Welcome to TiddlyWiki created by Jeremy Ruston, Copyright © 2007 UnaMesa Association
''The Gospel Worthy of All Acceptation,
or the Duty of Sinners to Believe in Jesus Christ,
By Andrew Fuller, 1786''
[With Corrections and Additions, to which is added an Appendix,
on the Necessity of a Holy Disposition in order to Believing in Christ.]
"Go, . . . preach the gospel to every creature: he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shalt be damned!" -- Jesus CHRIST
''Advertisement to the Second Edition''
THE author had no thoughts of reprinting the present publication till he was repeatedly requested to do so from very respectable quarters.
The corrections and additions, which form a considerable part of this edition, are such as, after a lapse of fifteen years, the writer thought it proper to make. It would be inexcusable for him to have lived all this time without gaining any additional light by what he has seen and heard upon the subject; and still more so to publish a Second Edition without doing all in his power towards improving it. The omissions, however, which also are considerable, are not always owing to a disapprobation of the sentiment, but to other things presenting themselves which appeared to be more immediately in point.
1801.
''Preface''
WHEN the following pages were written, (1781),^^1^^ the author had no intention of publishing them. He had formerly entertained different sentiments. For some few years, however, he had begun to doubt whether all his principles on these subjects were Scriptural. These doubts arose chiefly from thinking on some passages of Scripture, particularly the latter part of the second Psalm, where kings, who "set themselves against the Lord, and against his Anointed," are positively commanded to "kiss the Son;" also the preaching of John the Baptist, Christ, and his apostles, who, he found,
''__Notes__''
^^1^^First published in 1786 -- B.
[[ NEXT >>|329]]
did not hesitate to address unconverted sinners, and that in the most pointed manner -- saying, "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand." -- "Repent, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out." And it appeared to him there must be a most unwarrantable force put upon these passages to make them mean any other repentance and faith than such as are connected with salvation.
Reading the lives and labours of such men as Elliot, Brainerd, and several others, who preached Christ with so much success to the American Indians, had an effect upon him. Their work, like that of the apostles, seemed to be plain before them. They appeared to him, in their addresses to those poor benighted heathens, to have none of those difficulties with which he felt himself encumbered. These things led him to the throne of grace, to implore instruction and resolution. He saw that he wanted both; the one to know the mind of Christ, and the other to avow it.
He was, for some time, however, deterred from disclosing his doubts. During nearly four years they occupied his mind, and not without increasing. Being once in company with a minister whom he greatly respected, it was thrown out, as a matter of inquiry, Whether we had generally entertained just notions concerning unbelief? It was common to speak of unbelief as a calling in question the truth of our own personal religion; whereas, he remarked, "it was the calling in question the truth of what God had said." This remark appeared to carry in it its own evidence.
From this time, his thoughts upon the subject began to enlarge. He preached upon it more than once. From hence, he was led to think on its opposite, faith, and to consider it as a persuasion of the truth of what God has said; and, of course, to suspect his former views concerning its not being the duty of unconverted sinners.
He was aware that the generality of Christians with whom he was acquainted viewed the belief of the gospel as something presupposed in faith, rather than as being of the essence of it; and considered the contrary as the opinion of Mr. Sandeman, which they were agreed in rejecting, as favourable to a dead or inoperative kind of faith. He thought, however, that what they meant by a belief of the gospel was nothing more than a general assent to the doctrines of revelation, unaccompanied with love to them, or a dependence on the Lord Jesus Christ for salvation. He had no doubt but that such a notion of the subject ought to be rejected; and if this be the notion of Mr. Sandeman, (which, by the way, he does not know, having never read any of his works,) he has no scruple in saying it is far from any thing which he intends to advance.^^1^^
It appeared to him that we had taken unconverted sinners too much upon their word, when they told us that they believed the gospel. He did not doubt but that they might believe many things concerning Jesus Christ and his salvation; but being blind to the glory of God, as it is displayed in the face of Jesus Christ, their belief of the gospel must be very superficial, extending only to a few facts, without any sense of their real intrinsic excellency; which, strictly speaking, is not faith. Those who see no form nor comeliness in the Messiah, nor beauty, that they should desire him, are described as not believing the report concerning him, Isa. liii. 1, 2.
''__Notes__''
^^1^^Since the first edition of this piece made its appearance, the author has seen Mr. Sandeman's writings, and those of Mr. A. M'Lean, who, on this subject, seems to agree with Mr. Sandeman. Justice requires him to say that these writers do not appear to plead for a kind of faith which is not followed with love, or by a dependence on Christ alone for salvation; but their idea of faith itself goes to exclude every thing cordial from it. Though he accords with them in considering the belief of the gospel as saving faith, yet there is an important difference in the ideas which they attach to believing. This difference with some other things is examined, in an Appendix, at the end of this edition.
[[<< BACK |328 ADVERTISEMENT & PREFACE]] | [[ NEXT >>|330]]
He had also read and considered, as well as he was able, President Edwards's Inquiry into the Freedom of the Will, with some other performances on the difference between natural and moral inability. He found much satisfaction in this distinction; as it appeared to him to carry with it its own evidence -- to be clearly and fully contained in the Scriptures -- and calculated to disburden the Calvinistic system of a number of calumnies with which its enemies have loaded it, as well as to afford clear and honourable conceptions of the Divine government. If it were not the duty of unconverted sinners to believe in Christ, and that because of their inability, he supposed this inability must be natural, or something which did not arise from an evil disposition; but the more he examined the Scriptures, the more he was convinced that all the inability ascribed to man, with respect to believing, arises from the aversion of his heart. They will not come to Christ that they may have life; will not hearken to the voice of the charmer, charm he never so wisely; will not seek after God; and desire not the knowledge of his ways.
He wishes to avoid the error into which we are apt to be betrayed, when engaged in controversy -- that of magnifying the importance of the subject beyond its proper bounds; yet he seriously thinks the subject treated of in the following pages is of no small importance. To him, it appears to be the same controversy, for substance, as that which in all ages has subsisted between God and an apostate world. God has ever maintained these two principles: All that is evil is of the creature, and to him belongs the blame of it; and all that is good is of himself, and to him belongs the praise of it. To acquiesce in both these positions is too much for the carnal heart. The advocates for free-will would seem to yield the former, acknowledging themselves blameworthy for the evil; but they cannot admit the latter. Whatever honour they may allow to the general grace of God, they are for ascribing the preponderance in favour of virtue and eternal life to their own good improvement of it. Others, who profess to be advocates for free grace, appear to be willing that God should have all the honour of their salvation, in case they should be saved; but they discover the strongest aversion to take to themselves the blame of their destruction in case they should be lost. To yield both these points to God is to fall under in the grand controversy with him, and to acquiesce in his revealed will; which acquiescence includes "repentance towards God, and faith towards our Lord Jesus Christ." Indeed, it were not very difficult to prove that each, in rejecting one of these truths, does not, in reality, embrace the other. The Arminian, though he professes to take the blame of the evil upon himself, yet feels no guilt for being a sinner, any further than he imagines he could, by the help of Divine grace, given to him and all mankind, have avoided it. If he admit the native depravity of his heart, it is his misfortune, not his fault; his fault lies, not in being in a state of alienation and aversion from God, but in not making the best use of the grace of God to get out of it. And the Antinomian, though he ascribes salvation to free grace, yet feels no obligation for the pardon of his impenitence, his unbelief, or his constant aversion to God, during his supposed unregeneracy. Thus, as in many other cases, opposite extremes are known to meet. Where no grace is given, they are united in supposing that no duty can be required; which, if true, "grace is no more grace."
The following particulars are premised, for the sake of a clear understanding of the subject: --
First, There is no dispute about the doctrine of election, or any of the discriminating doctrines of grace. They are allowed on both sides; and it is granted that none ever did or ever will believe in Christ but those who
[[<< BACK |329]] | [[ NEXT >>|331]]
are chosen of God from eternity. The question does not turn upon what are the causes of salvation, but rather upon what are the causes of damnation. "No man," as Mr. Charnock happily expresses it, "is an unbeliever, but because he will be so; and every man is not an unbeliever, because the grace of God conquers some, changeth their wills, and bends them to Christ."^^1^^
Secondly, Neither is there any dispute concerning who ought to be encouraged to consider themselves as entitled to the blessings of the gospel. Though sinners be freely invited to the participation of spiritual blessings; yet they have no interest in them, according to God's revealed will, while they continue in unbelief; nor is it any part of the design of these pages to persuade them to believe that they have. On the contrary, the writer is fully convinced that, whatever be the secret purpose of God concerning them, they are at present under the curse.
Thirdly, The question is not whether men are bound to do any thing more than the law requires, but whether the law, as the invariable standard of right and wrong, does not require every man cordially to embrace whatever God reveals; in other words, whether love to God, with all the heart, soul, mind, and strength, does not include a cordial reception of whatever plan he shall at any period of time disclose.
Fourthly, The question is not whether men are required to believe any more than is reported in the gospel, or any thing that is not true; but whether that which is reported ought not to be believed with all the heart, and whether this be not saving faith.
Fifthly, It is no part of the controversy whether unconverted sinners be able to turn to God, and to embrace the gospel; but what kind of inability they lie under with respect to these exercises; whether it consists in the want of natural powers and advantages, or merely in the want of a heart to make a right use of them. If the former, obligation, it is granted, would be set aside; but if the latter, it remains in full force. They that are in the flesh cannot please God; but it does not follow that they are not obliged to do so; and this their obligation requires to be clearly insisted on, that they maybe convinced of their sin, and so induced to embrace the gospel remedy.
