of sources: believing the promises, the tests of life and having the Spirit. He regarded the highest form of assurance as deriving from the direct witness of the Spirit as identified in Romans 5:5 and 8:16. Rather than being a recipe for wild, unsustainable claims, MLJ noted that while this direct assurance does not result from deduction from the Scriptures, it is normally “a result of the Spirit illuminating certain statements of Scripture.” He “brings them to me with power and they speak with me, and I am certain of them.”

Claims have been made that MLJ interpreted Scripture in the light of his own experience and that of certain other historical figures. But such an argument is a double-edged sword – it could equally be claimed that his critics are doing the same. It is much better to avoid such accusations and to humble ourselves before Scripture, and the God of Scripture, recognising that our experience of God is limited. It is certainly true that MLJ used historical examples to illustrate what he believed to be the teaching of Scripture – at a time when he believed that Spiritual experience was at a low ebb, he wanted his hearers to know that what he was teaching was not something novel. But he also regularly warned against interpreting Scripture in the light of experience. Rather, Scripture must judge and inform our experience – surely that is still true of us today.

Part Three: Revival and the Holy Spirit 

MLJ’s viewed revival not as an organised evangelistic campaign, but as “a great outpouring of the Spirit,” “a revivification, a re-enlivening of the Church herself,” from which outsiders derive benefits. It is a manifestation of the glory of God who is present in power. He believed that prayer for revival was necessary, and that hindrances to revival, including unbelief, defective orthodoxy, spiritual inertia and fear of the supernatural should be removed. He saw a concern for revival as a natural implication of Calvinism, “The true Calvinist is concerned about revival. Why? Because he is concerned about the glory of God.”

The challenge here is a very contemporary one. Is revival something we should seek for the glory of God, the good of the church and the good of our unbelieving neighbours? Or is it acceptable to be satisfied with the situation where little of the glory of God is experienced and few of our neighbours are impacted by the holiness and the love of God in Jesus Christ? If we are Calvinists – who believe in the sovereignty of God and the indispensable necessity of the power of the Holy Spirit to communicate to believers the benefits of Christ and to bring unbelievers to new birth – then surely we are praying for divine power already. Revival is that power being poured out abundantly.

Eveson addresses the claim that MLJ was obsessed with revival by showing the place it occupied in his ministry – his focus was on fundamental gospel truths and the glory of God – revival was a necessary, but not imbalanced part of his vision of the success of the gospel in the world. As Iain H. Murray pointed out, “Revival was a subject which did not occupy a separate place in MLJ’s thinking and preaching, rather it was closely related to his whole understanding of the work of God in bringing men to salvation and assurance.”

Part Four: Preaching and the Holy Spirit

This chapter covers a lot of ground regarding MLJ’s views of sermon preparation, the nature of expository preaching, the centrality of preaching in the purposes of God and the need for the power of the Holy Spirit to make preaching effective. It is a fascinating read given MLJ’s stature and influence as a preacher.

Preaching is “the primary task of the Church and of the Christian minister” to both build up and establish Christians, and to evangelise unbelievers. It “should be governed by theology for it begins with God and it ends with God. A preacher is sent by God, comes from God, is a spokesman for God, and seeks to bring people to humble themselves before God.” 

Familiarity with the Bible is essential, as is a conviction of the authority and trustworthiness of Scripture. Reason and scholarship are to be servants, not masters, and character and the Holy Spirit’s equipping are far more important in a preacher than formal qualifications.

MLJ emphasised the importance of hard study and prayer in sermon preparation, and freedom, zeal and a sense of urgency in delivery. A sermon is “a particular message that leads to a particular end” and application and exhortation are essential parts. 

Eveson touches on recent debates regarding the relationship between Word and Spirit and shows how MLJ believed that the Word of God is not effectual independently of the Holy Spirit. Its hearers do not have an innate ability to experience its power – it is the Holy Spirit who uses the Word of God to accomplish his purposes: “All the riches of God’s grace in Christ, come to us by the power of the Holy Spirit through the word of the Gospel. That is how God does it.” As such this divine power must not be taken for granted. Given this high view of preaching in the purposes of God MLJ comments that true preaching is “God acting”, and so “if there is no power, it is not preaching.”

This high view of preaching is a challenge to us when our Church calendars are in danger of being filled with many other things. Do we have confidence in preaching as God’s appointed means for edification and evangelism? Do we recognise our utter dependence on God to bless the means he has given? The ‘means of grace’ are important – they are ordained by God. But without the ‘grace of the means,’ God blessing them by his Spirit, they will inevitably be ineffective.

The book has two valuable appendices: an address delivered by MLJ on ‘Evan Roberts and the 1904 Revival’, delivered in 1974, which shows MLJ’s ability to appreciate the character of true revival while at the same time being aware of the dangers of imbalance and excess. The second appendix is journal entries from 1930-31 which provide an insight to MLJ’s struggles and discipleship during a period when the church he was pastoring was experiencing remarkable growth.

Conclusion

This book does not present a critical reworking of MLJ’s teaching. Its purpose is to present his position fairly and identify its biblical undergirdings. In this it succeeds admirably, and so is a resource to be welcomed. and pondered. As Sinclair B. Ferguson notes in his foreword, “Agreement in essentials, and recognition of the genuineness of spiritual experience even if interpreted differently, should, as Philip Eveson indicates, go a long way to the peaceful maintenance of the unity of the Spirit (Eph. 4:3).” It contains a great challenge regarding our own fellowship with God and our experience of his presence and power. The Lord has more to give than we have yet received. If this book humbles us and drives us to prayer, its author will be well rewarded.