========================================================================
  THE GOSPEL PREACHER (VOLUME 1)
  by Benjamin Franklin
========================================================================

The first volume of sermons by Benjamin Franklin, a prominent 19th-century
preacher in the Restoration Movement, presenting gospel messages with the
directness and scriptural focus characteristic of the Stone-Campbell tradition.

  Chapters: 21

------------------------------------------------------------------------
  TABLE OF CONTENTS
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    1. GP1 - 00.3-Introduction
    2. GP1 - 01-Evidences of the Divine Authority of the Bible
    3. GP1 - 02-What Must Men Believe to be Saved?
    4. GP1 - 03-How are Persons Made Believers?
    5. GP1 - 04-The Different Things to Which Salvation is Ascribed in the New Testament.
    6. GP1 - 05-Men Must Do Something to be Saved
    7. GP1 - 06-Conversion, or Turning to God
    8. GP1 - 07-The Adaptation of the Bible to Man
    9. GP1 - 08-The Simplicity of the Gospel of Christ
   10. GP1 - 09-The Two Covenants
   11. GP1 - 10-The Inaguration of the New Institution
   12. GP1 - 11-Predestination and the Foreknowledge of God
   13. GP1 - 12-The Necessity of Regeneration
   14. GP1 - 13-The Union of Christians
   15. GP1 - 14-A New Testament Example of Conversion
   16. GP1 - 15-The Course to Pursue to be Infallibly Safe
   17. GP1 - 16-The Love of God to Man
   18. GP1 - 17-The Church�Its Purity
   19. GP1 - 18-The Second Coming of Christ and the Destruction of the World
   20. GP1 - 19-The Three States of Man � The Fleshly, the Intermediate, and the Eternal
   21. GP1 - 20-The Punishment After Death of Those Who Die in Their Sins

========================================================================
  CHAPTER 1: GP1 - 00.3-INTRODUCTION
========================================================================

INTRODUCTION.

THE author of the following discourses cheerfully conforms to the usual custom,
in furnishing a few words by way of introduction to his new volume of sermons.
When a new book makes its appearance, the inquiry is at once started, What
demand has called forth another book? or, What is the object in offering another
book to the world? It is due, both to the writer and the public, that a few
words of explanation, in reply to the above and some other questions, should
appear here.

By means of the periodicals, and other publications, issued from the hand of the
author of the following discourses, which have been extensively circulated in
this country, and to some extent in other countries, he has become well known to
many thousands as a writer and publisher with whom he has no personal
acquaintance. Many of those his ardent friends he can never see and address in
person. From these the request has frequently been made, during the past few
years, that such a series of discourses as the following should be published. To
meet the wishes of these, in this respect, has been one reason for the
appearance of this volume.

Again: there are many thousands, in all quarters of this country, and beyond the
limits of our own country, who have recognized the name of the writer as a
preacher of the Gospel of much success for many years past. It is now true that
he has been actively engaged in the ministry of the Word more than thirty years,
without the intermission of a single week, except in a few instances when
compelled by sickness to lay by for a short time, and that more than eight
thousand persons have been turned to the Lord by his own personal appeals. Many
persons who have been made acquainted with these facts, but never seen him nor
heard his voice, desire to see a few of the discourses, as a specimen, which
have been effective in the achievement of this work. This volume is intended, to
some extent, to meet this demand.

Numerous persons who have heard the voice of the author of these discourses, and
participated with him in the meetings held by him in his extended labors in half
the States of the Union, desire to have a. few of the sermons they have heard,
that they may read and preserve them. They want them because they have heard and
will recognize and identify them, and thus call up anew the thrilling
surroundings and interesting scenes on the happy occasions of their delivery, in
the presence of vast audiences. They want them that their children may read
them, and recognize in them specimens of the preaching that achieved the great
reformatory movement of the nineteenth century, and produced such a revolution
in the public mind in this great and rising country. It is an item in the
intention of the writer to meet this demand.

Many friends have made the suggestion that immense good can be achieved by
placing these discourses in the hands of serious persons, that they may consider
them candidly and composedly, without the excitement of public occasions. We
have no doubt that much good will, in this way, result from them. They want them
to send to their friends who reside whore they have no preaching from those
devoted exclusively to the Gospel of Christ, that they may understand the ground
we, as a religious body, occupy. The volume is aimed to subserve these ends.

THE CLAIMS OF THESE DISCOURSES.

The author of these discourses is entirely an extemporaneous speaker, never in
his life having memorized a single discourse, either of his own composition or
that of any body else, and never than three times in his life attempting to read
a discourse. He preaches frequently on the same subject, but perfectly
extemporaneously, varying widely on different occasions, enlarging or
abbreviating as the occasion may appear to require, and as the mind may be more
active and fruitful on some occasions than others. While many of his numerous
hearers will recognize themes in this volume on which they have heard him, and
numerous points on which he has amplified, more or less, in their hearing, they
will not find a single discourse which they ever heard or read word for word.
Still, the themes being the same, and the arguments bearing such a resemblance
to what they have heard or read, they will readily recognize them. But probably
a half dozen paragraphs cannot be found--except in a single discourse--in the
volume, corresponding word for word with anything the author has ever spoken or
written. They have all been written exclusively for this volume. Such themes
have been selected as to make the series of discourses similar to what the
author has delivered on some occasions, especially the first ten discourses.
They are intended for men in the confused, perverted, and unbelieving condition
of thousands of well-meaning people of our time, to relieve them of their
doubts, perplexities, and confusion, and stay their minds on the one Lord and
his holy teaching--showing them that there is something clear, intelligible, and
tangible on which the souls of men can rest. The constant aim in preparing these
discourses has been to simplify, render every thing easy and clear, thus fitting
them for and adapting them to the people. The continual effort has been to
convince, enlighten, and turn the sinner to God; to build up, encourage, and
comfort the saints. In doing this, numerous difficult, perplexing, and
controverted points are introduced, the issues clearly stated, and the truth
vindicated, maintained, and defended. The following discourses are aimed to be
simply Gospel discourses, stating, unfolding, advocating, maintaining, and
defending the Gospel of Christ, and opposing, exposing, and repudiating every
thing in the way of it, or in opposition to it. This is done in kindness, but in
plainness, and with earnestness and force. An effort been made throughout to
furnish those discourses as near in the same spirit and substance as the author
speaks as possible. It will be seen in the perusal of these discourses that the
reformatory movement of the nineteenth century is appreciated by the writer of
these lines; that he regards the ground occupied in this great movement as
invulnerable; as unquestionably right; as capable of the most irresistible
advocacy, propagation, and defense; as the only hope of the present generation.
It is nothing less than to return to the original ground in all things; to stand
precisely where the apostles and first Christians stood; receive precisely the
same Gospel received by them; preach it as they preached it; believe it as they
believed it, and practice it as they practiced it. As to this being not only the
best thing that can now be done, but the only thing that can be done, with any
hope of uniting Christians and converting the world, the writer hereof never
expects to entertain a single doubt. The themes of the following discourses are
discussed as if the hearer were supposed to be listening for the first time to
Gospel discourses--as if the entire matter were new to him. They are prepared in
this style purposely, for the reason that the object is to give them as
specimens of the author’s preaching, as nearly as possible as he preaches, and
many who will read them will need the elucidations found here of the plainest
matters. No attempt has been made only to bring the Gospel of Christ to the
understanding, unfold it, defend it, and enforce it on the hearer, to the
exclusion of every thing else. As Paul explained that the grace or favor of
apostleship was given to him that he "might preach among the Gentiles the
unsearchable riches of Christ," and "to make all men see what is the fellowship
of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world has been hid in God, who
created all things by Jesus Christ" [Eph 3:8-9]; so now, the real purpose of
every man who knows the meaning of preaching the Gospel ought to be, not to
blind men, but to "make all men see," or " to enlighten all men as it respects
the fellowship of the mystery," which, from the beginning of time had, to the
time of the apostles, been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ,
but which were then revealed to his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit.
These sermons come not with any claim of originality--any wonderful discoveries
of anything new or startling; they claim simply to be sound Gospel discourses,
without display or flourish, in the native style of the author, addressed to the
minds, hearts, and consciences of men, in reference to the most wonderful
realities known to our fallen and sinful race, with the desire to make men
happy. benefit and save them. They come not to engender strife, but to make
peace--final and everlasting peace. To show men how to enjoy the peace of God
and be at peace with all good men, is of transcendent importance. The writer
believes there is a peace ground--a union ground--where all the good and true,
the pure and holy, can unite, enjoy God and the holy fellowship of the saints,
and, with one heart and one soul, labor together to turn the world to God. This
ground, he believes, is pretty fully developed in the following discourses, and
the objections to it shown to be without foundation, and swept away. It is
confidently believed by the writer that the reader of the following discourses
will find a ready relief from many of the perplexing questions of our time--a
clear path for him to pursue, and full encouragement--if he has simply an honest
desire to serve God and be saved. The teaching in these discourses, any man who
reads them will readily see, is the same in substance with the teaching of the
venerable men who led the way in our glorious reformatory movement, with the
most of whom the writer has had a personal acquaintance, and with all of whom he
has been familiarly acquainted by reputation. To understand and give to others
an understanding of the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments containing the
will of God to man; to do that will of God, and induce others to do it, on earth
as it is done in heaven, was their great aim. This great aim cannot be wrong.
The writer claims to unite with them in this great aim, and offers this volume
as a mite contributed in carrying out this aim. The Bible, in its own diving
character, and for the purpose the Lord had in giving it, must restored to the
people--not merely in in a neatly-printed volume in in our mother-tongue, but in
its own native power and grandeur. Its divine authority must be asserted,
maintained, and defended not only as true, divine, from God, but it must be
enforced, urged, and continually impressed on the hearts and consciences of men.
As a people, we must make all men know that we are simply for the Bible, in its
own true import, purpose, or intent; for the God of the Bible, in the character
ascribed to him in the Bible; the Messiah of the Bible, with the divine
character ascribed to him in that holy book, and his offices; the Holy Spirit of
the Bible, with the office and work ascribed to him in the Bible; the religion
of the Bible, in all its parts--its facts, its commandments, and promises; its
faith, obedience, and hope; its rewards and punishments--the whole of it; no
more, no less. To it and to its Divine Author we have vowed eternal allegiance;
to develop it, enforce it on the minds, hearts, and consciences of mankind; to
advocate, propagate, maintain, defend, and perpetuate it has been the work of
the author of the following discourses for a third of a century; to be enrolled
with its friends, a co-laborer with them, and have their fellowship; to have
their God for his God, their cause for his cause, and their final inheritance
for his inheritance, is the highest honor he desires. If this volume shall, in
any goodly degree, enlighten sinners encourage, comfort, and strengthen the
saints, the purpose of the writer will be fully accomplished.

BENJ. FRANKLIN.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 2: GP1 - 01-EVIDENCES OF THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE
========================================================================

SERMON, No. I.

THEME.--EVIDENCES OF THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE.

TEXT.--"To whom he showed himself alive, after his sufferings, by many
infallible proofs."--Acts 1:4.