Sixthly, The question is not whether faith be required of sinners as a virtue, which, if complied with, shall be the ground of their acceptance with God, or that on account of which they may be justified in his sight; but whether it be not required as the appointed means of salvation. The righteousness of Jesus believed in is the only ground of justification, but faith in him is necessary to our being interested in it. We remember the fatal example of the Jews, which the apostle Paul holds up to our view. "The Gentiles," saith he, "who followed not after righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness which is of faith: but Israel, who followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness. Wherefore? Because they sought it not by faith, but, as it were, by the works of the law; for they stumbled at that stumbling-stone." Though we had not been elsewhere told (1 Pet. ii. 8) that in doing this they were disobedient, yet our judgments must be strangely warped by system if we did not conclude it to be their sin, and that by which they fell and perished. And we dare not but charge our hearers, whether they will hear or whether they will forbear, to beware of stumbling upon the same stone, and of falling after the same example of unbelief.
Finally, The question is not whether unconverted sinners be the subjects
''__Notes__''
^^1^^//Discourses, Vol. II.// p. 473.
[[<< BACK |330]] | [[ NEXT >>|332 PART I]]
of exhortation, but whether they ought to be exhorted to perform spiritual duties. It is beyond all dispute that the Scriptures do exhort them to many things. If, therefore, there be any professors of Christianity who question the propriety of this, and who would have nothing said to them, except that, "if they be elected they will be called," they are not to be reasoned with, but rebuked, as setting themselves in direct opposition to the word of God. The greater part of those who may differ from the author on these subjects, it is presumed, will admit the propriety of sinners being exhorted to duty; only this duty must, as they suppose, be confined to merely natural exercises, or such as may be complied with by a carnal heart, destitute of the love of God. It is one design of the following pages to show that God requires the heart, the whole heart, and nothing but the heart; that all the precepts of the Bible are only the different modes in which we are required to express our love to him; that, instead of its being true that sinners are obliged to perform duties which have no spirituality in them, there are no such duties to be performed; and that, so far from their being exhorted to every thing excepting what is spiritually good, they are exhorted to nothing else. The Scriptures undoubtedly require them to read, to hear, to repent, and to pray, that their sins may be forgiven them. It is not, however, in the exercise of a carnal, but of a spiritual state of mind, that these duties are performed.
____________________
''Part I''
''The Subject Shown to be Important, Stated and Explained.''
GOD, having blessed mankind with the glorious gospel of his Son, hath spoken much in his word, as it might be supposed he would, of the treatment which it should receive from those to whom it was addressed. A cordial reception of it is called, in Scripture, receiving Christ, allowing him, believing in him, &c, and the contrary, refusing, disallowing, and rejecting him; and those who thus reject him are, in so doing, said to judge themselves unworthy of everlasting life.^^1^^ These are things on which the New Testament largely insists: great stress is there laid on the reception which the truth shall meet with. The same lips which commissioned the apostles to go and "preach the gospel to every creature," added, "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned." "To as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God;" but to them "who received him not," but refused him, and rejected his way of salvation, he became a stumbling-stone, and a rock of offence, that they might stumble, and fall, and perish. Thus the gospel, according to the different reception it meets with, becomes a "savour of life unto life, or of death unto death."
The controversies which have arisen concerning faith in Jesus Christ are not so much an object of surprise as the conduct of those who, professing to be Christians, affect to decry the subject as a matter of little or no importance. There is not any principle or exercise of the human mind of which the New Testament speaks so frequently, and on which so great a stress is laid. And with regard to the inquiry whether faith be required of all men who hear, or have opportunity to hear, the word, it cannot be uninteresting. If it be not, to inculcate it would be unwarrantable and cruel to
''__Notes__''
^^1^^John i.12; iii. 16; Psal. cxviii. 22; 1 Pet. ii. 7; Platt. xxi.42; Acts xiii. 46.
[[<< BACK |331]] | [[ NEXT >>|333]]
our fellow sinners, as it subjects them to an additional charge of abundance of guilt; but if it be, to explain it away is to undermine the Divine prerogative, and, as far as it goes, to subvert the very intent of the promulgation of the gospel, which is that men “should believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and, believing, have life through his name,” John xx. 31. This is doubtless a very serious thing, and ought to be seriously considered. Though some good men may be implicated in this matter, it becomes them to remember that "whosoever breaketh one of the least of Christ's commandments, and teacheth men so, shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven." If believing be a commandment, it cannot be one of the least: the important relations which it sustains, as well as the dignity of its object, must prevent this: the knowledge of sin, repentance for it, and gratitude for pardoning mercy, all depend upon our admitting it. And if it be a great commandment, the breach of it must be a great sin; and whosoever teaches men otherwise is a partaker of their guilt; and, if they perish, will be found to have been accessory to their eternal ruin. Let it be considered whether the apostle to the Hebrews did not proceed upon such principles, when he exclaimed, "How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation?" And the Lord Jesus himself when be declared, "He that believeth not shall be damned!"
In order to determine whether faith in Christ be the duty of all men who have opportunity to hear the gospel, it will be necessary to determine what it is, or wherein it consists. Some have maintained that it consists in a persuasion of our interest in Christ and in all the benefits and blessings of his mediation. The author of The Further Inquiry, Mr. L. Wayman, of Kimbolton, who wrote about sixty years ago upon the subject, questions "whether there be any act of special faith which hath not the nature of appropriation in it" (p. 13); and by appropriation he appears to mean a persuasion of our interest in spiritual blessings. This is the ground upon which he rests the main body of his argument: to overturn it, therefore, will be in effect to answer his book. Some, who would not be thought to maintain that a persuasion of interest in Christ is essential to faith, for the sake of many Christians whom they cannot but observe, upon this principle, to be, generally speaking, unbelievers, yet maintain what fully implies it. Though they will allow, for the comfort of such Christians, that assurance is not of the essence of faith, (understanding by assurance an assured persuasion of our salvation,) but that a reliance on Christ is sufficient; yet, in almost all other things, they speak as if they did not believe what at those times they say. It is common for such persons to call those fears which occupy the minds of Christians, lest they should miss of salvation at last, by the name of unbelief; and to reprove them for being guilty of this God-dishonouring sin, exhorting them to be strong in faith, like Abraham, giving glory to God; when all that is meant is, that they should, without doubting, believe the goodness of their state. If this be saving faith, it must inevitably follow that it is not the duty of unconverted sinners; for they are not interested in Christ, and it cannot possibly be their duty to believe a lie. But if it can be proved that the proper object of saving faith is not our being interested in Christ, but the glorious gospel of the ever-blessed God, (which is true, whether we believe it or not,) a contrary inference must be drawn; for it is admitted, on all hands, that it is the duty of every man to believe what God reveals.
I have no objection to allowing that true faith "hath in it the nature of appropriation," if by this term be meant an application of the truths believed to our own particular cases. "When the Scriptures teach," says a pungent writer, "we are to receive instruction, for the enlightening of our own minds;
[[<< BACK |332 PART I]] | [[ NEXT >>|334]]
when they admonish, we are to take warning; when they reprove, we are to be checked; when they comfort, we are to be cheered and encouraged; and when they recommend any grace, we are to desire and embrace it; when they command any duty, we are to hold ourselves enjoined to do it; when they promise, we are to hope; when they threaten, we are to be terrified, as if the judgment were denounced against us; and when they forbid any sin, we are to think they forbid it unto us. By which application we shall make all the rich treasures contained in the Scriptures wholly our own, and in such a powerful and peculiar manner enjoy the fruit and benefit of them, as if they had been wholly written for us, and none other else besides us."^^1^^
By saving faith, we undoubtedly embrace Christ for ourselves, in the same sense as Jacob embraced Jehovah as his God (Gen. xxviii. 21); that is, to a rejecting of every idol that stands in competition with him. Christ is all-sufficient, and suited to save us as well as others; and it is for the forgiveness of our sins that we put our trust in him. But this is very different from a persuasion of our being in a state of salvation.
My objections to this notion of faith are as follow: --
First, Nothing can be an object of faith, except what God has revealed in his word; but the interest that any individual has in Christ and the blessings of the gospel, more than another, is not revealed. God has no where declared, concerning any one of us, as individuals, that we shall be saved; all that he has revealed on this subject respects us as characters. He has abundantly promised that all who believe in him, love him, and obey him shall be saved; and a persuasion that if we sustain these characters we shall be saved, is doubtless an exercise of faith: but whether we do or not, is an object not of faith, but of consciousness. "Hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments. Whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him" -- "My little children, let us not love in word and in tongue, but in deed and in truth hereby we know that we are of the truth, and shall assure our hearts before him."^^2^^ If any one imagine that God has revealed to him his interest in his love, and this in a special, immediate, and extraordinary manner, and not by exciting in him the holy exercises of grace, and thereby begetting a consciousness of his being a subject of grace, let him beware lest he deceive his soul. The Jews were not wanting in what some would call the faith of assurance: "We have one Father," said they, "even God:" but Jesus answered, "If God were your Father, ye would love me."
Secondly, The Scriptures always represent faith as terminating on something without us; namely, on Christ, and the truths concerning him: but if it consist in a persuasion of our being in a state of salvation, it must terminate principally on something within us; namely, the work of grace in our hearts; for to believe myself interested in Christ is the same thing as to believe myself a subject of special grace. And hence, as was said, it is common for many who entertain this notion of faith to consider its opposite, unbelief, as a doubting whether we have been really converted. But as it is the truth and excellence of the things to be interested in, and not his interest in them, that the sinner is apt to disbelieve; so it is these, and not that, on which the faith of the believer primarily terminates. Perhaps what relates to personal interest may, in general, more properly be called hope than faith; and its opposite fear, than unbelief.
Thirdly, To believe ourselves in a state of salvation (however desirable, when grounded on evidence) is far inferior in its object to saving faith. The grand object on which faith fixes is the glory of Christ, and not the
''__Notes__''
^^1^^//Downame's Guide to Godliness//, p. 647
^^2^^1 John ii. 3. 5; iii. 18, 19.