THE Evangelist Luke, author of the book styled Acts of Apostles, made the
statement just read, and now selected as a text for a discourse on the Divine
Authority of the Bible. It is a fundamental statement, when properly considered.
It is not simply that Jesus was shown to his apostles after his sufferings, nor
that he was shown to them alive, but he showed himself to them alive. Nor is it
all, that he showed himself to them alive, nor that he did this by proof, nor
that he did it by proofs, nor that he did it by any proofs, but he showed
himself alive by many INFALLIBLE proofs. The apostles not only saw the Lord, and
saw him alive, but he showed himself to them alive; and gave them proof, and not
only proof, but proofs; not only proofs, but more, many proofs; and even more
than that, many infallible proofs, that he was the Lord himself. This grand
statement is fundamental; involving the great issue between the believers in the
Bible and unbelievers; the friends of the Bible and the enemies. It involves the
foundation of the entire revelation from God to man. If this statement is true,
the Bible is true and from God, and all the consequences follow, whether we
understand them or not. With this statement the Bible stands or falls; and with
it stands or falls our faith and our hope of all beyond this life. If Jesus
showed himself alive after his sufferings by many infallible proofs, he rose
from the dead. On his resurrection from the dead, the entire question turns. An
impostor could not have raised himself from the dead. God would not have raised
an impostor, and thus aided him in palming off an imposition on the world. If
Jesus rose, God raised him. If God raised him, he is Divine. If he is Divine,
all he ever said is true. This is the foundation of the entire matter of
revelation. He said he was with the Father before time began; that the Father
loved him before the foundation of the world; before the founding of kosmos, or
the material world. "Before Abraham was, I am," said he. He said he came down
from heaven. "I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the Ending, the
First and the Last; the Bright and Morning Star, the Root and Offspring of
David. I am He who was dead, and am alive; and behold, I live forever and ever.
I am He who was, and who is, and who is to come, the Omnipotent." He was before
all things, and by him all things consist. It was by him and for him the
universe was made. He is the express image of the invisible God and the
brightness of the Father’s glory. In him dwells all the fullness of the Deity
bodily. The apostles say, He knew all things. He came before the world as no
other teacher ever did, declaring, "I am the way, the truth, and the life; no
man comes to the Father but by me." "I, if I be lifted up, will draw all men to
me." There is no account of his having been educated, or having any
opportunities, in continuous association with the wise, the learned, and the
great. On the contrary, he was evidently brought up in comparative obscurity.
Yet, on coming forth from this obscurity, to the position of a public
instructor, the very first time he opened his lips, and on every subsequent
occasion, he showed that he knew all about man, what was in him, even to his
very thoughts; that he knew the Scriptures thoroughly; the patriarchs, the
prophets, and the entire history of man, from the creation down to his time. He
was never deceived nor disappointed by any man, nor set of men, but saw through
them and all their designs; knew and frequently foretold the results that would
follow. From the day he entered his public ministry till he ascended to heaven,
it is clear that he saw all things in advance, comprehended all that was coming,
and that even his enemies were blindly following the programme he had marked out
for them, without seeming to know that they were confirming his claims as a
prophet, and proving that he could see the future as clearly as the past. The
issue to be examined in this discourse is not about an opinion, a speculation,
or some intricate theory, but about a person--the most wonderful person that
ever appeared as an inhabitant of this earth. The issue now in hand is not about
his personal appearance either, his manners, or peculiar points in his teaching,
but about Him, AS A PERSON. The whole issue centers in and turns on one
question. That question is, Did he rise from the dead? If he rose, his claims
are all established. The Bible is a Divine Book. If he did not rise, his claims
amount to nothing, and the Bible is without Divine authority, and only to be
regarded as any other book of antiquity. Before coming to the main point of
discussion, it is necessary to array before the mind the two parties--the
friends and the enemies of Jesus, the believers and unbelievers; examine their
ground, what they claim, what they propose; what they affirm and what they deny;
how far they agree and wherein they differ. What, then, do unbelievers claim?
What do they affirm? What do they advocate? What do they defend? The deliberate
answer to each of these four questions is, Nothing, nothing under the shining
heavens, either for this world or the world to come. They claim nothing, affirm
nothing, advocate nothing, defend nothing. They deny Christ, the apostles, the
prophets, and the Bible, as possessing Divine authority, but propose nothing
instead. They would take the Bible from us, our faith and hope, but propose to
give us nothing in return. They would take away the Church, the ministry, and
all our religious edification, but propose nothing in return. They would take
away our worship, and all the hallowed memories of the kingdom of God, but give
us nothing in return. In casting away the Scriptures and the Savior, they do not
propose any other system of religion. They believe no other. They believe
nothing, advocate nothing, and defend nothing. They simply deny what others
believe, pull down what others build up, oppose what others defend. They have
nothing to offer you but doubts, instead of your unshaken faith; confusion,
instead of your clear and intelligible understanding of the right way of the
Lord; their want of confidence, instead of your confidence; their restlessness
of mind, instead of your peace with God; their wavering and continual distrust
of every thing, instead of your full assurance of faith; their want of
confidence in God, instead of your everlasting trust in him. We might have some
reason for listening to a man who proposes something, but certainly none in
listening to a man who proposes nothing; who has nothing to believe; no theme,
except how manythings he does not believe; how manythings he does not
understand; how much is absurd, inconsistent, and contradictory to his mind. We
cannot lean on things that we do not believe, nor things that are absurd. We
must have something in which we have confidence, which we believe, living and
dying, in order to happiness. To be happy, the soul of man must have something
on which to rest; on which to lean with the fullest assurance of faith. Nor is
it in the way of the full assurance of faith, that we find some things in the
Bible that we do not understand, or cannot explain. That only proves that the
Bible, in that respect, is like all the works of Cod, deep, profound, and
wonderful, beyond the comprehension of the human mind. But the matter now to be
investigated is not of that character. It is a question of fact. The same mind
required in the investigation of questions in the arts, in science and history,
is required here; the same reason and understanding also. The friends of the
Bible come before the world with a proposition, on which, in the nature of the
case, every thing rests, and on which they rest every thing--an affirmative
proposition. But to approach the question with intelligence it is necessary to
look at the surroundings, and ascertain what is admitted, what is denied, and
the real ground of controversy. The following items are admitted:

That there was such a person as Jesus of Nazareth.

That he lived at the time assigned to him in the Bible.

That he lived in the country assigned to him in the Bible.

That he was nailed to the Roman cross.

That he actually died on the cross

That the body was given to Joseph of Aramathea.

That Joseph laid it in his own new tomb.

That a great stone was placed at the entrance of the tomb, and an armed guard of
Roman soldiers was stationed over it to guard it; that the directions given
those who posted the guard there, were, to "make it as secure as you can."

That the reason for posting the guard there, was that the enemies remembered
that he said he would rise the third day, and they feared that his disciples
would steal the body and tell that he had risen from the dead.

That early on the morning of the third day, the body was missing--that it was
not in the tomb.

In all these points there is a perfect agreement among both friends and enemies.
A dissenting voice is not heard. But here comes the real issue. It is in
accounting for the absence of the body. The two parties--the friends and the
enemies--account for its absence in two different ways. The friends say, the
body was raised from the dead. The enemies say, the body was stolen. Here is the
issue. So far as the information goes, no other ground has been taken by any
body. The judgment must be made up between these two grounds. The testimony and
surroundings on each side must now be briefly considered. Turn your attention to
the enemies’ side first. What is their position? It is that the body was stolen.
Who were their witnesses? The Roman guard, consisting of sixty soldiers. The
number of witnesses is sufficient to prove anything, all things being equal. To
what do they testify? That the body of Jesus was stolen from the tomb. So far
the testimony appears clear and conclusive. Who stole the body? They say the
disciples stole it. That statement also appears clear and conclusive. Where was
the guard when the theft was committed? They were all at their post. That
appears to place them in a proper position for witnesses. What were they doing
while the disciples committed the theft? They say they were asleep. This
involves their testimony in the depths of absurdity, and completely destroys it.
Stop and consider the matter.

If they were confessedly asleep, how did they know the body was stolen? How did
they know the disciples stole it? If they were asleep, when the body disappeared
from the tomb, how did they know that it did not rise and walk out? The
confession that they were asleep when the body disappeared from the tomb, had it
been true, was a clear confession that they knew nothing about the question how
the body disappeared, and could not be competent witnesses touching the question
in dispute. Had they been asleep, they could have testified that, when they
awoke from their sleep, the body was gone from the sepulcher, but certainly
could not have testified as to the manner in which it disappeared. These
considerations set aside their statement as wholly unreliable.

But their statement is unreliable on another account. It was certain death,
under the Roman military law, for a soldier to be found asleep while on guard.
Then the guard was divided into different watches, and each watch only required
to be on guard six hours at a time, involving no necessity for being sleepy
while on guard. Then, it would have been marvelous for the entire watch to have
fallen asleep at once, and so soundly asleep, as not to have been awakened by
the rolling away of the stone from the entrance of the tomb, which was "very
great," and the entire transaction of taking away the body! This is an
incredible story.

But if they were asleep, why were they not brought to account and punished, for
violating the military laws, especially in such an important case? There is not
a word about their being tried or punished! If the confession of their having
been asleep had been believed, would the whole thing have passed off thus
quietly? By no means. They would have been tried and punished.

They had the disciples completely in their power. Why did they not confront them
with the body, and compel them to return the body when they commenced telling
that it was risen? The reason is, they did not believe the story themselves.
They knew that the disciples did not have the body in their possession.

What motive could the disciples have had in stealing the body? They could not
have made it alive. They would have known that they could have been compelled to
return it, and that, it being found in their possession, would have been a means
of exposing them. They knew they were powerless, and that there would have been
no difficulty in bringing them to punishment.

It is also true that the disciples never understood what he said about rising
the third day, and did not believe that he would rise. They believed, till the
last, that his kingdom would be an earthly kingdom, and that he would be an
earthly king ; and when he died, all their expectations in him were blasted.
They went away, saying, "We thought it was he who was to have redeemed Israel."
They gave all up as lost. After he rose, they still had the idea of a civil
government in their heads, and said to him, "Lord, wilt thou at this time
restore the kingdom to Israel?"

The thing reported was impossible. The moon was at its full, giving light all
night. The Jews from all nations under heaven were there, in attendance on their
great anniversary, tented in all directions; and the Roman guard, ever watchful,
was there, rendering it impossible for those discouraged and disappointed
disciples to have gone to the tomb, rolled away the stone, taken the body, and
conveyed it away unobserved. The man who can believe the story that the
disciples stole the body of Jesus, as reported by the guard, ought never to say
anything about the credulity of Christians, for he can believe not only without
evidence, but against all evidence and reason. There is nothing here on which
any human being can rest the soul.

But now turn your attention to the other side, and consider the account. How do
the friends of Jesus account for the absence of the body from the tomb on the
morning of the third day? Their account of the matter is, that he rose from the
dead. Who are their witnesses? The following list is given by Paul:

He was seen alive, after his resurrection, by Cephas.

He was then seen by the twelve apostles.

Afterward, he was seen by more than five hundred brethren at once, the greater
portion of whom were still living when Paul wrote the first letter to the
Corinthians.

After that he was seen by James.

Then by all the apostles.

Last of all, by Paul.