[[<< BACK |333]] | [[ NEXT >>|335]]
happy condition we are in, as interested in him. The latter doubtless affords great consolation; and the more we discover of his excellence, the more ardently shall we desire an interest in him, and be the more disconsolate while it continues a matter of doubt. But if we be concerned only for our own security, our faith is vain, and we are yet in our sins. As that repentance which fixes merely on the consequences of sin as subjecting us to misery is selfish and spurious, so that faith which fixes merely on the consequences of Christ's mediation as raising us to happiness is equally selfish and spurious. It is the peculiar property of true faith to endear Christ: "Unto you that believe he is precious." And where this is the case, if there be no impediments arising from constitutional dejection or other accidental causes, we shall not be in doubt about an interest in him. Consolation will accompany the faith of the gospel: "Being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ."
Fourthly, All those exercises of faith which our Lord so highly commends in the New Testament, as that of the centurion, the woman of Canaan, and others, are represented as terminating on his all-sufficiency to heal them, and not as consisting in a persuasion that they were interested in the Divine favour, and therefore should succeed. "Speak the word only," says the one, "and my servant shall be healed; for I am a man in authority, having soldiers under me: and I say to this man, Go, and he goeth; and to another, Come, and he cometh; and to my servant, Do this, and he doeth it." Such was the persuasion which the other entertained of his all-sufficiency to help her, that she judged it enough if she might but partake of the crumbs of his table -- the scatterings as it were of mercy. Similar to this is the following language: -- "If I may but touch the hem of his garment, I shall be made whole." -- "Believe ye that I am able to do this? They said unto him, Yea, Lord." -- "Lord, if thou wilt, thou canst make me clean." -- "If thou canst do any thing, have compassion on us, and help us: Jesus said, If thou canst believe, all things are possible to him that believeth." I allow that the case of these people, and that of a sinner applying for forgiveness, are not exactly the same. Christ had no where promised to heal all who came for healing; but he has graciously bound himself not to cast out any who come to him for mercy. On this account, there is a greater ground for faith in the willingness of Christ to save than there was in his willingness to heal; and there was less unbelief in the saying of the leper, "If thou wilt, thou canst make me clean,” than there would be in similar language from one who, convinced of his own utter insufficiency, applied to him for salvation. But a persuasion of Christ being both able and willing to save all them that come unto God by him, and consequently to save us if we so apply, is very different from a persuasion that we are the children of God, and interested in the blessings of the gospel.
Mr. Anderson, an American writer, has lately published a pamphlet on the Scripture Doctrine of the Appropriation which is in the Nature of saving Faith. The scheme which he attempts to defend is that of Hervey, Marshall, &c., or that which in Scotland is known by the name of the Marrow doctrine.^^1^^ These divines write much about the gospel containing a gift or grant of Christ and spiritual blessings to sinners of mankind; and that it is the office of faith so to receive the gift as to claim it as our own; and thus they seem to have supposed that it becomes our own. But the gospel contains no gift or grant to mankind in general, beyond that of an offer or free invitation; and thus, indeed, Mr. Boston, in his notes on the Marrow of Modern Divinity, seems to explain it. It warrants every sinner to believe
''__Notes__''
^^1^^Alluding to a work published some years since, under the title of //The Marrow of Modern Divinity//.
[[<< BACK |334]] | [[ NEXT >>|336]]
in Christ for salvation, but no one to conclude himself interested in salvation till he has believed; consequently, such a conclusion, even where it is well-founded, cannot be faith, but that which follows it.
Mr. Anderson is careful to distinguish the appropriation for which he contends from "the knowledge of our being believers, or already in a state of grace," -- p. 61. He also acknowledges that the ground of saving faith "is something that may be known before, and in order to the act of faith;" that it is "among the things that are revealed, and which belong to us and to our children," -- p. 60. Yet he makes it of the essence of faith to believe "that Christ is ours," -- p. 56. It must be true, then, that Christ is ours, antecedently to our believing it, and whether we believe it or not. This, it seems, Mr. Anderson will admit; for he holds that "God hath made a gift or grant of Christ and spiritual blessings to sinners of mankind," and which denominates him ours "before we believe it." Yet he does not admit the final salvation of all to whom Christ is thus supposed to be given. To what, therefore, does the gift amount, more than to a free invitation, concerning which his opponents have no dispute with him? A free invitation, though it affords a warrant to apply for mercy, and that with an assurance of success; yet gives no interest in its blessings, but on the supposition of its being accepted. Neither does the gift for which Mr. A. contends; nothing is conveyed by it that insures any man's salvation. All the author says, therefore, against what he calls conditions of salvation, is no less applicable to his own scheme than to that of his opponents. His scheme is as really conditional as theirs. The condition which it prescribes for our becoming interested in the blessings of eternal life, so interested, at least, as to possess them, is, to believe them to be our own; and without this he supposes we shall never enjoy them.
He contends, indeed, that the belief of the promises cannot be called a condition of our right to claim an interest in them, because if such belief be claiming an interest in them, it would be making a thing the condition of itself, -- pp. 50, 51. But to this it is replied, First, Although Mr. A. considers saving faith as including appropriation, yet this is only one idea which he ascribes to it. He explains it as consisting of three things: a persuasion of Divine truth, wrought in the heart by the Holy Spirit; a sure persuasion; and an appropriating persuasion of Christ's being ours, -- pp. 54-56. Now though it were allowed that the last branch of this definition is the same thing as claiming an interest in the promises, and therefore cannot be reckoned the condition of it; yet this is more than can be said of the former two, which are no less essential to saving faith than the other. Secondly, The sense in which the promise is taken, by what is called appropriating faith, is not the same as that in which it is given in the promise itself. As given in the word, the promise is general, applying equally to one sinner as to another; but as taken, it is considered as particular, and as insuring salvation. Thirdly, If an interest in the righteousness of Christ were the immediate object of saving faith, how could it be said that "unto us it shall be imputed, if we believe on him that raised up Jesus from the dead?" If Christ's righteousness be ours, it must be so as imputed to us; but this would be making the apostle say, If we believe Christ's righteousness to be imputed to us, it shall be imputed to us.
I have no partiality for calling faith, or any thing done by us, the condition of salvation; and if by the term were meant a deed to be performed of which the promised good is the reward, it would be inadmissible. If I had used the term, it would have been merely to express the necessary connexion of things, or that faith is that without which there is no salvation; and, in this sense, it is no less a condition in Mr. A.'s scheme than in that
[[<< BACK |335]] | [[ NEXT >>|337]]
which he opposes. He thinks, however, that the promises of God are, by his statement of things, disencumbered of conditions; yet how he can prove that God has absolutely given Christ and spiritual blessings to multitudes who will never possess them, I am at a loss to conceive. I should have supposed that whatever God has absolutely promised would take effect. He says, indeed, that "the Lord may give an absolute promise to those who, in the event, never come to the actual enjoyment of the promised blessing, as in the case of the Israelites being brought to the good land, (Exod. iii. 17,) though the bulk of them that left Egypt perished in the wilderness through unbelief," -- p. 43. It is true God absolutely promised to plant them, "as a nation," in the good land, and this he performed; but he did not absolutely promise that every individual who left Egypt should be amongst them. So far as it respected individuals (unless it were in reference to Caleb and Joshua) the promise was not absolute.
Upon the mere ground of Christ being exhibited in the gospel, "I am persuaded," says Mr. A., "that he is my Saviour; nor can I, without casting reproach upon the wisdom, faithfulness, and mercy of God, in setting him forth, entertain any doubts about my justification and salvation through his name," -- p. 65. Has God promised justification and salvation, then, to every one to whom Christ is exhibited? If he has, it doubtless belongs to faith to give him credit: but, in this case, we ought also to maintain that the promise will be performed, whatever be the state of our minds; for though we believe not, he abideth faithful. On the other hand, if the blessing of justification, though freely offered to all, be only promised to believers, it is not faith, but presumption, to be persuaded of my justification, any otherwise than as being conscious of my believing in Jesus for it.
Mr. A. illustrates his doctrine by a similitude. "Suppose that a great and generous prince had made a grant to a certain class of persons, therein described, of large estates, including all things suitable to their condition; and had publicly declared, that whosoever of the persons so described would believe such an estate, in virtue of the grant now mentioned, to be his own, should not be disappointed, but should immediately enter upon the granted estate, according to the order specified in the grant. Suppose, too, that the royal donor had given the grant in writing, and had added his seal, and his oath, and his gracious invitation, and his most earnest entreaty, and his authoritative command, to induce the persons described in the grant to accept of it. It is evident that any one of these persons, having had access to read or hear the grant, must either be verily persuaded that the granted estate is his own, or be chargeable with an attempt to bring dishonour upon the goodness, the veracity, the power, and authority of the donor; on account of which attempt he is liable not only to be debarred for ever from the granted estate, but to suffer a most exemplary and tremendous punishment," p.66.
I suppose the object of this similitude is expressed in the sentence, "It is evident that any one of these persons, having had access to read or hear the grant, must either be verily persuaded that the granted estate is his own, or be chargeable with dishonouring the donor." In what sense, then, is it his own? He is freely invited to partake of it; that is all. It is not so his own but that he may ultimately be debarred from possessing it; but in whatever sense it is his own, that is the only sense in which he is warranted to believe it to be so. If the condition of his actually possessing it be his believing that he shall actually possess it, he must believe what was not revealed at the time, except conditionally, and what would not have been true but for his believing it.
The above similitude may serve to illustrate Mr. A.'s scheme; but I know
[[<< BACK |336]] | [[ NEXT >>|338]]
of nothing like it, either in the concerns of men or the oracles of God. I will venture to say there never was a gift or grant made upon any such terms, and the man that should make it would expose himself to ridicule. The Scriptures furnish us with an illustration of another kind. The gospel is a feast freely provided, and sinners of mankind are freely invited to partake of it. There is no mention of any gift, or grant, distinct from this, but this itself is a ground sufficient. It affords a complete warrant for any sinner, not indeed to believe the provisions to be his own, whether he accept the invitation or not, but that, relinquishing every thing that stands in competition with them, and receiving them as a free gift, they shall be his own. "If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins." -- "To us it shall be imputed, if we believe on him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead." Those who were persuaded to embrace the invitation are not described as coming to make a claim of it as their property, but as gratefully accepting it; and those who refused are not represented as doubting whether the feast was provided for them, but as making light of it, and preferring their farms and merchandise before it.