These witnesses were not all present, it will be observed, on all the occasions
alluded to; nor are these occasions the only ones on which he was seen; nor are
the persons here enumerated the only persons who saw him after he rose from the
dead. But these are sufficient for the present purpose. They did not all see nor
observe the same things; but among them were some who saw him repeatedly during
a space of forty days; who ate with him, drank with him, handled him, heard him,
and, on sundry occasions, had the fullest opportunity to make themselves
competent witnesses. In these interviews, he talked over many of their previous
transactions, explaining things he held taught them, and bringing all things to
their remembrance. Concluding these personal interviews with them, he took them
to Mount Olivet, and in their presence, and in open day, ascended up into
heaven. This makes substantially the case. The next thing is the examination.
There are but two grounds on which testimony can be made doubtful. 1. If there
can be shown a possibility of mistake on the part of witnesses, it renders the
testimony doubtful. 2. If the honesty of the witnesses can be questioned, it
renders the testimony doubtful. But if the witnesses could not have been
mistaken, nor dishonest, there remains no ground of doubt. These are the two
points now to be examined. I.Could these witnesses have been mistaken? They
certainly could not. If they did not testify to the truth, they knew they did
not. There was no mistake about it. The reasons for saying they could not have
been mistaken must be given somewhat in detail:

He was seen on too many different occasions, by too many different persons, and
by some of these persons too often, for them to have been mistaken. If but
twelve persons had seen him but one time, in open day, the testimony would have
been considered conclusive. But he was seen of above five hundred brethren at
one timed by the twelve more than once, and by several others again and again,
during a space of forty days. So many of them saw him so frequently, that they
could not have been mistaken. If what they said about seeing him was not true,
they knew it was not true.

There could have been no mistake about identifying him on these occasions, for
there were so many who saw him, and the opportunities for identifying him were
such as to render it impossible for them to have been mistaken. They saw him in
daylight, ate with him, handled him, and conversed with him. In these interviews
he rehearsed manythings he had said, and spoke of manythings he had done before
his death. The interviews were too numerous, the conversations too extended, and
the things on which they discoursed were of such a nature as to identify him
beyond all dispute.

They were with him in open day; heard him say that he was about to leave them,
and return to his Father; and on the Mount of Olives they saw him ascend to
heaven, They saw, also, a convoy of angels, who said, "Why stand you here,
gazing up into heaven? That same Jesus, whom you see ascending into heaven,
shall so come in like manner as you have seen him ascend into heaven." There
could have been no mistake about the main matter here. If these things were not
true, they knew they were not true.

The apostles claimed that the Lord, after he ascended to heaven, gave them power
to heal all manner of diseases--to give sight to the blind, hearing to the deaf,
and speech to the dumb. They said they did all these things. In saying this,
they could not have been mistaken. They knew whether they did these things.

Some of these witnesses made statements that could have been proved false, if
they had been false, by almost any number of persons. As samples: the statements
of Matthew, published in Palestine, eight years after the death of Christ, that
he fed thousands, in open day, by miracle; that there was a great earthquake
when he died; that there was darkness over the whole land from the sixth till
the ninth hour; that the vail in the temple was rent in two from the top to the
bottom; that the rocks were split; the statement of Paul, that he was seen of
above five hundred brethren at once. These, and many more statements like them,
could have been disproved by almost any number of witnesses, if they had not
been true; and the enemies could have thus defeated the apostles. But instead of
these statements being refuted, they are confirmed by all the testimony in the
world, in any way bearing on them. They stand, not only uncontradicted by
anything written in that age, but corroborated by every authority having
connection with them. These were statements about which they could not have been
mistaken.

They claimed that they were inspired by the Savior, empowered to make
revelations from God, and to speak in all the languages under heaven--languages
that they had never learned. They know whether they had received these
revelations and whether they could speak these languages. They could not have
been mistaken here.

This is certainly sufficient to show that there was no ground for mistake on the
part of these witnesses in regard to the matter in hand. If the things they
testified to were not true, they knew it. II. The other side remains to be
considered. Could they have been dishonest? Could they have been pretenders?
They certainly could not, for the following reasons:

They had no inducement to tell falsehoods touching the matter in hand. Every
earthly interest they had was against the ground they took, and in favor of
their renouncing it.

That Jesus rose from the dead, if not true, was the most unpopular and unwelcome
story that any man or set of men could have told at the time in which they
lived. The idea, that these timid men would have had the boldness and
determination to face the world, Jews and pagans, and declare persistently that
Jesus rose from the dead, knowing it to be false, is the very climax of
absurdity.

Admitting the possibility of these timid and cowardly men (as they were before
the death of Christ) to have had the effrontery to stand up in Jerusalem, before
the learned rabbis, the doctors of the law, the scribes and priests, at the
first, and declare that Jesus rose from the dead, knowing that they were telling
a falsehood; still, there remains no way of accounting for their persistence in
their statement, and maintaining that it was true, though every possible means
were used to induce them to recant, till they sealed their testimony with their
blood. What man of intelligence can believe that these men were dishonest; mere
pretenders; telling what they knew to be false, and that they were true to their
original purpose, and every man of them stood by every other man in telling and
maintaining the falsehood, through stripes, imprisonments, and banishments, till
the last one was martyred for telling the falsehood, and not a man of them could
ever, by any means, be induced to give it up? The man who can believe this ought
to say nothing of the credulity of Christians! It is to believe that men can
have two opposite characters at the same time, and maintain both till death;
that they can be hypocrites, pretenders and deceivers for life, engaged in
palming off a grand falsehood on the world; and yet so true to their falsehood
and to each other, that not one of them ever could be induced to betray and
expose the falsehood or his fellow-witnesses. Not one of them ever could be
induced to save himself from stripes, imprisonment, or death, to turn States
evidence! What they stated at the first, they stated at the last.

Take Paul as a more particular example. Three times he was beaten with rods,
once he was stoned. Five times he received forty stripes, save one. He was
exposed to wild beasts in Ephesus. Finally, in Rome, he was deliberately
beheaded. Yet he stood to the same testimony from the first till the last. Can
any man doubt that he was an honest man?

Those men bore unquestionable marks of honesty, sincerity and candor in the
purity of their lives, the purity and correctness of their teaching. They not
only taught purity, but practiced it.

If, therefore, these were not honest, sincere and candid men, the world never
contained any. They gave the highest evidence that men can give of honesty and
sincerity. It is, therefore, impossible for men who understand what evidence is,
men of intelligence, to conclude that they were dishonest. It is morally
impossible for them to have been dishonest. It follows, then, with the force of
demonstration, that, as they could not have been dishonest, and could not have
been mistaken, their testimony is true. The Lord rose from the dead. He is
Divine, and the Bible of Divine authority. He was dead, but is alive, and lives
forever and ever. In him all fullness dwells. He is head over all things to the
Church. He is the way, the truth, and the life. But now turn back to the first
preaching of the apostles. Where did they first preach after he rose? In
Jerusalem, where, fifty days before, it was unanimously agreed, he died. Here
was the place where the people were better prepared than anywhere else in the
world to judge of the truth of their preaching; and among the people who had all
the opportunities of knowing whether they told the truth or not, and they, too,
the most decided and determined people in their religion on the face of the
earth. Here the apostles first stand up, with all the late and present
surroundings in the minds of the people, and preach. What is the main ground of
the first discourse? That the same Jesus, whom the people had crucified some
fifty days before, had been raised from the dead and exalted to the right hand
of God, and the sublime display of supernatural power which they saw and heard
was from him. Here the people, in thousands, who were posted in the events of
the past few weeks, stood around the apostles, and saw and heard what was before
them. Their prejudices were all against them. Popularity was against them. All
worldly interests were against them. All existing church relations were against
them. What is the result? Three thousand sturdy and determined Jews turn their
backs on their former church, their worldly interests, and sins, and yield to
the authority of Jesus the Christ. In a few days, five thousand became obedient
to the faith. Shortly the Gospel reached Samaria, and the people, with one
accord, gave heed to the things spoken by the preacher of Jesus. Triumphantly,
grandly, and sublimely it moved onward. In ten years the Gentiles became
obedient to the faith. In less than forty years it traveled the length of the
Mediterranean Sea and throughout the Roman empire. Did uninspired fishermen of
Galilee; illiterate, timid, and weak men, do all this, in their own strength?
Did they do this by telling a falsehood, sticking to a falsehood, and, in their
mere human strength, preaching a falsehood? If they did, their falsehood did
more than any truth ever did since the beginning of time, for such a revolution
had never been brought about before by any sort of preaching, true or false. To
say that the apostles did this in their own strength, by preaching a falsehood,
and one of the silliest falsehoods ever told, too, if it was a falsehood at all,
is to say, that the most stupendous, grand, and sublime religious movement
recorded in the world’s history, was achieved by weak and ignorant men by
preaching a falsehood, in spite of all the learning, talent, money, prejudice,
pride, popularity, civil and religious authorities on the face of the earth! The
man who will say this, is not a subject of argument. No doubt, many statesmen,
philosophers, men of wealth, and powerful men of the world of different kinds,
as well as distinguished religionists of different kinds, of that day, thought
the whole affair about Jesus of Nazareth a shallow thing, with which the people
had been carried away, and that, in a short time, there would be nothing more
heard of Jesus or his apostles. But how stands the case now? Eighteen centuries
have gone into the past, and their events are known in history. What has become
of the statesmen of Greece and Rome? Excepting a few, their names have gone into
oblivion. Where is that mighty civil superstructure, on which they put forth
their greatest power and skill? In less than four hundred years, it was divided
into petty kingdoms, and the wisdom of the great men who framed the Roman
government was shown to be foolishness with God. Where are the philosophers of
Greece and Rome? Excepting a few, their names are not even found in history.
Their systems of philosophy have been exploded, and many of the things in which
they gloried and prided themselves most, have been demonstrated to be erroneous
and false. Where are the men of wealth of those times? Gone, ages since; their
vast estates scattered to the winds, and they forgotten. But where is the name
of Jesus of Nazareth? It has been interwoven with the history of the civilized
world for eighteen hundred years. Every infidel that now writes a letter, in
some form or other, puts down "the year of our Lord, one thousand eight hundred
and sixty-eight." Every note of hand, bond, deed, mortgage, bank check, summons,
receipt, no matter by whom written, believer, or unbeliever, bears "the year of
our Lord on it," either in full or in some abbreviated form. If any man thinks
the power of our Lord Jesus the Christ is nothing, or a matter of no
consequence, let him inquire for the origin of the observance of the Lord’s day
or the first day of the week. What statesman, philosopher, or great man of the
world, originated the observance of the first day of the week? No great man did
it. It originated with Jesus of Nazareth. Has he any power on earth now? Lift up
your eyes and look at the stupendous business operations of the civilized world.
See the busy multitudes in the departments of agriculture, mechanic arts,
commerce, and trade, as the week closes. Then, open your eyes on the Lord’s day
morning, and see the general suspension! Where is the power that suspends all
this? Whose wonderful hand stays and suspends all those busy multitudes? Where
did all this originate? You trace back and find the origin of it in the
resurrection of our Lord from the dead. Before that event, nothing of the kind
described had ever existed on the first day of the week. There had been such a
thing as the observance of the Sabbath or the seventh day, but no observance of
the first day as a sacred day, since the beginning of time. Amid all the
unbelief, the hardness of heart, and terrible impenitence of these times, the
name of Jesus finds its way into all the records, the legal documents, the
documents of State, and the entire literature of the civilized world. Even in
the most degraded forms of an apostate church and people, the name of Jesus
fills every thing. Where, too, are the names of the apostles? Their names, have
gone wherever the name of Jesus is known. Where, is the Gospel of Christ?
Written, printed, and circulated, in the Scriptures, throughout the world. After
the Jews have hated, despised, and malignantly fought the religion of Christ,
the apostles, and the Lord himself, for eighteen hundred years; after the pagan
world have fought it as long, and powerful and learned infidels have put forth
their most determined efforts to crush it; in one word, after it has stood the
criticism and opposition of all the combined influences that could be brought
against it, for eighteen hundred years, it is received and believed by more
people than at any other period since it became a power among men. What is
grandly in its favor is, that the most powerful, enlightened, and elevated
people in the world, are the people who receive the Word of God. The most pure,
benevolent, and good people in the world, are those who practice the Bible most
closely. Faith in the Savior and in the Bible, never gives way at the approach
of death. This cannot he said of Infidelity. There is, it may be admitted, now
and then a determined case of infidelity, where a man resists the Bible and hugs
his infidelity till the last. Cases of that kind are not the rule, but the
exception. No man can know precisely; but, in nine cases out of ten, when death
is supposed to be approaching, skepticism vanishes away and disperses like mist
before the rising sun, and leaves the soul without any support in the most
trying hour. It is simply a matter of fact, that at death, or the supposed
approach of death, the faith of the saint becomes stronger and stronger, and the
unbelief of the skeptic becomes weaker and weaker. The believer maintains his
ground, and leans on his faith to the last. It never fails him. In numerous
instances, skeptics repudiate their unbelief with their last breath, and warn
their friends against it. Why is this? The reason is, there is reality on the
side of the believer. He is founded on the Rock of Ages, and can sing in death,
"How firm a foundation, ye saints of the Lord." The dying saint can commend his
faith to those he leaves behind. The infidel repudiates his unbelief when he is
dying, and admonishes his friends and warns them against it. In the last
moments, there is a great difference between the man who can say, "The Lord is
my shepherd," and the man who says "There is no God." But, turning to the
skeptic again, before closing the present discourse, What does he propose? To do
away with the Bible, the ministry, the Church, and all religion. What are we to
have, then? No Bible, no ministry, no Church, and no religion; nor error, nor
superstition, nor impositions. Indeed! But the world is filled largely with
religious establishments that came not from the Bible, that are not only not
authorized by anything in the Bible, but condemned by the Bible. Not only so,
but error, superstition, and imposition abound where the Bible has never gone,
and is not known--error that did not originate with anything in the Bible.
Banishment of the Bible is no guarantee that error, superstition, deception, and
imposition shall cease. The Pope, at one time, had the Bible well-nigh done
away, but there was more error, superstition, deception, and imposition then
than ever existed where the authority of the Bible prevailed. Deception was then
reduced to a science. When they got the authority of the Bible out of the way,
the Romish priesthood were organized and confederated in a grand systematic
scheme of delusion and deception. The entire scheme was used with no other clear
purpose than to delude and deceive the people. It was then that the most
terrible spiritual despotism ever known on the face of the earth prevailed and
did its work. The reaction from this, in one form of it, resulted in the atheism
of France, when the best thing they had for man beyond this life was "Death, an
eternal sleep." It was then and there that Jacobinism prevailed. It was then and
there they cut off the heads of some of the noblest of men and women. It was
then that the king and queen lost their heads. The millennium of Romanism,
without the Bible, preceded the tragedies in France, and the millennium of
unbelief followed. No man of sense, who is a friend to his race, desires these
scenes, or others like them, to be reënacted, or follow on us or our children.
Yet you have no security for anything better without the Bible. But now some
application must be made of what has gone before. The question will come up, How
does it follow, as a sequence, that the Bible is of divine authority if the
foregoing reasoning is correct? This we will now proceed to show.

The foregoing argument is to prove that Jesus of Nazareth is the Christ, the Son
of the living God. This is the foundation of the divine authority of the Bible.
It was in reference to this, that, when Peter made the statement, "Thou art the
Christ, the Son of the living God," the Lord said, "You are Peter, and on this
rock, I will build my Church; and the gates of hades shall not prevail against
it." This is the great proposition of the new institution. When it is proved,
all minor ones are proved, as a matter of course. This may not be obvious to
every person, at a glance, and the argument must be carefully restated and the
reasoning applied.

In the foregoing argument, it is assumed that if Jesus is the Christ, the Son of
the living God, his claims are established, and all he ever taught is true; but
this has not been elaborated. The intention now is to restate, elaborate, and
apply it.

The whole argument has been shown to rest on the resurrection of Christ from the
deed. No power this side of the power of the Almighty could have raised him. The
Almighty would not have raised an impostor, and thus aided him in palming off an
imposition on the world. This led to the foregoing brief argument to show that
he rose from the dead. The result of the argument is as follows: 1. God raised
him from the dead. 2. If God raised him, he is the Christ, the Son of the living
God; or, which, in amount, is the same, he is divine. All his claims are true.
But how does this confirm the divine authority of the Bible? Mainly in the
following three ways:

He fulfilled numerous predictions of the Old Testament, such as could not, by
any possibility, have been fulfilled by an impostor, thus confirming the divine
authority of the inspired prophet, who, by the Spirit of God in him, looked down
through many long centuries and predicted what would come to pass, and, on the
other hand, confirmed the divine authority of HIM who fulfilled these numerous
and wonderful predictions. These prophecies, and their fulfillment, connect and
interweave the Old Testament with Jesus, so that both stand or fall together.
The reasoning turns both ways: The prophets of the Old Testament point to Jesus
and find their fulfillment in him. He comes and fulfills their predictions, and
thus the divine authority of the prophets and of himself is established.

After establishing his own divine authority, he called, qualified, and sent the
apostles, and confirmed their divine mission, thus indorsing them and the
portions of the Bible emanating from them. All they said and did is indorsed by
him. As certain as he is from God, all the portions of the Bible from them are
divinely indorsed. This settles the divine authority of the New Testament.

The claims of Jesus of Nazareth to be the Christ, the Son of the living God, or,
which is the same, Divine, being, established, all his acts and words are of
divine authority. It is, then, settled that he was with God before the world
was; that it was by him and for him the worlds were made; that he was before all
things, and by him all things consist; that he who saw him saw the Father; that
he thought it not robbery to be equal with God; that he is the express image of
God and the effulgence of his glory; that in him all fullness dwells; that the
fullness of the Godhead dwells bodily in him; that he knew all the past, the
present, and the future. That he could look into the past, was evinced by his
unlimited acquaintance with all the Old Testament Scriptures, characters, and
events, which was shown in all his conversations and discourses. Every thing
mentioned in the history of the past was as familiar to him as the passing
events around him. He knew all about the flood, Noah, Egypt, Pharaoh, Moses, the
kings and prophets of Israel; Nineveh, Tyre, Sidon, Sodom, and Gomorrah. He
looked forward, from forty years before the fall of Jerusalem, and saw the Jews
fall by the edge of the sword, carried away captive among all nations, Jerusalem
trodden down of the Gentiles, and the fulfillment of the times of the Gentiles,
events extending down through eighteen hundred years, now fulfilled and
fulfilling before the eyes of an unbelieving generation. The whole turns on the
following three points:

He knew all things.

All authority was vested in him.

All he indorsed is of divine authority.

What, then, did he indorse? He indorsed Moses, in numerous instances, by quoting
him as the word of God and the word of the Spirit of God. He indorsed the
historical books of Moses and honored them as from God. He indorsed the law of
Moses, as the law of God, in numerous instances and in different forms. He
indorsed the principal events of the Old Testament, such as the creation, the
Adamic sin and its consequences; the destruction of the world by a flood; the
call of Abraham and the promise; the overthrow of Sodom; the fate of the proud
monarch of Egypt; the liberation of Israel from Egyptian bondage; the giving of
the law; events of Sinai and the sojourn in the wilderness; the crossing of
Jordan; entrance into Canaan, etc. He indorsed the writings of David, Isaiah,
Jeremiah, Ezekiel; and Daniel, as well as other prophets, by quoting them as
divine authority. His numerous quotations of the Old Testament, in its various
parts, as sacred Scripture, ascribing it to God, to the Spirit of God, etc.; his
many references to the Old Testament writings, settles the question of the
divine authority with all who believe on Jesus as the Christ, the Son of the
living God. Having thus indorsed the divine authority of the Old Testament, he
turns to the New. " The words thou gavest me I have given them," said he, in his
address to the Father. "All authority in heaven and on earth is given to me,"
said he, before he commissioned the apostles. "Go, therefore, and disciple all
nations," etc. His repeatedly meeting with them, talking over all things that
had previously occurred between him and them, expounding to them the Scriptures,
eating and drinking with them, giving them an opportunity to see him, hear him,
handle him, and witness his ascension up into heaven; the endowment of
supernatural power, after the ascension, and the continuation of this wonderful
power with them, amounts to a complete indorsement of the apostles, establishing
their divine authority, and the divine authority of the portion of the Bible
emanating from them. The work they did, the wonders they achieved, and the
religious revolution of the civilized world that followed them, in view of their
native weakness and inability in themselves to do any such work, demonstrates
that the power of God was with them all the time, indorsing all they said and
did as of divine authority. What a grand spectacle to see HIM of whom Moses and
all the prophets wrote, who was dead and is alive; who is divine; who has all
authority in heaven and on earth; in whom all the fullness of the Deity resides
fully; standing between the two Testaments, the Old and the New, extending one
hand back over Moses and the prophets, fully indorsing the Old Testament as of
divine authority; and then turning to the apostles, and extending the other hand
over them, and, by indorsing them and accompanying them with the most grand and
stupendous displays of supernatural power, indorsing the New Testament, given by
them, as of divine authority! This settles the question of the divine authority
of the Bible. It is all indorsed by HIM, who is the Alpha and the Omega, the
First and the Last. HE has gone into heaven, angels, authorities, and powers
being made subject to him. HE is worshiped by all the angels in heaven. HE shall
reign till all his enemies shall be put under his feet. To HIM every knee shall
bow and every tongue confess. To HIS NAME be honor and power everlasting.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 3: GP1 - 02-WHAT MUST MEN BELIEVE TO BE SAVED?
========================================================================

SERMON, No. II THEME.--WHAT MUST MEN BELIEVE TO BE SAVED?

TEXT.--"He that believes not shall be condemned."--Mark 16:16.