In short, if this writer can prove it to be true that justification and eternal life are absolutely given, granted, and promised, to all who hear the gospel, there can be no dispute whether saving faith includes the belief of it with respect to ourselves, nor whether it be a duty; but if the thing be false, it can be no part of the faith of the gospel, nor of the duty of a sinner, to give credit to it.
But to return. That the belief of the truth which God hath revealed in the Scriptures concerning Christ is saving faith is evident from the following passages: -- "Go preach the gospel to every creature: he, that believeth and is baptized shall be saved." Believing, here, manifestly refers to the gospel to be preached, and the rejection of which would subject the unbeliever to certain damnation.-- "These things are written that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that, believing, ye might have life through his name." Believing unto life is here described as a persuasion of Jesus being the Christ, the Son of God; and that on the ground of what was written in the Scriptures. "Those by the wayside are they that hear: then cometh the devil, and taketh away the word out of their hearts, lest they should believe and be saved." This language plainly denotes that a real belief of the word is connected with salvation. Peter confessed, "Thou art Christ, the Son of the living God. Jesus answered, Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jona; for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father who is in heaven." Here it is plainly intimated that a belief of Jesus being the Christ, the Son of the living God, is saving faith; and that no man can be strictly said to do this, unless he be the subject of a spiritual illumination from above. To the same purpose are those express declarations of Paul and John: "If thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved." -- "Whoso believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God." -- "Who is he that overcometh the world, but he that believeth that Jesus is the Son of God?" -- "Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and he in God." -- "He that hath received his testimony hath set to his seal that God is true." -- "No man can say that Jesus is the Lord but by the Holy Spirit." -- Again, "While ye have the light, believe in the light, that ye may be the children of light." The light they then had was that of the gospel; and had they believed it, they would have been the children of light, or true Christians. "Ye sent unto John, and he bare witness unto the truth." -- "These things I say that ye might be saved." Our Lord could not mean less by this language than that, if they believed
[[<< BACK |337]] | [[ NEXT >>|339]]
those things which John testified, and which he himself confirmed, they would be saved; which is the same thing as declaring it to be saving faith. Christ "shall come to be glorified in his saints, and to be admired in all them that believe (because our testimony among you was believed) in that day." The words in a parenthesis are evidently intended to give the reason of the phrase, "them that believe," and intimate that it was the belief of the gospel testimony that denominated them believers. "God hath chosen us to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth." It cannot be doubted that, by the "belief of the truth," is here meant faith in Christ; and its being connected with sanctification of the Spirit and eternal salvation proves it to be saving.
If the foregoing passages be admitted to prove the point, (and if they do not, we may despair of learning any thing from the Scriptures,) the duty of unconverted sinners to believe in Christ cannot fairly be called in question; for, as before said, it is admitted on all hands that it is the duty of every man to believe what God reveals.
But to this statement it is objected, that Christianity having at that time great opposition made to it, and its professors being consequently exposed to great persecution and reproach, the belief and acknowledgment of the gospel was more a test of sincerity than it now is: men are now taught the principles of the Christian religion from their youth, and believe them, and are not ashamed to acknowledge them; while yet they give no evidence of their being born of God, but of the contrary. There is some force in this objection, so far as it respects a confession of Christ's name; but I do not perceive that it affects the belief of the gospel. It was no more difficult to believe the truth at that time than at this, though it might be much more so to avow it. With respect to that traditional assent which is given to Christianity in some nations, it is of the same nature as that which is given to Mahometanism and paganism in others. It is no more than that of the Jewish nation in the time of our Lord towards the Mosaic Scriptures. They declared themselves to be Moses's disciples, and had no doubt but they believed him; yet our Lord did not allow that they believed his writings. "Had ye believed Moses," says be, "ye would have believed me; for he wrote of me." The same is doubtless true of all others who assent to his gospel merely from having been educated in it. Did they believe it, they would be consistent, and embrace those things which are connected with it. It is worthy of remark, that those professors of Christianity who received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved, are represented as not believing the truth, and as having pleasure in unrighteousness, 2 Thess. ii. 10, 12. To admit the existence of a few facts, without possessing any sense of their humiliating implication, their holy nature, their vast importance, or the practical consequences that attach to them, is to admit the body without the spirit. Paul, notwithstanding his knowledge of the law, and great zeal on its behalf, while blind to its spirituality, reckoned himself to be "without the law," Rom. vii. 9. And such are those professing Christians, with respect to the gospel, "who receive not the love of the truth, that they may be saved."
It is further objected, that men are said to have believed the gospel, who, notwithstanding, were destitute of true religion. Thus some among the chief rulers are said to have "believed in Jesus, but did not confess him; for they loved the praise of men more than the praise of God." It is said of Simon that he "believed also;" yet he was "in the gall of bitterness, and in the bond of iniquity." Agrippa is acknowledged by Paul to have believed the prophets, and faith is attributed even to the devils. The term belief, like almost every other term, is sometimes used in an improper sense. Judas is
[[<< BACK |338]] | [[ NEXT >>|340]]
said to have repented and hanged himself, though nothing more is meant by it than his being smitten with remorse, wishing he had not done as he did, on account of the consequences. Through the poverty of language there is not a name for every thing that differs, and therefore where two things have the same visible appearance, and differ only in some circumstances which are invisible, it is common to call them by the same name. Thus men are termed honest who are punctual in their dealings, though such conduct in many instances may arise merely from a regard to their own credit, interest, or safety. Thus the remorse of Judas is called repentance; and thus the convictions of the Jewish rulers, of Simon, and Agrippa, and the fearful apprehension of apostate angels, from what they had already felt, is called faith. But as we do not infer, from the application of the term repentance to the feelings of Judas, that there is nothing spiritual in real repentance, so neither ought we to conclude, from the foregoing applications of the term believing, that there is nothing spiritual in a real belief of the gospel.
"The objects of faith," it has been said, "are not bare axioms or propositions: the act of the believer does not terminate at an axiom, but at the thing; for axioms are not formed but that by them knowledge may be had of things." To believe a bare axiom or proposition, in distinction from the thing, must be barely to believe that such and such letters make certain words, and that such words put together have a certain meaning; but who would call this believing the proposition? To believe the proposition is to believe the thing. Letters, syllables, words, and propositions are only means of conveyance; and these, as such, are not the objects of faith, but the thing conveyed. Nevertheless, those things must have a conveyance, ere they can be believed in. The person, blood, and righteousness of Christ, for instance, are often said to be objects of faith; and this they doubtless are, as they are objects held forth to us by the language of Scripture: but they could not meet our faith, unless something were affirmed concerning them in letters and syllables, or vocal sounds, or by some means or other of conveyance. To say therefore that these are objects of faith is to say the truth, but not the whole truth; the person, blood, and righteousness of Christ revealed in the Scriptures as the way of a sinner's acceptance with God, are, properly speaking, the objects of our faith; for without such a revelation it were impossible to believe in them.
Mr. Booth, and various other writers, have considered faith in Christ as a dependence on him, a receiving him, a coming to him and trusting in him for salvation. There is no doubt but these terms are frequently used, in the New Testament, to express believing. "As many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name." -- "He that cometh to me shall never hunger, and he that believeth in me shall never thirst." -- "That we should be to the praise of his glory, who first trusted in Christ." -- "I know whom I have trusted, and am persuaded that he is able to keep that which I have committed to him against that day." Whether these terms, however, strictly speaking, convey the same idea as believing, may admit of a question. They seem rather to be the immediate effects of faith than faith itself. The author of the Epistle to the Hebrews describes the order of these things, in what he says of the faith of Enoch: “He that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.” Here are three different exercises of mind: First, believing that God is; Secondly, believing that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him; Thirdly, coming to him: and the last is represented as the effect of the former two. The same may be applied to Christ. He that cometh to Christ must believe the gospel testimony, that he is the Son of God, and the Saviour of sinners; the only name given under heaven,
[[<< BACK |339]] | [[ NEXT >>|341]]
and among men, by which we must be saved: he must also believe the gospel promise, that he will bestow eternal salvation on all them that obey him; and under the influence of this persuasion, he comes to him, commits himself to him, or trusts the salvation of his soul in his hands. This process may be so quick as not to admit of the mind being conscious of it; and especially as, at such a time, it is otherwise employed than in speculating upon its own operations. So far as it is able to recollect, the whole may appear to be one complex exercise of the soul. In this large sense also, as comprehending not only the credit of the gospel testimony, but the soul's dependence on Christ alone for acceptance with God, it is allowed that believing is necessary, not only to salvation, but to justification. We must come to Jesus that we may have life. Those who attain the blessing of justification must seek it by faith, and not by the works of the law; submitting themselves to the righteousness of God. This blessing is constantly represented as following our union with Christ; and “he that is joined to the Lord is one spirit."*
Let it but be granted that a real belief of the gospel is not merely a matter presupposed in saving faith, but that it enters into the essence of it, and the writer of these pages will be far from contending for the exclusion of trust or dependence. He certainly has no such objection to it as is alleged by Mr. M'Lean, that “to include, in the nature of faith, any holy exercise of the heart, affects the doctrine of justification by grace alone, without the works of the law."+ If he supposed, with that author, however, that, in order to justification being wholly of grace, no holiness must precede it; or that the party must, at the time, be in a state of enmity to God; he must, to be consistent, unite with him also in excluding trust (which, undoubtedly, is a holy exercise) from having any place in justifying faith; but persuaded as he is that the freeness of justification rests upon no such ground, he is not under this necessity.
The term trust appears to be most appropriate, or best adapted of any, to express the confidence which the soul reposes in Christ for the fulfilment of his promises. We may credit a report of evil tidings as well as one of good, but we cannot be said to trust it. We may also credit a report, the truth or falsehood of which does not at all concern us; but that in which we place trust must be some thing in which our wellbeing is involved. The relinquishment of false confidences which the gospel requires, and the risk which is made in embracing it, are likewise better expressed by this term than by any other. A true belief of the record which God has given of his Son is accompanied with all this; but the term belief does not, of itself, necessarily convey it. When Jacob's sons brought the coat of many colours to him, he credited their story; he believed Joseph to be torn to pieces; but he could not be said to trust that he was. When the same persons, on their return from Egypt, declared that Joseph was yet alive, Jacob, at first, believed them not, but, on seeing the waggons, he was satisfied of the truth of their declaration, and trusted in it too, leaving all behind him on the ground of it.
But whatever difference there may be between credit and trust, they agree in those particulars which affect the point at issue; the one, no less than the other, has relation to revealed truth as its foundation. In some cases it directly refers to the Divine veracity; as in Psal. cxix. 42, I trust in thy word. And where the immediate reference is to the power, the wisdom, or the mercy of God, or to the righteousness of Christ, there is a remote relation to veracity; for neither the one nor the other would be objects of trust, were they not revealed in a way of promise. And from hence it will follow, that
----------
* John v. 40; Rom. ix. 31, 32; x. 3; 1 Cor, vi. 17. + On the Commission, p. 83.
[[<< BACK |340]] | [[ NEXT >>|342]]
trusting in Christ, no less than crediting his testimony, is the duty of every sinner to whom the revelation is made.
If it be asked, What ground could a sinner, who shall at last prove to have no interest in the salvation of Christ, ever possess for trusting in him? let it be considered what it was for which he was warranted or obliged to trust. Was it that Christ would save him, whether he believed in him or not? No: there is no such promise, but an explicit declaration of the contrary. To trust in this, therefore, would be to trust in a falsehood. That for which he ought to have trusted in him was the obtaining of mercy, in case he applied for it. For this there was a complete warrant in the gospel declarations, as Mr. Booth, in his Tidings to Perishing Sinners, has fully evinced. There are principles, in that performance, which the writer of these pages, highly as he respects the author, cannot approve. The principal subjects of his disapprobation have been pointed out, and he thinks Scripturally refuted, by Mr. Scott;* but with respect to the warrant which every sinner has to trust in Christ for salvation, Mr. B. has clearly and fully established it. I may add, if any man distrust either the power or willingness of Christ to save those that come to him, and so continue to stand at a distance, relying upon his own righteousness, or some false ground of confidence, to the rejection of him, it is criminal and inexcusable unbelief.
Mr. Booth has (to all appearance, designedly) avoided the question, Whether faith in Christ be the duty of the ungodly? The leading principle of the former part of his work, however, cannot stand upon any other ground. He contends that the gospel affords a complete warrant for the ungodly to believe in Jesus; and surely he will not affirm that sinners are at liberty either to embrace the warrant afforded them or to reject it? He defines believing in Jesus Christ "receiving him as he is exhibited in the doctrine of grace, or depending upon him only." But if the ungodly be not obliged, as well as warranted, to do this, they are at liberty to do as the Jewish nation did, to receive him not, and to go on depending upon the works of the law for acceptance with God. In the course of his work, he describes the gospel message as full of kind invitations, winning persuasions, and importunate entreaties; and the messengers as commissioned to persuade and entreat sinners to be reconciled to God, and to regard the vicarious work of Jesus as "the only ground of their justification," -- pp. 36, 37, 2d ed. But how if they should remain unreconciled, and continue to disregard the work of Christ? How if they should, after all, make light of this "royal banquet," and prefer their farms and their merchandises to these "plentiful provisions of Divine grace?" Are they guiltless in so doing, and free from all breach of duty? I am persuaded, whatever was Mr. Booth's reason for being silent on this subject, he will not say they are.
----------
* See his Warrant and Nature of Faith.
[[<< BACK |341]] | [[ NEXT >>|343 PART II]]
''Part II
Arguments to Prove that Faith in Christ is the Duty of All Men who Hear,
or have Opportunity to hear, the Gospel.''
WHAT has been already advanced, on the nature of faith in Christ, may contribute to the deciding of the question whether faith be the duty of the ungodly: but, in addition to this, the Scriptures furnish abundance of positive evidence. The principal part of that which has occurred to me may be comprehended under the following propositions:
''I. Unconverted Sinners are Commanded, Exhorted, and Invited to Believe in Christ for Salvation.''
It is here taken for granted that whatever God commands, exhorts, or invites us to comply with, is the duty of those to whom such language is addressed. If, therefore, saving faith be not the duty of the unconverted, we may expect never to find any addresses of this nature directed to them in the Holy Scriptures. We may expect that God will as soon require them to become angels as Christians, if the one be no more their duty than the other.
There is a phraseology suited to different periods of time. Previously to the coming of Christ, and the preaching of the gospel, we read but little of believing; but other terms, fully expressive of the thing, are found in abundance. I shall select a few examples, and accompany them with such remarks as may show them to be applicable to the subject.
Psalm ii. 11, 12, "Serve the Lord with fear, and rejoice with trembling: kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little: blessed are all they that put their trust in him." The Psalm is evidently a prophecy of the resurrection and exaltation of the Messiah. Whatever reference may be had to Solomon, there are several things which are not true of either him or his government: and the whole is applicable to Christ, and is plentifully applied to him in the New Testament. The "kings and judges of the earth," who are here admonished to "serve the Lord (Messiah) with fear," and to "kiss the Son lest he be angry," are the same persons mentioned in verse 2, which words we find, in the New Testament, applied to "Herod and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel" (Acts iv. 27): that is, they were the enemies of Christ, unregenerate sinners: and such, for any thing that appears, they lived and died.
The command of God addressed to these rulers is of a spiritual nature, including unfeigned faith in the Messiah, and sincere obedience to his authority. To "kiss the Son" is to be reconciled to him, to embrace his word and ordinances, and bow to his sceptre. To "serve him with fear, and rejoice with trembling," denote that they should not think meanly of him, on the one hand, nor hypocritically cringe to him, from a mere apprehension of his wrath, on the other: but sincerely embrace his government, and even rejoice that they had it to embrace. That which is here required of unbelievers is the very spirit which distinguishes believers, a holy fear of Christ's majesty, and a humble confidence in his mercy: taking his yoke upon them, and wearing it as their highest delight. That the object of the command was spiritual is also manifest from the threatening and the promise annexed to it, "lest ye perish from the way" -- "blessed are all they that put their trust in him." It is here plainly supposed that if they did not embrace the Son, they should perish from the way: and if they did put their trust in him, they
[[<< BACK |342]] | [[ NEXT >>|344]]
should be blessed. The result is, unconverted sinners are commanded to believe in Christ for salvation: therefore believing in Christ for salvation is their duty. Isaiah lv. 1-7, "Ho, every one that thirsteth, come ye to the waters, and he that hath no money: come ye, buy, and eat: yea, come, buy wine and milk without money and without price. Wherefore do ye spend money for that which is not bread? and your labour for that which satisfieth not? Hearken diligently unto me, and eat ye that which is good, and let your soul delight itself in fatness. Incline your ear, and come unto me: hear, and your soul shall live: and I will make an everlasting covenant with you, even the sure mercies of David. Behold, I have given him for a witness to the people, a leader and commander to the people. Behold, thou shalt call a nation that thou knewest not: and nations that knew not thee shall run unto thee, because of the Lord thy God, and for the Holy One of Israel: for he hath glorified thee. Seek ye the Lord while he may be found, call ye upon him while he is near. Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts: and let him return unto the Lord, and he will have mercy upon him: and to our God, for he will abundantly pardon." This is the language of invitation: but Divine invitation implies an obligation to accept it: otherwise the conduct of those who "made light" of the gospel supper, and preferred their farms and merchandise before it, had been guiltless.
The concluding verses of this passage express those things literally, which the foregoing ones described metaphorically: the person invited and the invitation are the same in both. The thirst which they are supposed to possess does not mean a holy desire after spiritual blessings, but the natural desire of happiness which God has implanted in every bosom, and which, in wicked men, is directed not to "the sure mercies of David," but to that which “is not bread,” or which has no solid satisfaction in it. The duty, to a compliance with which they are so pathetically urged, is a relinquishment of every false way, and a returning to God in His name who was given for "a witness, a leader, and a commander to the people;" which is the same thing as "repentance towards God, and faith towards our Lord Jesus Christ." The encouragements held up to induce a compliance with this duty are the freeness, the substantialness, the durableness, the certainty, and the rich abundance of those blessings which as many as repent and believe the gospel shall receive. The whole passage is exceedingly explicit, as to the duty of the unconverted: neither is it possible to evade the force of it by any just or fair method of interpretation.
Jeremiah vi. 16, "Thus saith the Lord, Stand ye in the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths, where is the good way, and walk therein, and ye shall find rest for your souls. But they said, We will not walk therein." The persons here addressed are, beyond all doubt, ungodly men. God himself bears witness of them that "their ears were uncircumcised, and they could not hearken: for the word of the Lord was to them a reproach, and they had no delight in it," ver. 10. Yea, so hardened were they, that "they were not ashamed when they had committed abomination," and so impudent that "they could not blush," ver. 15. And such, for any thing that appears, they continued: for when they were exhorted to "walk in the good way," their answer was, "We will not walk therein." Hence the awful threatening which follows: "Hear, O earth: behold, I will bring evil upon this people, even the fruit of their thoughts, because they have not hearkened unto my words, nor to my law, but rejected it," ver. 19.