THIS terrible sentence was uttered by our Lord in his last interview with his
disciples before he ascended to heaven. It is a fearful utterance when properly
considered in its relations and bearings. Paul says, "Without faith it is
impossible to please God," and again, "He who comes to God must believe." Heb
11:6. The Lord says, "He who believes not the Son shall not see life, but the
wrath of God abides on him." John 3:35. We learn from Rom 5:1, that
justification is by faith. It is a matter of profound gratification, that, in
the midst of the confusion, misunderstanding, and mysticisms of these times,
there are some important points on which all are agreed. One thing in which all
are agreed is, that there can be no justification or spiritual life without
faith. No man can come to God, please God, or be accepted of God without faith.
Without faith, no man can be saved from his sins now, nor from eternal
condemnation in the world to come. The condemnation of heaven rests on the man
who believes not. This is stated in the Scriptures as clearly as language can
make it. It is a matter settled and agreed to by all who receive the Bible. If,
then, it is settled, that a man cannot be saved unless he believes, a question
of momentous importance rises. That question is, "What must we believe?" This
question contains the theme for the present discourse. It is useless to perplex
our minds about the question whether justification is by faith alone, or by
faith and something else combined, till we settle the one about what we must
believe. This lies at the foundation. It is the first matter to be settled. We
can take no other step correctly, do no other thing acceptably, nor please God
at all till we believe. Nor is the question, What must we believe to become a
Quaker, a Shaker, a Romanist, a Unitarian, or a Universalist. What a man must
believe to become one of these, or one of a hundred more similar to them, is a
matter of no consequence compared with the question, What must a man believe to
be justified before God? This is the great question among those now agitating
the minds of men. Among all the beliefs of our time, there is but one through
which sinners can be justified and saved in the sight of God. Among all the
questions of our day, there is none of the same importance with the one, What is
the belief without which the soul of the sinner cannot be saved at all? This is
the great question. If this cannot be settled, and that, too, without ground for
a doubt, it is useless to proceed to discuss others. We must live in doubt and
die in despair. But, thanks to our heavenly Father, it can be settled. By his
blessing, it shall be settled in this discourse. The inquiry is not what it
would be well to believe, or what it would be better to believe than something
else; nor what it would be respectable or popular to believe, but what is it
that a man must believe, or be condemned--lost forever? No doubt, many look on
this question as so plain and easy that it is useless to discuss it. True, it is
so plain that all ought to understand it; yet many do not. Many of the
fashionable and educated, in the highest circles of life, who go to and belong
to church, could not tell what they believe if it were to save them from
perdition. A reason why such cannot tell what they believe is, that they do not
believe anything. They are simply non-believers. It is a fact, that a large
number go into a church, commit themselves to the church, without ever reading,
or hearing read, the creed, and utterly without knowing what is in the creed. It
is useless for these to talk about faith, their creed, or any other creed. They
know what church they have joined, but know not what is in the creed, or what is
the belief of their church. Faith has nothing to do with the action of such
people. All creeds are the same to them. They know nothing of what is in any of
them. They have started out with the popular idea, that "there is good and bad
in all churches; that all ought to belong to some church, but it is no
difference what church, ’if the heart is right.’" They have fallen in love with
some church because of its fine organ, delightful music, pleasant minister, fine
house, respectable members, or their special associates being there, and not on
account of any creed or any belief, for they know nothing of any creed and have
no belief. They simply know that they belong to a different church from some of
their neighbors, but do not know what the difference is. They are deceived,
thinking that they are believers, when they not only believe nothing themselves,
but do not know what a man should believe to become a Christian. A Calvinist and
an Arminian cannot fellowship each other, because the one is a Calvinist and the
other is an Arminian. The one holds the five points of Calvinism and the other
the opposite five points of Arminianism, and they cannot possibly fellowship
each other on account of the difference in their faith. But inquire of the
Calvinist what the five points of Calvinism are, and in nine cases out of ten he
cannot tell. Neither can the Arminian tell what the opposite five points of
Arminianism are. Yet the one is a Calvinist and the other an Arminian; and,
though the one does not know what Calvinism is, and the other does not know what
Arminianism is, the one believes Calvinism and the other Arminianism, and they
cannot fellowship each other because their faith is not alike! What is the
difference to them whether it is alike or not, when they do not know what it is?
This is the case with nine-tenths of the differences of our time. The people
immediately connected with them do not know what they are, and if they did know,
they would be none the more certain, on that account, of being saved. In the
commission, the Lord said: "Go into all the world, and preach the Gospel to
every creature." The Gospel is, then, what must be preached. The Lord proceeds:
"He that believes." He that believes what? He that believes the Gospel,
certainly. The Gospel, then, is what the Lord commanded the apostles to preach,
and what hearers were required to believe. The amount of it is, then, that the
Lord commanded the Gospel to be preached, required the Gospel to be believed,
and declared that he that believes not the Gospel shall be condemned. But some
man will say: "All sorts of preachers profess to preach the Gospel, and I see
not how to determine which is the Gospel." There is a way to test the matter.
Does a man claim that he is preaching the Gospel when preaching Calvinism? If he
does, the Lord says: "He that believeth not the Gospel shall be condemned." Dare
he say: "He that believes not Calvinism shall be condemned?" He will not say
this. Or, to place the matter in a different form, we will look at it as
follows: A man cannot be a Christian and not believe the Gospel. Calvinists
themselves admit that a man can be a Christian and not believe Calvinism, for
they admit that there are Christians among the Arminians, and they do not
believe Calvinism. Therefore, Calvinism is not the Gospel. Nothing can be
clearer than that if a man cannot be a Christian and not believe the Gospel, but
can be a Christian and not believe Calvinism, Calvinism is not the Gospel, and,
consequently, not what a man must believe to avoid condemnation. This same
reasoning may be applied to Arminianism. A man cannot be a Christian and not
believe the Gospel. A man can be a Christian and not believe Arminianism, as
Arminians themselves admit. Therefore, Arminianism is not the Gospel, nor what a
man must believe to avoid condemnation. The same rule may be applied to
Universalism. A man cannot be a Christian and not believe the Gospel. A man can
be a Christian and not believe Universalism, as Universalists themselves admit.
Therefore, Universalism is not the Gospel, or what a man must believe to avoid
condemnation. Some man may say, "Try Campbellism by the same rule." There is no
need of any trial in this case, for it is granted, if there is any such thing,
that Campbellism is not the Gospel. Whatever may be said of the isms, of which
an example is here given, and all such, whether true or false, they are not the
Gospel, nor what a man must believe, in order to justification, or what a man
must believe, or be condemned. Whatever the Lord requires a man to believe, it
is not any of these isms. Belief in any one of them is not what the Lord
requires; nor will unbelief in any one of them condemn any man. True or false,
as mere questions, there is no salvation in believing them, nor condemnation in
not believing them. It is not necessary to pursue this negative examination
further, or the inquiry touching what a man need not believe. The matter now is
to determine what a man must believe. Among all the beliefs of the world, what
belief is it through which the sinner is justified before God? By reference to
John 20:30-31, we learn what he wrote out his testimony concerning Christ for.
He says: "Many other signs truly did Jesus, in the presence of his disciples,
which are not written in this book; but these are written that you might
believe." This gives the purpose of the apostle in writing his book: "These are
written that you might believe." The next question is, That you might believe
what? He informs us, "That you might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son
of God." This settles the question about what we must believe. We must believe
that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God. This is the grand proposition to be
believed, and the belief of it is the faith that justifies the sinner, or
through which the Lord saves his soul. Here some one may start the question, "Is
this saving faith?" The apostle proceeds to refer us to the result of this
faith, in the same connection, in the following words: "That believing you might
have life through his name." These things are written that you might believe.
The truth to be believed is, that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God. The
object of this belief is, that the believer might have life through the name of
Jesus. Here is the grand truth to be believed, and the belief of it is the faith
through which the sinner may have life. This belief is evangelical, divine,
apostolical--the belief that saves the soul. There is no other belief or saving
faith for sinful man. If he has not this, he will be lost. There is no dispute
about the belief here advocated. No church repudiates it. The doubts and
disputes are all about other beliefs. If a man believes with his heart that
Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God, he has true faith, divine faith,
saving faith, and there is no other faith through which man can be justified
before God. We can learn something of what a man must believe from what he is to
confess with his mouth. We will now hear Paul tell, in the same connection, what
a man must confess with his mouth and believe from his heart: "If thou shalt
confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and believe in thy heart that God raised
him from the dead, thou shalt be saved: for with the heart man believes unto
righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation." Rom
10:8-9. To believe that "God raised Jesus from the dead" is the same as to
believe that he is the Christ, the Son of the living God; for if God raised him
from the dead, he thus demonstrated that all he ever said was true. God would
not have raised an impostor. If God raised him from the dead, he thus confirmed
his divine mission and all he ever said. His entire claim to be the Messiah, or
to be from God, is confirmed, if God raised him from the dead. Indeed, if he
rose from the dead at all, it proves his divine mission. An impostor could not
have raised himself from the dead. God would not have raised him, and thus have
aided him in palming an imposition on the world. The belief, then, with the
whole heart, that God raised him, amounts to the same as the belief that he is
the Christ, the Son of the living God. But we will give an example showing the
faith on which persons were received in the time of the apostles. Turn your
attention to Philip and the Ethiopian officer as they ride in the chariot.
Philip is busily engaged in preaching to the officer. What is he preaching? The
sacred historian says "He preached to him Jesus." That is certainly a very brief
history of what he was preaching, but equally plain. It is certainly what might
be expected, that the officer believed what was preached. What did he believe,
then? The sacred writer says, "As they went on their way, they came to a certain
water." We will not stop now to speculate about that "certain water." Water is
not the theme now; faith is the theme. What did the officer believe? This is the
matter in hand. The officer said, "See; here is water! what doth hinder me to be
immersed?" And Philip answered, "If you believe with all your heart, you may."
And he answered and said, "I believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God."