The "good way," in which they were directed to walk, must have been the same as that in which the patriarchs and prophets had walked in former ages: who, we all know, lived and died in the faith of the promised Messiah.
[[<< BACK |343 PART II]] | [[ NEXT >>|345]]
Hence our Lord, with great propriety, applied the passage to himself, Matt. xi. 28. Jeremiah directed to "the old paths," and "the good way," as the only medium of finding rest to the soul: Jesus said, "Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me, and ye shall find rest unto your souls."
We see in this passage also, as in many others, in what manner God requires sinners to use the means of grace not by a mere attendance upon them, (which, while the end is disregarded, and the means rested in instead of it, is not using, but perverting them,) but with a sincere desire to find out the good way, and to walk in it. God requires no natural impossibilities. No man is required to believe in Christ before he has opportunity of examining the evidence attending his gospel: but he ought to search into it like the noble Bereans, immediately, and with a pure intention of finding and following the good way: which, if he do, like them he will soon be found walking in it. If we teach sinners that a mere attendance on the means of grace is that use of them which God requires at their hands, and in which consists the whole of their duty, as to repentance towards God, and faith towards our Lord Jesus Christ, we shall be found false witnesses for God, and deceivers of the souls of men.
The New Testament is still more explicit than the Old. Faith in Jesus Christ, even that which is accompanied with salvation, is there constantly held up as the duty of all to whom the gospel is preached.
John xii. 36, "While ye have the light; believe in the light, that ye may be the children of light." The persons to whom this passage was addressed were unbelievers, such as "though Jesus had done so many miracles among them, yet believed not on him" (ver. 37); and it appears that they continued unbelievers, for they are represented as given over to judicial blindness and hardness of heart, ver. 40. The light which they were exhorted to believe in appears to be himself as revealed in the gospel: for thus he speaks in the context, "I am come a light into the world, that whosoever believeth in me should not abide in darkness." And that the believing which Christ required of them was such as, had it been complied with, would have issued in their salvation, is manifest from its being added, "that ye may be the children of light:" an appellation never bestowed on any but true believers.
John vi. 29, "This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent." These words contain an answer to a question. The persons who asked it were men who "followed Christ for loaves," who "believed not," and who after this "walked no more with him," ver. 26. 36. 66. Christ had been rebuking them for their mercenary principles in thus following him about, and charging them, saying, "Labour not for the meat that perisheth, but for that which endureth unto everlasting life," ver. 27. They replied by asking, "What shall we do, that we might work the works of God?" which was saying in effect, We have been very zealous for thee in following thee hither and thither: yet thou dost not allow that we please God: thou directest us "to labour for that which endureth unto everlasting life." What wouldest thou have us to do? what can we do? what must we do, in order to please God? To this question our Lord answers, "This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent;" which, if it be a proper answer, is the same as saying, This is the first and greatest of all duties, and without is no other duty can be acceptable.
It has been said, in answer to the argument from this passage,"The words contain a declaration that believing in Christ for salvation is necessary to the enjoyment of eternal life, and that faith in him is an act acceptable and pleasing to God: but afford no proof that it is required of men in a state of unregeneracy. To declare to unregenerate persons the necessity of faith in
[[<< BACK |344]] | [[ NEXT >>|346]]
order to salvation, which is what our blessed Lord here does, falls very far short of asserting it to be their present duty." * We see by this answer that Mr. Brine, who will be allowed to have been one of the most judicious writers on that side the question, was fully convinced of three things. First, That the persons here addressed were unregenerate sinners. Secondly, That the faith recommended is saving. Thirdly, That when faith is here called the work of God, it does not mean the work which God performs, but an act of theirs, which would be acceptable and pleasing to him. Yet we are told that our Lord merely expresses the necessity of it, without asserting it to be their present duty. Was it not the object of their inquiry then, What was their present duty, or what they ought to do in order to please God? What else can be made of it? Further, How can our Lord be supposed in answer to their question to tell them of an act which was necessary, acceptable, and pleasing to God, but which was not their present duty? Is such an answer worthy of him? Nay, how could their believing be an act acceptable and pleasing to God, if it were not their present duty? God is pleased with that only in us which he requires at our hands.
John v. 23, "The Father hath committed all judgment unto the Son, that all men should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father. He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which hath sent him." That men are obliged to honour the Father, by a holy hearty love to him, and adoration of him under every character by which he has manifested himself, will be allowed by all except the grossest Antinomians: and if it be the will of the Father that all men should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father, nothing less can be required of them than a holy, hearty love to him, and adoration of him under every character by which he has manifested himself. But such a regard to Christ necessarily supposes faith in him: for it is impossible to honour him, while we reject him in all or any of his offices, and neglect his great salvation. To honour an infallible teacher is to place an implicit and unbounded confidence in all he says: to honour an advocate is to commit our cause to him: to honour a physician is to trust our lives in his hands: and to honour a king is to bow to his sceptre, and cheerfully obey his laws. These are characters under which Christ has manifested himself. To treat him in this manner is to honour him, and to treat him otherwise is to dishonour him.
The Scriptures both of the Old and New Testament abound with exhortations to hear the word of God, to hearken to his counsel, to wait on him, to seek his favour, &c., all which imply saving faith. "Hearken unto me, O ye children: for blessed are they that keep my ways. Hear instruction, and be wise, and refuse it not. Blessed is the man that heareth me, watching daily at my gates, waiting at the posts of my doors. For whoso findeth me findeth life, and shall obtain favour of the Lord. But he that sinneth against me wrongeth his own soul. All they that hate me love death How long, ye simple ones, will ye love simplicity? and the scorners delight in their scorning, and fools hate knowledge? Turn you at my reproof: behold, I will pour out my Spirit unto you, I will make known my words unto you." -- "Hear, ye deaf, and look, ye blind, that ye may see. Hearken diligently unto me. Incline your ear, and come unto me: hear, and your soul shall live." -- "Seek ye the Lord while he may be found, call ye upon him while he is near." -- "This is my beloved Son: hear him." -- "And it shall come to pass that every soul which will not hear that Prophet shall be destroyed from among the people." -- "Labour not for the meat that perisheth, but for that which endureth unto everlasting life."
----------
* Mr. Brine's Motives to Love and Unity, &c., p. 42.
[[<< BACK |345]] | [[ NEXT >>|347]]
It is a grievous misapplication of such language to consider it as expressive of a mere attendance upon the means grace, without any spiritual desire after God: and to allow that unregenerate sinners comply with it. Nothing can be further from the truth. The Scriptures abound in promises of spiritual and eternal blessings to those who thus hearken, hear, and seek after God: such exercises, therefore, must of necessity be spiritual, and require to be understood as including faith in Christ. The Scriptures exhort to no such exercises as may be complied with by a mind at enmity with God: the duties which they inculcate are all spiritual, and no sinner while unregenerate is supposed to comply with them. So far from allowing that ungodly men seek after God, or do any good thing, they expressly declare the contrary. "God looked down from heaven upon the children of men, to see if there were any that did understand, that did seek God. Every one of them is gone back: they are altogether become filthy there is none that doeth good, no, not one." To reduce the exhortations of Scripture to the level of a carnal mind is to betray the authority of God over the human heart: and to allow that unconverted sinners comply with them is to be aiding and abetting in their self-deception. The unconverted who attend the means of grace generally persuade themselves, and wish to persuade others, that they would gladly be converted and be real Christians, if it were but in their power. They imagine themselves to be waiting at the pool for the moving of the water, and therefore feel no guilt on account of their present state of mind. Doubtless, they are willing and desirous to escape the wrath to come: and, under certain convictions, would submit to relinquish many things, and to comply with other things, as the condition of it; but they have no direct desire after spiritual blessings. If they had, they would seek them in the name of Jesus, and, thus seeking, would find them. That preaching, therefore, which exhorts them to mere outward duties, and tells them that their only concern is, in this manner, to wait at the pool, helps forward their delusion, and, should they perish, will prove accessory to their destruction.
Simon the sorcerer was admonished to "repent, and pray to the Lord, if perhaps the thought of his heart might be forgiven him." From this express example many, who are averse from the doctrine here defended, have been so far convinced as to acknowledge that it is the duty of the unconverted to pray, at least for temporal blessings: but Simon was not admonished to pray for temporal blessings, but for the forgiveness of sin. Neither was he to pray in a carnal and heartless manner: but to repent, and pray. And being directed to repent, and pray for the forgiveness of sin, he was, in effect, directed to believe in Jesus: for in what other name could forgiveness be expected? Peter, after having declared to the Jewish rulers that there was none other name under heaven given among men whereby we must be saved, cannot be supposed to have directed Simon to hope for forgiveness in any other way.
To admonish any person to pray, or to seek the Divine favour, in any other way than by faith in Jesus Christ, is the same thing as to admonish him to follow the example of Cain, and of the self-righteous Jews. Cain was not averse from worship. He brought his offering: but having no sense of the evil of sin, and of the need of a Saviour, he had taken no notice of what had been revealed concerning the promised Seed, and paid no regard to the presenting of an expiatory sacrifice. He thanked God for temporal blessings, and might pray for their continuance: but this was not doing well. It was practically saying to his Maker, I have done nothing to deserve being made a sacrifice to thy displeasure: and I see no necessity for any sacrifice being offered up, either now or at the end of the world. In short, it was claiming to approach God merely as a creature, and as though nothing had taken
[[<< BACK |346]] | [[ NEXT >>|348]]
place which required an atonement. The self-righteous Jews did not live without religion: they followed after the law of righteousness: yet they did not attain it: and wherefore? "Because they sought it not by faith, but, as it were, by the works of the law; for they stumbled at that stumbling-stone." And shall we direct our hearers to follow this example, by exhorting them to pray, and seek the Divine favour, in any other way than by faith in Jesus Christ? If so, how can we deserve the name of Christian ministers?
The Scriptures exhort sinners to put their trust in the Lord, and censure them for placing it in an arm of flesh. Whether trusting in Christ for the salvation of our souls be distinguishable from believing in him or not, it certainly includes it. To trust in Christ is to believe in him; if, therefore, the one be required, the other must be. Those who "loved vanity, and sought after lying," are admonished "to offer the sacrifices of righteousness, and to put their trust in the Lord: and a trust connected with the sacrifices of righteousness must be spiritual." To rely on any other object is to "trust in vanity," against which sinners are repeatedly warned: "Trust not in oppression: become not vain in robbery." "He that trusteth in his own heart is a fool." "Cursed be the man that trusteth in man, and maketh flesh his arm, and whose heart departeth from the Lord."
It is allowed, that if God had never sent his Son into the world to save sinners, or if the invitations of the gospel were not addressed to sinners indefinitely, there would be no warrant for trust in the Divine mercy: and, as it is, there is no warrant for trust beyond what God has promised in his word. He has not promised to save sinners indiscriminately, and therefore it would be presumption in sinners indiscriminately to trust that they shall be saved. But he has promised, and that in great variety of language, that whosoever, relinquishing every false ground of hope, shall come to Jesus as a perishing sinner, and rely on him alone for salvation, shall not be disappointed. For such a reliance, therefore, there is a complete warrant. These promises are true, and will be fulfilled, whether we trust in them or not: and whosoever still continues to trust in his own righteousness, or in the general mercy of his Creator, without respect to the atonement, refusing to build upon the foundation which God has laid in Zion, is guilty of the greatest of all sins: and if God give him not repentance to the acknowledgment of the truth, the stone which he has refused will fall upon him, and grind him to powder.
But "until a man through the law is dead to the law," says Mr. Brine, "he hath no warrant to receive Christ as a Saviour, or to hope for salvation through him."* If, by receiving Christ, were meant the claiming an interest in the blessings of his salvation, this objection would be well-founded. No man, while adhering to his own righteousness as the ground of acceptance with God, has any warrant to conclude himself interested in the righteousness of Jesus. The Scriptures every where assure him of the contrary. But the question is, Does he need any warrant to be dead to the law; or, which is the same thing, to relinquish his vain hopes of acceptance by the works of it, and to choose that Rock for his foundation which is chosen of God, and precious? To "receive" Christ, in the sense of Scripture, stands opposed to rejecting him, or to such a non-reception of him as was practised by the body of the Jewish nation, John i. 11, 12. An interest in spiritual blessings, and, of course, a persuasion of it, is represented as following the reception of Christ, and, consequently, is to be distinguished from it: "To as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name." The idea that is generally attached to the term, in various cases to which the reception of Christ bears an allusion,
----------
* Motives to Love and Unity, pp. 38, 39.
[[<< BACK |347]] | [[ NEXT >>|349]]
corresponds with the above statement. To receive a gift is not to believe it to be my own, though, after I have received it, it is so: but to have my pride so far abased as not to be above it, and my heart so much attracted as to be willing to relinquish every thing that stands in competition with it. To receive a guest is not to believe him to be my particular friend, though such he may be: but to open my doors to him, and make him heartily welcome. To receive an instructor is not to believe him to be my instructor any more than another's: but to embrace his instruction, and follow his counsel. For a town, or city, after a long siege, to receive a king, is not to believe him to be their special friend, though such he may be, and in the end they may see it: but to lay down their arms, throw open their gates, and come under his government. These remarks are easily applied: and it is no less easy to perceive that every sinner has not only a warrant thus to receive Christ, but that it is his great sin if he receive him not.
''II. Every Man is Bound Cordially to Receive and Approve Whatever God Reveals.''
It may be presumed that, if God reveal any thing to men, it will be accompanied with such evidence of its being what it is, that no upright mind can continue to doubt of it. "He that is of God heareth God's words."
It will be allowed, by those with whom I am now reasoning, that no man is justifiable in disbelieving the truth of the gospel, or in positively rejecting it: but then it is supposed that a belief of the gospel is not saving faith: and that, though a positive rejection of Divine truth is sinful, yet a spiritual reception of it is not a duty. I hope it has been made to appear, in the former part of this piece, that a real belief of the doctrine of Christ is saving faith, and includes such a cordial acquiescence in the way of salvation as has the promise of eternal life. But he this as it may, whether the belief of the gospel be allowed to include a cordial acquiescence in God's way of salvation or not, such an acquiescence will be allowed to include saving faith. "Acting faith," says Mr. Brine, "is no other than suitable thoughts of Christ, and a hearty choice of him as God's appointed way of salvation."* If, therefore, it can be proved that a cordial approbation of God's way of saving sinners is the duty of every one, it will amount to proving the same thing of saving faith.
I allow there is a difficulty in this part of the work, but it is that which attends the proof of a truth which is nearly self-evident. Who could suppose that Mr. Brine, after such an acknowledgment concerning faith, could doubt of its being the duty of all mankind? Ought we not, if we think of Christ at all, to think suitably of him? and are we justifiable in entertaining low and unsuitable thoughts of him? Is it not a matter of complaint, that the ungodly Jews saw "no form nor comeliness in him, nor beauty, that they should desire him?" And with respect to a hear choice of him, as God's appointed way of salvation, if it be not the duty of sinners to choose him, it is their duty to refuse him, or to desire to be accepted of God by the works of their hands, in preference to him? Mr. Brine would censure men for this. So does Mr. Wayman. Speaking of self-righteous unbelievers, he says; "They plainly declare that Christ is not all and in all to them, but that he comes in but at second-hand: and their regard is more unto themselves, and their dependence more upon their own doings, than upon the Mighty One upon whom God hath laid our help."+ But why thus complain of sinners for their not choosing Christ, if they be under no obligation to do so? Is there no sin in the invention of the various false schemes of religion, with which the Christian world abounds, to the exclusion of Christ? Why,
----------
* 352 Johnson's Mistakes Noted and Rectified, p. 34.
+ Further Inquiry, p. 160.
[[<< BACK |348]] | [[ NEXT >>|350]]
then, are heresies reckoned among the works of the flesh? Gal. v. 20. If we are not obliged to think suitably of Christ, and to choose him whom the Lord and all good men have chosen, there can be no evil in these things: for where no law is, there is no transgression.
"A hearty choice of God's appointed way of salvation" is the same thing as falling in with its grand designs. Now the grand designs of the salvation of Christ are the glory of God, the abasement of the sinner, and the destruction of his sins. It is God's manifest purpose, in saving sinners, to save them in this way: and can any sinner be excused from cordially acquiescing in it? If any man properly regard the character of God, he must be willing that he should be glorified: if he knew his own unworthiness, as he ought to know it, he must also be willing to occupy that place which the gospel way of salvation assigns him: and if he be not wickedly wedded to his lusts, he must be willing to sacrifice them at the foot of the cross. He may be averse from each of these, and, while an unbeliever, is so: but he will not be able to acquit himself of guilt: and it is to be lamented that any who sustain the character of Christian ministers should be employed in labouring to acquit him.
If a way of salvation were provided which did not provide for the glory God, which did not abase, but flatter the sinner, and which did not require him to sacrifice his lusts, he would feel no want of power to embrace it. Nominal Christians, and mere professors, in all ages, have shown themselves able to believe any thing but the truth. Thus it was with the carnal Jews: and thus our Lord plainly told them, -- "I am come in my Father's name, and ye receive me not. If another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive." -- "Because I tell you the truth, ye believe me not. Which of you convinceth me of sin? And if I say the truth, why do ye not believe me? He that is of God heareth God's words: ye, therefore, hear them not, because ye are not of God." This is the true source of the innumerable false schemes of religion in the world, and the true reason why the gospel is not universally embraced.
Unbelievers are described as "disallowing" of him who is "chosen of God, and precious." Now either to allow or disallow supposes a claim. Christ claims to be the whole foundation of a sinner's hope: and God claims, on his behalf, that he be treated as "the head of the corner." But the heart of unbelievers cannot allow of the claim. The Jewish builders set him at nought, and every self-righteous heart follows their example. God, to express his displeasure at this conduct, assures them that their unbelief shall affect none but themselves: it shall not deprive the Saviour of his honours: "for the stone which they refuse," notwithstanding their opposition, "shall become the head of the corner." What can be made of all this, but that they ought to have allowed him the place which he so justly claimed, and to have chosen him whom the Lord had chosen? On no other ground could the Scripture censure them as it does, and on no other principle could they be characterized as disobedient; for all disobedience consists in a breach of duty.
Believers, on the other hand, are described as thinking highly of Christ: reckoning themselves unworthy to "unloose the latchet of his shoes," or that he should "come under their roof;" treating his gospel as "worthy of all acceptation," and as counting all things but loss, for the excellency of the knowledge of him." They are of the same mind with the blessed above, who sing his praise, "saying with a loud voice, WORTHY is the Lamb that was slain to receive power, and riches, and wisdom, and strength, and honour, and glory, and blessing." In fine, they are of the same mind with God himself: him whom God has chosen they choose: and he that is precious
[[<< BACK |349]] | [[ NEXT >>|351]]
in his sight is precious in theirs, 1 Pet. ii. 4-7. And do they over-estimate his character? Is he not worthy of all the honour they ascribe to him, of all the affection they exercise towards him: and that whether he actually receive it or not? If all the angels had been of the mind of Satan, and all the saints of the spirit of the unbelieving Israelites, who were not gathered: yet would he have been "glorious in the eyes of the Lord." The belief or unbelief of creatures makes no difference as to his worthiness, or their obligation to ascribe it to him.