See Acts 8:36-38. On this belief the evangelist received and immersed him; and
on this belief all the first converts were received and immersed. If this
passage is rejected as spurious, we lose nothing but an example. The weight of
authority, however, is in its favor, and the thread of the narrative is
incomplete without it. It is, therefore, received here. When our Lord was
immersed by John in Jordan, and had gone up from the water, the heavens were
parted above him, and the Spirit assumed a visible form, and descended on him.
John the Immerser afterward referred to this, saying, "I knew him not, but he
who sent me to immerse, said, on whomsoever you shall see the Holy Spirit
descending and remaining, he is he," or he is the Messiah. At the time the
Spirit descended and rested on him, the Almighty Father spake from the heavens,
and uttered an oracle that he did not see fit to utter through the lips of man,
angel, or even his own beloved Son, but, with his own voice, he said, "This is
my Son, the beloved, in whom I am well pleased." See Mat 3:17. Again, in the
midst of that transcendantly sublime scene, on the mountain of transfiguration,
in the presence of the glorified and immortalized Elijah, from the eternal
state; the mediator of the first covenant, Moses, from the intermediate state;
and three witnesses of Jesus, Peter, James, and John, in the flesh; God again
repeated the oracle, "This is my Son, the beloved, in whom I am well pleased;"
adding to this utterance, made on the former occasion, the command, "Hear you
him." To this grand scene Peter refers, in one of his letters to the disciples,
in his authoritative declaration: "We have not followed cunningly-devised fables
when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but
were eye-witnesses of his majesty. For he received from God the Father honor and
glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my
Son, the beloved, in whom I am well pleased." See 2Pe 1:16. It was in view of
this wonderful oracle, that Peter, when the Lord said "Whom do you say that I
the Son of Man am?" replied, "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God."
Mat 16:16. In this instance, too, we have the importance of this fundamental
truth fully brought out. The Lord replies, "Blessed are you, Simon, son of Jona:
for flesh and blood has not revealed it to you, but my Father who is in heaven."
What is it the Father in heaven has revealed? The foundation truth of the new
institution. This the Father in heaven revealed on the banks of the Jordan. This
central truth--the major proposition of the new institution--that "Jesus is the
Christ, the Son of the living God," is here uttered by Peter and again repeated
in the mountain of transfiguration. But now for the prominence which the Lord
gives this truth. He proceeds in his reply to Peter: "You are Peter, and on this
rock I will build my Church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against
it." Here the fundamental heresy of Rome had its origin. It perverts this grand
truth of the new institution in two important particulars: 1. It expounds the
rock on which the Church is built to be Peter. 2. It expounds the meaning of the
words "the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it," to be, that "the gates
of Hades shall not prevail against the Church." By "this rock," the Lord did not
mean Peter. Peter was not the theme, but the person to whom the Lord addressed
himself on the theme. What was the theme of the conversation? The Lord himself
was the theme, and not Peter. "Whom do you say that I am?" "Thou art the Christ,
the Son of the living God." "Blessed are you, Simon, son of Jona: for flesh and
blood has not revealed it," or this. "It," or this what? This confession,
unquestionably, which Peter has just made, that "he is the Christ, the Son of
the living God." "And," he proceeds, "on this rock I will build my Church."
Where is the antecedent to "this rock?" The theme is not changed. "This," refers
back to the same statement," "Thou art the Christ." On this truth, concerning
Jesus, that he is "the Christ, the Son of the living God, I will build my
Church," and "the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it." Against what?
Against this truth, or this rock, and not the Church. The theme is not the
Church, but the truth, on which it is built. The gates of Hades have nothing to
do with prevailing against the Church. But the Lord knew that he would die, and
go into Hades, and that he would have to overcome the gates, or powers of Hades,
and rise from the dead, or the foundation of the Church, that "he is the Christ,
the Son of the living God," would be overthrown. His prediction is an assurance
that the powers of Hades should not prevent his resurrection, and thus prevail
against the foundation of the new institution. It was an allusion to the grand
contest involved in his resurrection from the dead. The issue is over his
resurrection. He was put to death. His body was laid in the grave. His soul went
to Paradise, an apartment in Hades. At the dawn of light, on the third day, the
grand question came: will he rise, or will the powers of Hades prevail? If he
rises, the proposition that "he is the Christ, the Son of the living God," is
sustained. If he does not rise, it is lost. All is suspended on this issue. To
this grand issue he looked, and declared "the gates of Hades shall not prevail
against it,"--the rock, or foundation. In this light Paul viewed it, in his
reference to those disciples in Corinth, who had fallen back into their
Sadduceanism and denied the resurrection of the dead. 1Co 15:12, he puts the
question, "How say some among you that there is no resurrection of the dead?" He
then proceeds to show them that every thing rests on the resurrection of the
dead, by bringing to their view the consequences of their denial of the
resurrection, or rather the result, if there is no resurrection. He mentions
these results as follows: Result 1. Christ is not risen. Certainly this is
correct if there is no resurrection. Result 2. The apostle’s preaching is vain.
If Christ did not rise, the preaching, that he did rise, is false. Result 3.
Their faith is vain. They believed what was preached, that Christ rose. If he
did not rise, they believed a falsehood. This faith is vain. It could not save
them. Result 4. The apostles were false witnesses, for they testified that he
did rise, and that they saw him after he rose from the dead. Result 5. They were
yet in their sins. They could not have been justified from their sins by the
belief of a falsehood. Result 6. Those fallen asleep in Christ are perished, or
lost. Their faith, being the belief of a falsehood, that God raised Christ, whom
he did not raise if the dead rise not, could not save them, and they are lost.
Result 7. We, the apostles, of all men are the most miserable, for we have given
up this world--suffered the loss of all things for Christ; but if the dead rise
not all is lost. After thus showing them where they placed themselves, in
denying the resurrection from the dead, he comes out in the following triumphant
language: "But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the first-fruits of
them that slept." If he rose from the dead, the preaching of the apostles, that
he did rise, is true; the belief of that preaching is the belief of the truth;
the apostles were true witnesses, in testifying that God raised him; by this
faith they were justified; those who had fallen asleep in Christ had not
perished, and the apostles were not of all men most miserable. Thus we see how
beautifully he rests every thing on the great truth. Please turn to Paul’s
opening address, in the Athenian court, in the presence of distinguished
jurists, statesmen, and philosophers, as found in Acts 17:30 : "And the times of
this ignorance God winked at; but now commands all men everywhere to repent."
The times of ignorance to which he alluded were before the Gospel came, and the
"now," that he brings in contrast with these times of ignorance is since the
light of the Gospel has come. Now, since the Lord has come, the light of the
Gospel is extended to the nations of the earth--he commands all men everywhere
to repent. Paul knew that this was a pretty broad affirmation, and the men
before him were not prepared to receive it on his simple statement, and he
quickly follows it with the reason for the command for all men everywhere to
repent: "Because he has appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in
righteousness by that man whom he has ordained." Still, he knew that they would
follow immediately to demand the proof of that also, and he instantly adds:
"Whereof he has given assurance to all men, in that he has raised him from the
dead." In raising Christ from the dead, God has given assurance to all men that
he will judge the world in righteousness, and he commands all men everywhere to
repent, because he will judge the world in righteousness. This is not foreign
nor difficult reasoning. If God raised Jesus from the dead he is divine. If he
is divine, all he said is true. All he promised or threatened will be fulfilled.
The resurrection of Jesus is the foundation of the whole spiritual system,
revealed to the world through Christ. This foundation must be overthrown before
the Christian’s faith can be shaken. It is of no consequence whether we can
explain the questions where Cain got his wife, why the Canaanites and the
Midianites were commanded to be destroyed, why God hardened Pharaoh, or how the
additions were made to the books of Moses after he was dead, etc. These matters,
and numerous others of the same kind, introduced by Tom Paine, in his infidel
book, may all be explained, and the difficulty existing in the minds of
unbelieving men may grow out of their ignorance. One tolerably clear evidence of
this is found in the fact, that the men who have studied the Bible most closely
and critically, find the least trouble about these matters. Why have not the
great and profound men, who have studied antiquity a life-time, searched the
quotations in ancient writings, carefully read and compared the oldest
manuscripts, read all the principal histories--Jewish, pagan, infidel, and
Christian--stumbled and fell over these difficulties? Because they have found
clear and satisfactory solutions of many of them, which leads intelligent people
rationally to conclude that if they knew more they could solve all these
supposed difficulties. True, it is well for a Christian man to examine and
explain these matters as far as he can. Still, his faith does not rest on these
matters. It rests on something more certain. The man of understanding begins
with Jesus. Whose son is he? What think you of him? Is he the Alpha and
Omega--the beginning and the ending--the resurrection and the life? Did he speak
the truth when he said, "He who sees me sees the Father," and "before Abraham
was, I am?" That "he was before all and by him all things consist?" That "it was
by him, and for him, that the worlds were made?" That "in him dwells all the
fullness of the Godhead bodily?" In a word, is all that is said of him in the
Bible true? It is, if God raised him from the dead. It is all true, if he is the
Christ, the Son of the living God. When this is received with the whole heart,
or without any dissent, we have found an anchorage. We turn to him, in the
language of one of old, "Thou knowest all things." We inquire of him about
Moses, Abraham, and the prophets, and find him quoting their language as the
Word of God. This ends all questions about the Old Testament writings. We see
him commission and send out the apostles, and thus indorse them. This settles
their authority. He is the chief corner-stone--the foundation. The prophets and
the apostles rest on him. The Old Testament and the New rest on him. The
salvation of the world rests on him. He is the tried stone, chosen of God, and
precious; though rejected by Jewish and infidel builders, he is made the head of
the corner, and there is no other name under heaven nor among men by whom we can
be saved. He is Lord of all, head over all things to the Church. He was dead,
but is alive, and lives for evermore. He has the keys of Hades and of Death; can
open, and no man can shut, can shut, and no man can open. He has gone into
heaven; angels, authorities, and powers being put in subjection to him. All
authority in heaven and on earth is given to him. He says, "I, if I be lifted
up, will draw all men to me." And again he says, "I am the way, and the truth,
and the life: no man comes to the Father but by me." Converts must then be made
to him, learn of him, and follow him. Implicitly we should receive what he says,
because it comes from him. There is a large amount of unscriptural language used
in our time, and which has no foundation in correct principles. Hence, we hear
people say they believe in prayer, baptism, communion, etc., but this is not
sensible. The faith is not in or does not rest on baptism, prayer, or the Lord’s
Supper, etc., but on Christ. The entire belief is on him. Men are baptized, not