It is allowed by all, except the grossest Antinomians, that every man is obliged to love God with all his heart, soul, mind, and strength: and this notwithstanding the depravity of his nature. But to love God with all the heart is to love him in every character in which he has made himself known; and more especially in those wherein his moral excellences appear with the brightest lustre. The same law that obliged Adam in innocence to love God in all his perfections, as displayed in the works of creation, obliged Moses and Israel to love him in all the glorious displays of himself in his wonderful works of providence, of which they were witnesses. And the same law that obliged them to love him in those discoveries of himself obliges us to love him in other discoveries, by which he has since more gloriously appeared, as saving sinners through the death of his Son. To suppose that we are obliged to love God as manifesting himself in the works of creation and providence, but not in the work of redemption, is to suppose that in the highest and most glorious display of himself he deserves no regard. The same perfections which appear in all his other works, and render him lovely, appear in this with a tenfold lustre: to be obliged to love him on account of the one, and not of the other, is not a little extraordinary.
As these things cannot be separated in point of obligation, so neither can they in fact. He that loves God for any excellency, as manifested in one form, must of necessity love him for that excellency, let it be manifested in what form it may: and the brighter the display, the stronger will be his love. This remark is verified in the holy angels. At first they loved their Maker for what they saw in his works of creation. They saw him lay the foundation of the earth, and they "SHOUTED FOR JOY." In process of time they witnessed the glorious displays of his moral character in the government of the world which he had made: and now their love increases. On every new occasion, they cry, "HOLY, HOLY, HOLY IS THE LORD OF HOSTS: THE WHOLE EARTH IS FULL OF HIS GLORY." At length, they beheld an event to the accomplishment of which all former events were subservient: they saw the Messiah born in Bethlehem. And now their love rises still higher. As though heaven could not contain then on such an occasion, they resort to the place, and contemplate the good that should arise to the moral system, bursting forth into a song: "GLORY TO GOD IN THE HIGHEST, AND ON EARTH PEACE, GOOD-WILL TOWARDS MEN." All this was but the natural operation of love to God; and, from the same principle, they took delight in attending the Redeemer through his life, strengthening him in his sufferings, watching at his tomb, conducting him to glory, and looking into the mysteries of redemption. With a heart like theirs, is it possible to conceive that we should continue impenitent or unbelieving? If, in our circumstances, we possessed that love to God by which they were influenced, it would melt us into holy lamentation for having sinned against him. If the gospel invitation to partake of the water of life once sounded in our ears, we should instantly imbibe it. Instead of making "light of it," and preferring our "farms" and our "merchandise" before it, we should embrace it with our whole heart. Let any creature be affected towards God as the holy angels are, and if he had a thousand souls to be saved, and the invitation extended to every one
[[<< BACK |350]] | [[ NEXT >>|352]]
that is willing, he would not hesitate a moment whether he should rely on his salvation. It is owing to a want of love to God that any man continues impenitent or unbelieving. This was plainly intimated by our Lord to the Jews: "I know you, that ye have not the love of God in you. I am come in my Father's name, and ye receive me not." It is impossible to love God, and not to embrace the greatest friend of God that ever existed: or to love his law, and not approve of a system which above all things tends to magnify and make it honourable.
"The affections included in Divine love," says an able writer, "are founded on those truths for which there is the greatest evidence in the world. Every thing in the world that proves the being of God proves that his creatures should love him with all their hearts. The evidence for these things is in itself very strong, and level to every capacity. Where it does not beget conviction, it is not owing to the weakness of men's capacities: but the strength of their prejudices and prepossessions. Whatever proves that reasonable creatures are obliged to love God and his law, proves that sinners are obliged to exercise a suitable hatred of sin, and abasement for it. A sinner cannot have due prevalent love to God and hatred of sin, without prevalent desire of obtaining deliverance from sin, and the enjoyment of God. A suitable desire of ends so important cannot, be without proportionable desire of the necessary means. If a sinner, therefore, who hears the gospel have these suitable affections of love to God and hatred of sin, to which he is obliged by the laws of natural religion, these things cannot be separated from a real complacency in that redemption and grace which are proposed in revealed religion. This does not suppose that natural religion can discover or prove the peculiar things of the gospel to be true: but when they are discovered, it proves them to be infinitely desirable. A book of laws that are enforced with awful sanctions cannot prove that the sovereign has passed an act of grace or indemnity in favour of transgressors: but it proves that such favour is to them the most desirable and the most necessary thing in the world. It proves that the way of saving us from sin which the gospel reveals is infinitely suitable to the honour of God, to the dignity of his law, and to the exigences of the consciences of sinners."*
"If any man has a taste for moral excellency," says another, "a heart to account God glorious for being what he is, he cannot but see the moral excellency of the law, and love it and conform to it, because it is the image of God: and so he cannot but see the moral excellency of the gospel, and believe it, and love it, and comply with it: for it is also the image of God: he that can see the moral beauty in the original cannot but see the moral beauty of the image drawn to life. He, therefore, that despises the gospel, and is an enemy to the law, even he is at enmity against God himself, Rom. viii. 7. Ignorance of the glory of God, and enmity against him, make men ignorant of the glory of the law and of the gospel, and enemies to both. Did men know and 'love him that begat, they would love that which is begotten of him,' I John v. 1. 'He that is of God heareth God's words: ye therefore hear them not, because ye are not of God,' John viii. 47."+
'' III. Though the Gospel, Strictly Speaking, is not A Law, but A Message of Pure Grace; Yet it Virutally Requires Obedience, and such an Obedience as Includes Saving Faith.''
It is no uncommon thing to distinguish between a formal requisition and that which affords the ground or reason of that requisition. The goodness of God, for instance, though it is not a law or formal precept, yet virtually requires a return of gratitude. It deserves it: and the law of God formally
----------
* M'Laurin's Essay on Grace, 332
+ Bellamy's True Religion Delineated, p. 332.
[[<< BACK |351]] | [[ NEXT >>|353]]
requires it on his behalf. Thus it is with respect to the gospel, which is the greatest overflow of Divine goodness that was ever witnessed. A return suitable to its nature is required virtually by the gospel itself, and formally by the Divine precept on its behalf.
I suppose it might be taken for granted that the gospel possesses some degree of virtual authority: as it is generally acknowledged that, by reason of the dignity of its author, and the importance of its subjectmatter, it deserves the audience and attention of all mankind: yea, more, that all mankind who have opportunity of hearing it are obliged to believe it. The only question therefore is whether the faith which it requires be spiritual, or such as has the promise of salvation.
We may form some idea of the manner in which the gospel ought to be received, from its being represented as an embassy. "We are ambassadors for Christ," saith the apostle, "as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you, in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God." The object of an embassy, in all cases, is peace. Ambassadors are sometimes employed between friendly powers for the adjustment of their affairs: but the allusion, in this case, is manifestly to a righteous prince, who should condescend to speak peaceably to his rebellious subjects, and, as it were, to entreat them for their own sakes to be reconciled. The language of the apostle supposes that the world is engaged in an unnatural and unprovoked rebellion against its Maker; that it is in his power utterly to destroy sinners: that if he were to deal with them according to their deserts, this must be their portion: but that, through the mediation of his Son, he had, as it were, suspended hostilities, had sent his servants with words of peace, and commissioned them to persuade, to entreat, and even to beseech them to be reconciled. But reconciliation to God includes every thing that belongs to true conversion. It is the opposite of a state of alienation and enmity to him, Col. i. 21. It includes a justification of his government, a condemnation of their own unprovoked rebellion against him, and a thankful reception of the message of peace: which is the same for substance as to repent and believe the gospel. To speak of an embassy from the God of heaven and earth to his rebellious creatures being entitled to nothing more than an audience, or a decent attention, must itself be highly offensive to the honour of his majesty: and that such language should proceed from his professed friends must render it still more so.
"When the apostle beseecheth us to be 'reconciled' to God, I would know," says Dr. Owen, "whether it be not a part of our duty to yield obedience? If not, the exhortation is frivolous and vain."* If sinners are not obliged to be reconciled to God, both as a Lawgiver and a Saviour, and that with all their hearts, it is no sin to be unreconciled. All the enmity of their hearts to God, his law, his gospel, or his Son, must be guiltless. For there can be no neutrality in this case: not to be reconciled is to be unreconciled: not to fall in with the message of peace is to fall out with it: and not to lay down arms and submit to mercy is to maintain the war.
It is in perfect harmony with the foregoing ideas, that those who acquiesce in the way of salvation, in this spiritual manner, are represented, in so doing, as exercising OBEDIENCE: as "obeying the gospel," "obeying the truth," and "obeying Christ," Rom. x. 16; vi. 17. The very end of the gospel being preached is said to be for "obedience to the faith among all nations," Rom. i.5. But obedience supposes previous obligation. If repentance towards God, and faith towards our Lord Jesus Christ, were not duties required of us, even prior to all consideration of their being blessings bestowed upon us, it were incongruous to speak of them as exercises of obedience. Nor
----------
* Display of Arminianism, chap. x.
[[<< BACK |352]] | [[ NEXT >>|354]]
would it be less so to speak of that impenitence and unbelief which expose men to "eternal destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power," as consisting in their not obeying the gospel, 2 Thess. i. 8, 9. The passage on which the former part of this argument is founded (viz. 2 Cor. v. 19, 20) has been thought inapplicable to the subject, because it is supposed to be an address to the members of the church at Corinth, who were considered by the apostle as believers. On this principle Dr. Gill expounds the reconciliation exhorted to, submission to providence, and obedience to the discipline and ordinances of God. But let it be considered whether the apostle be here immediately addressing the members of the church at Corinth, beseeching them, at that time, to be reconciled to God: or whether he be not rather rehearsing to them what had been his conduct, and that of his brethren in the ministry, in vindication of himself and them from the base insinuations of false teachers; to whom the great evils that had crept into that church had been principally owing. The methods they appear to have taken to supplant the apostles were those of underhand insinuation. By Paul's answers, they appear to have suggested that he and his friends were either subtle men, who, by their soft and beseeching style, ingratiated themselves into the esteem of the simple, catching them, as it were, with guile (2 Cor. i. 12: xii. 16): or weak-headed enthusiasts, "beside themselves," (ch