because they believe in baptism, but because they believe on him who commanded
baptism. We do not believe commandments, nor believe on them, but obey them. We
believe on Christ, obey his command to be immersed, to pray, commune, etc., and
hope for the things which he promises. He is the foundation of all authority in
the kingdom. The man who believes on him, receives him, and obeys him, is moved
by his divine authority to do all he does in religion. He is the central idea in
the new institution. Every system in the world has a central point in it. The
foundation proposition, on which every thing rests in Mormonism, is that Joseph
Smith was a prophet from God. The man who believes this is a Mormon. It is the
major proposition of Mormonism, and has all the minor ones in it; or, in one
word, has all Mormonism in it. The proposition that Emanuel Swedenborg was a
divine prophet has all Swedenborgianism in it. The central idea in the Baptist
church is baptism. The church takes its name from baptism, rallies round it, and
makes it the central idea. The central idea in the Presbyterian church is
government by a presbytery, and the church is named after this one idea. The
central idea in the kingdom of God is the living and glorious person of the Lord
from heaven. The faith of the saints rests on him, and all their life, light,
and joy are from him. He is brought to man in the proposition, that he is the
Christ, the Son of the living God. All Christianity centers and embodies itself
in him, as a man’s whole political creed embodies and centers itself in his
favorite candidate. When he goes for the candidate, he goes for his political
creed and party, whether he understands it or not. So, when a man believes on
the Savior, goes for him, and devotes himself to him, he goes for all he taught,
whether he understands it or not. He is then a Christian--a disciple of Christ,
and nothing else. It is the concentration, the embodiment of all Christianity in
a person, a living and glorious person. Any one, with a grain of reflection, can
see the wisdom of this. In what other way could ignorant and prejudiced Jews and
pagans have been proselyted in a single day? How could they have been discipled
to Calvinism, Arminianism, Unitarianism, or Trinitarianism in a day? What could
they have done with the Nicene creed--the Augsburg, the Westminster, or
Philadelphia confession, in hearing one discourse? It requires years to
indoctrinate a man in the twenty-five articles of Methodism, or the thirty-nine
of Episcopalianism. The result is, that a large number never know what the
Church believes, but every one must understand the belief which God requires,
and must have that belief himself, for "he that believes not shall be
condemned." The Lord has, therefore, embodied the belief in a living and
glorious person, and demands of all men that they believe on him, as the grand
and glorious concentration of all that is divine. Hence, on Pentecost, on
hearing one Gospel discourse, three thousand believed and became Christians in
one day. Nor did they join Church without believing, or knowing what they were
doing. They learned what to believe on hearing one discourse, and believed it.
They were justified by faith, and not received without faith. They believed what
was preached--that God had raised Jesus from the dead--that God was with
him--that he was divine, and they willingly bowed their souls to him, and took
him for their leader; gladly and implicitly received all he taught, and did all
he commanded. On becoming his disciples, they placed themselves under him, as
his pupils, students, learners, to be taught by him, and guided to the
everlasting city of our God. The time has now come when this belief is thought
not sufficient; that a man must believe something more than this; that if he
knows nothing but Christ and him crucified, and specially determines to know
nothing more than this--will glory in nothing but the Cross of Christ, he falls
vastly short, much below the standard of our times. The popular tendency is to
take the mind and heart of the people away from Christ and occupy it with
something more, or something else. The time was in this country, when the
popular teachers expressed fears that we did not make enough of the Messiah, and
they talked of his divinity, his equality with the Father, his eternity, and the
like; but what do they now think of him who has all authority in heaven and on
earth; the chief among all the ten thousands, and altogether lovely? They treat
the belief on him, and those that have that belief, as unworthy of regard and
fellowship. Talk to them about uniting on him, following him, believing all he
taught, receiving it into good and honest hearts, obeying him implicitly in all
things, and hoping for all he promised, and they stand and look on you with
amazement, and affect to pray for you as one deluded. But the Lord Jesus is the
power in this work, and the men who oppose it must be shown that they stand in
exact antagonism to him. "If any man loves not the Lord Jesus Christ, he will be
accursed." He is the grand center, and in him men must be united and saved if
they are ever united and saved at all. The authority of men should be set aside
and destroyed, and the authority of Jesus restored to the people. The
philosophies, metaphysics, and speculations of designing men must be set aside,
and the clear, intelligible, and glorious teaching of Christ and his apostles
restored to men. There must be a clear issue made between Christ and all human
leaders, between his teaching and all human teaching, between his kingdom and
all other kingdoms. There must be no question in the minds of men except about
Jesus and his salvation, no issue except between the sinner’s soul and Jesus.
There must be no question about the theories and speculations of men. There is
but one issue, and that one is concerning Christ. Shall I believe on him? Shall
I receive him as my teacher, leader, and head? Shall I follow him? Shall I bow
my soul to him? obey him? Shall I be his disciple? These are the questions with
which the world must be pressed. The great work of the preacher is not to defend
himself, his views, or theories, but to defend his Master, Lord, and Redeemer,
his cause and kingdom. His work is to lift up his Lord before men, and plead
with them to believe on him, trust in him, learn of him, follow and honor him.
The work of all the preachers of Christ is the same. They all have the same Lord
over all, blessed forever and ever. They all have the same Gospel. The man who
can understand it most fully, enforce it most successfully, and bring the
largest number under its hallowed power, and make the most friends to the Lord
Jesus, is the best preacher. The main work now to be done is to divorce the
people from the rudiments of the world, from the doctrines and commandments of
men, from priestcraft, error, superstition, and human traditions, and espouse
them to Christ; turn their hearts from men to the Savior, from the love of party
to the love of union, from party fellowship to the fellowship of the saints. The
problems now to be solved are, Can we teach men to love the Savior more than all
other leaders; to love his teaching more than all other teaching; to forsake all
other leaders and follow him? Is it possible, after the long night of darkness,
superstition, and error, in which the people have been trained, to restore to
their hearts confidence in the Savior of the world, and in his infallible
teaching to save men? Can the hearts of the people be won back to the Lord?
These are the grand questions now to be tested. An immense army is now in the
field, with no mission but to push the conquests of King Jesus. They have no
cause nor conquests of their own to defend. They have no leader but Jesus. Their
war is about their great Leader and Head. They are pressing him on the attention
of men everywhere. They maintain that every man is for or against him, and call
on men as they value their lives, their souls, and their eternal all, to decide
whether they are for the Lord or against him; whether they will have Jesus for
their leader or not; whether they will have the teaching of Christ and the
apostles or not. They intend, by the favor of God, to push the teaching of
Christ and his authority through the world. They are narrowing the controversy
down and bringing it to a single point. It is Jesus and his teaching. They are
for nothing else. Those opposed to Jesus and his teaching are their opponents,
and no others. They have the faith in God, that he will strengthen their hands
and sustain them in their great work of restoring, in all its fullness, the
authority of the Christ, his pure worship, his teaching, and all things as they
were at the first, and unite in him, who is all in all, to live in one grand and
harmonious fellowship, to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace, in
the one body, one Spirit, one hope, one Lord, one faith, one immersion, and one
God and Father of all, above all, through all, and in all, that one triumphant
hallelujah may rise, as a precious incense, to him that lives forever and ever.
Then, when we shall have finished our course and lie down on the bed of death,
we can rest on his blessed words: "As I live, you also live." "I will never
leave you nor forsake you." "I am able to keep you from falling." "None can
pluck you out of my hand." "Be faithful till death." And again, "He who endures
to the end shall be saved." But, before closing, attention must be given to such
as are aliens, foreigners, and strangers, without God, and without hope, in the
midst of all the uncertainties of this world. These are separated from the Lord,
living as if they did not believe he existed. They have never even sanctified
their lips by confessing his name, nor made a solitary effort to obtain his
mercy. In one moment all possibility of their being saved might be cut off
forever. They might go away into the outer darkness, with all the foul, the
corrupt, degraded, and disgraced spirits that inhabit the regions of darkness
and despair. They may then look back, think of their folly, their indifference,
their hardness of heart, their impenitence, when mercy’s sweet voice, in tones
of affection, love, and compassion--in kind invitations, heart-felt pleadings,
and entreaties with tears--all failed to bring them to the Lord. They may then
think of the Cross, the crown of thorns, his writhings, struggles in death, his
expiring, the Roman spear, and his blood as it ran down, in crimson streams, to
the ground, and believe it to be an infinite exhibition of divine compassion,
and inquire: Why did all this fail to reach my hardened heart? They may then
call to mind all the precious invitations of the Savior, the apostles, the
preachers of their own time; the reasonings, expostulations, and arguments; the
prayers and tears, the solicitudes and anxieties of fathers, mothers, brothers,
sisters, children, and friends--all expended on a hard and ungrateful heart, and
yet it lost forever! The harvest is past--the summer is ended! The soul is lost.
No more lovely invitations forever! no more entreaties to turn to the Lord! no
more grace, nor mercy, nor compassion. The day of grace is gone forever! the
door of mercy is forever closed! O man! who will you blame for all this? God
loved you; Jesus died for you; the Gospel was preached to you; the saints loved
you, prayed for you, wept over you; the Spirit of God said "Come;" the Bride,
the Church, said "Come;" and whoever will was invited to come. God was not
willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. The
Savior said, "He who comes to me, I will in nowise cast out." You did not come!
You resisted all the love, grace, and mercy of our kind and gracious Father in
heaven; you resisted the Savior of the world and all the entreaties of the best
friends you had on earth, and rushed down to ruin. You will have to say: "I have
done all this myself; I have pulled down ruin on my own head. Against the will
of my gracious and most merciful Creator, all his love, kind entreaties, and
expostulations; against all the advice, warnings, and persuasions of the truest
and best friends I ever had; against the voice of reason, my own judgment, and
revelation, I have persisted and done all this! Against all that was good, and
pure, and lovely, I persisted, rushed blindly on and down, till I have landed in
bottomless perdition. Let others be warned not to come to this place of
torment." Be entreated, then, by all that is good, and pure, and lovely; by the
love of Christ, the mercy of God, and the sufferings of the Savior; be warned by
the threatenings of heaven, the terrors of the Lord, and the danger of being
lost forever, to turn to the Lord and live; be persuaded by the tender mercies
of our God, by all his goodness, by the value of the unfading heavens, and the
value of precious souls yet to come, while it is called to-day, and be happy
forever and ever. "Behold, now is the accepted time; behold, now is the day of
salvation."


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 4: GP1 - 03-HOW ARE PERSONS MADE BELIEVERS?
========================================================================

SERMON, No. III THEME.--HOW ARE PERSONS MADE BELIEVERS?

TEXT.--"Faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God."--Rom 10:17.

THIS text is selected because it expresses the general theme for this discourse,
which is, How are persons made believers? The question has been settled as to
what persons should believe to become Christians, or disciples of Christ, in the
foregoing discourse. The purpose, in this discourse, is to settle the question
as to how persons are made believers. What means does our Heavenly Father employ
to induce men and women to believe on Christ as the Savior of the world? There
are two theories about this, so widely different, that if either one of them is
right the other is wrong. One of these theories asserts that God puts forth an
immediate power, or influence of his Spirit from himself, or a direct influence
to the soul of the unbeliever, and makes him a believer. The other theory
asserts that God puts forth his power or influence through Christ, the apostles,
through the Holy Spirit that was in and inspired the apostles, and through the
Gospel preached by the apostles, and makes believers. These two theories are
wholly irreconcilable. If the one is correct, the other is a delusion, a
deception, a cheat. It is useless to talk of charity. Charity may extend to
erring people in kindness, pity, and compassion, but no charity can reconcile
two theories about the same thing so different, as that God makes believers by
an immediate influence, and that he does it by a mediate influence. If this work
of making a believer is done in one of these ways, it is not done in the other
way. This is self-evident. But now, the question arises, how is this matter to
be settled? To what can an appeal be made as authority to settle it? Shall the
case be referred to the man who says, "I know the time and place when the
immediate power came, took effect on my heart, and made me a believer. I was not
reading the word nor hearing the Gospel, and I know that I was made a believer
by the immediate power." If the question is to be left to such a man as this, it
is useless to continue this discourse. There are many men who will testify the
same as this man; but if such testimony is to be regarded, Mormonism, Quakerism,
Shakerism, or any other imposture ever imposed on credulous man, can be proved,
for they all have any amount of witnesses of the same kind. These witnesses care
not what the Bible says, what the Lord or the apostles have said. They refer you
to what they have experienced, but in their case you have nothing but the
testimony of their tongues. They will not be regarded in this discourse, nor any
witnesses, except such as the Lord has shown to be his witnesses, by the most
awful, grand, and sublime displays of supernatural power ever addressed to the
senses of mortal man. The subject will be treated exclusively for those who
believe the Bible. Those who do not believe the Bible will be addressed in
another discourse. The Bible is the supreme authority, and the writer will
proceed as if every reader believed and regarded it. Indeed, he will, for the
time being, assume that every person reading after him believes and regards it.
Let there be a clear understanding, then at the start. The question is not
whether God makes believers. We all admit that God makes believers. The question
is not whether he makes believers by the Holy Spirit. We all admit that God
makes believers by the Holy Spirit. Nor is it whether he does it by his power.
We all admit that God makes believers by the Holy Spirit and by his power. But
does he put forth his power through Christ, through the apostles, through the
Spirit in the apostles, through the Gospel preached reached by the apostles? Or
does he put forth his power or influence to make believers, immediately from
himself to the soul of the sinner, not through Christ, nor through the apostles,
nor the word? This is the question to be settled by Scripture. The first
scripture introduced will be found Acts 11:14. It is the language of an angel of
God to Cornelius, a centurion, of the Italian band. The angel commanded
Cornelius to send for Peter, adding, that " when he is come, he shall tell you
words whereby you and your house shall be saved." The particular point in this
language, to which special attention is invited, is that Cornelius and his house
were to be saved by words, and not without words. Any theory proposing, to make
believers and save men without words cannot be received, while the Lord’s
system, in which men are saved by words, is regarded. The question is not
whether the Lord can save men without words, but whether he does in the system
revealed in the Bible. The angel says by words, and let him who says without
words bring his proof. The next scripture introduced is found Mat 13:1-58. It is
our Lord’s teaching in the parable of the sower. It is a mercy on us that the
Lord explained this parable, as the people of our time would most likely never
have found the meaning of it. He says, "Some seed fell by the way-side," some
"fell on stony places," some "fell among thorns," and "other seed fell on good
ground." The first thing is to determine what the "seed" in this parable stands
for, or represents. This the Lord explains--not in learned and difficult terms,
but in the most laconic, explicit, and simple terms: "The seed is the word of
God." Any human being, with intelligence enough to be accountable, can
understand, that the seed of the kingdom is the word of God. All the products of
the kingdom spring from the seed of the kingdom, under the divine blessing. No
matter how rich your ground, nor how well you prepare it, nor how honest you
labor, you cannot raise wheat nor corn without seed; no matter how good the
ground, how honestly you labor, nor how much the Lord blesses you with rains,
sunshine, and a genial season, you must have the seed. It is indispensable. In
the same way, in the kingdom, we must have the seed of the kingdom, or we cannot
have the products of the kingdom. Faith is the very first product of the
kingdom, and you cannot have it without the seed of the kingdom, the word of
God. Men may theorize about faith, the faith of Christ without hearing the
Gospel, the seed of the kingdom, from which faith comes, but they will never
have it. As well might men talk of corn, wheat, or any other product of the
ground, without the seed ordained of God, as to talk of faith without the seed
of the kingdom, ordained of God to produce faith. Since the Lord ascended to
heaven, a believer in Christ has not been found whose faith did not, directly or
indirectly, come from the Gospel. The next thing in order is the way-side
ground. What does it represent? It represents an idle, indifferent, and careless
hearer, who does not understand the word when he hears it. There are such men in
all communities. There is no such thing as commanding their attention; they are
off, and talking about other things, or frequently nothing, or, at most, nothing
of consequence; they never give anything more than a slight and indifferent
hearing to the word. But when they do this, the Lord says, "Then straight way
comes the devil, and catches the word of God out of their heart." Do you say
"There is no devil?" If you do, this discourse is not intended for you; this
discourse is intended for, and addressed to such as believe the Bible. The Lord
says, "Then straightway comes the devil and catches away the word." If you do
not believe there is a devil, you do not believe Jesus, and are a skeptic, and
not the person to whom this discourse is addressed. When this idle hearer,
represented by the way-side ground, gives a slight hearing to the word, "then
straightway comes the devil." You inquire, What can his mission be? What has
roused him and called him up? A man has been hearing the word, and his fiendish,
malignant, and premeditated design is to defeat the word of God, and thus defeat
the divine means appointed to make him a believer and save him. Hear the Lord
describe his work in his own inimitable style: "Then straightway comes the devil
and catches away the word." Why does he catch away the word out of his heart?
The Lord answers, "Lest he should believe and be saved." See Luk 8:12. This
shows that the word of God is the seed; that it is sown in the heart, that men
should believe it and be saved; that the devil understands this work, and when
the seed is sown in a man’s heart, he comes and catches it away out of his
heart, lest he should believe and be saved. What does the thorny ground stand
for, or represent, in this parable? It represents a hearer, not so hard as the
one just described, but one that hears the word with pleasure at first, and then
finds that he will suffer persecution, and "straightway becomes offended because
of the word." He yields the word--gives it up. This is the end of the matter
with him. You need not follow him, expecting to find where some immediate power
made him a believer, converted him, made him a Christian, and saved him, after
he had become offended because of the word , and turned his ear away from it.
There is no power that the Lord brings to bear on men who turn their ear away
from the Gospel, and will not hear it, that converts them and saves them without
the word. "He that turns away his ear from hearing the law, even his prayer
shall be abomination." See Pro 28:9. What does the thorny ground represent? It
represents a hearer not so bad as either of those of which mention has been
made; it represents a man who receives the word with pleasure at first, is
delighted with it and happy, but subsequently is drawn into some of the business
operations of the world--banking, merchandizing, stock-trading, etc., and whose
whole mind and heart are literally overwhelmed in the affairs of this life; and
the Lord says, "The cares of this world and the deceitfulness of riches choke
the word out of his heart." Here you may bid adieu to his professions of
religion. When the word of God is by any means taken away out of a man’s heart,
there is an end to all faith, piety, and devotion to the Lord. In every case,
the Lord keeps it in view that "the good seed," which is the word of God, must
not only be sown in the heart, but remain in it, or none of the good fruits of
the kingdom can be brought forth. What does the good ground represent? It
represents the man who receives the word of God into a good and honest heart,
understands it, and, as explained in the parallel passage in Luke, brings forth
much fruit. The good and honest heart is the soil for the good seed, the word of
God. This is the Lord’s method of producing the fruits of the kingdom: the good
seed, the word of God, sown in good and honest hearts. He does not produce these
good fruits of the kingdom without this good seed of the kingdom, the word of
God. The Lord does not talk either of producing these good fruits by sowing the
seed in a totally depraved heart, but in a good and honest heart. If all men
were born totally depraved, there could not be in any of them a good and honest
heart. But instead of all men in an unconverted state being totally depraved,
and consequently all on one common level, the Lord here divides them off into
six classes; the good ground he divides into three classes. Some of it brings
thirty fold, some sixty, and some an hundred fold. Thirty fold is good, sixty
fold is better, and a hundred fold best. The thorny ground is bad, the stony
ground worse, and the way-side worst. Instead, then, of all unregenerate men
being totally depraved, and, consequently, precisely alike, he classifies them
in six classes: good. better, and best; bad, worse, and worst. Paul makes the:
same classification--1Co 3:9-12 --with his illustration of gold, silver,
precious stones; wood, hay, stubble. Precious stones are good material to go
into a building to be tried by fire, silver is better, and gold is best; wood is
bad material, hay worse, and stubble worst. This only recognizes what all men of
intelligence observe: that whatever theories preachers may advocate, all men are
not bad or good alike in an unregenerate state, and, consequently, not totally
depraved, nor so depraved that they cannot receive the good seed, the word of
God, into good and honest hearts, understand it, and bring forth fruit to the
honor and glory of God. The seed of the kingdom is the word of God, and a good
and honest heart is the soil’ of the Lord’s own appointment, to bring forth the
fruits of the kingdom of God. All this shows that there is no room for the idle
speculation that some immediate power or influence must give faith. The Son of
Man sows, or causes to be sown, the good seed of the kingdom, the word of God.
This good seed is received into a good and honest heart that understands it, and
brings forth much fruit. This perfectly corresponds with our Lord’s quotation
from the prophet, in the same chapter--Mat 13:13-15 --"By hearing you shall
hear, and shall not understand; and seeing, you shall see, and shall not
perceive: for this people’s heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of
hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with
their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart,
and should turn, and I should heal them." The trouble with these people, or the
reason they were not towed to the Lord, was not in some decree the Lord had made
before the beginning of time, nor that they were so depraved that they could not
hear nor believe, nor that the Lord would not send his power to enable them to
believe; but the reason was in themselves, in perversity, which they could have
avoided, but would not. Their heart had grown, or become gross. It was not so
created, but had become so. Their ears had become dull of hearing. They were not
so created, nor by inheritance, but had become so. Their eyes they had closed.
They had done this themselves. It was not something in their creation, that they
had inherited from Adam, or in any decree of God, but an act of their own, done
for a purpose: "lest they should see with their eyes, hear with their ears,
understand with their heart and turn, and I should heal them." They are
themselves blamed for the failure, which could not be the case-if they were
totally depraved and could not believe, repent, nor turn to the Lord. It is now
appropriate that we should have a few clear statements of Scripture, showing how
persons are made believers. The first scripture adduced on this point, will be
found John 17:20-21 : "I pray not for these alone, but for them also who shall
believe on me through their word." For whom does the Lord pray here? You answer,
For them who believe. True; but he is more explicit, and adds, for "them who
shall believe on me through their word." If there are those whose faith did not
come through their word--the word of the apostles--they are not included in this
prayer. The Lord did not here pray for them, but for those who should believe on
him through their word. This one passage ought to settle the question as to how
faith comes with people who believe the Scriptures. The apostle John bears the
following testimony, John 20:30-31 : "Many other signs truly did Jesus in the
presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book; but these are
written, that you might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and
that believing you might have life through his name." Here are three grand
questions answered: 1. What are these things written for? That you might
believe. The apostle here shows the Lord’s plan of making believers, or what he
has done, that men might believe, or to make faith accessible to them, or put it
in their power to believe. These things are written that you might believe. 2.
What must we believe? That Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God. 3. What is the
purpose in our believing that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God? That we might
have life through his name. This is the great purpose of our faith, or to give
us the privilege of life through his name. How beautifully the benevolence of
God stands out in all this. Man cannot believe, without the truth to be
believed. The Lord gives the truth, that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God.
This truth cannot be believed by man, unless revealed to him, with the testimony
required to make it credible. The things in the divine records of testimony
given by Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, concerning Jesus, are written that we
might believe, and that believing we might have life through his name. The
testimony of Peter is in point here, Acts 15:7 : "God made choice among us, that
the Gentiles, by my mouth, should hear the word of the Gospel and believe." This
is as clear as language can express anything. If it was the choice of God, that
the Gentiles, by the mouth of Peter, should hear the word of the Gospel and
believe, it was not his choice that they should believe without the word. Shall
the great apostle to the Gentiles be called to testify in the case, as to how
faith comes? He says, Rom 10:17 : "So, then, faith comes by hearing, and hearing
by the word of God." If he had said, Faith comes by feeling, by an immediate
influence of the Spirit, or by anything else besides hearing, it would have been
just as easy to so preach. But he settles the question by saying, in so many
words, that faith comes by hearing. He does not stop at this, but explicitly
states what we must hear--that it must be the word of God. He even reasons the
matter out. Please hear him: "How, then, shall they call on him in whom they
have not believed? And how shall they believe on him of whom they have not
heard? And how shall they hear without a preacher? And how shall they preach,
except they are sent?" Rom 10:14-15. If the Lord had not called and sent the
apostles to preach the Gospel, we never could have heard it; if we had never
heard it, we never could have believed it; if we had never believed it, we could
not have called on the name of the Lord, and, consequently, could not have been
saved. This then, is a settlement of the question of faith coming without the
word. But some man objects, remarking that it was granted, at the outset, that
God makes men believers. But he does it by means. That is precisely the point
under investigation. Does he make believers by an immediate influence or power
from himself, exerted on the heart of the sinner, or does he make believers
through means? This has been the question from the commencement of this
discourse. But was it not granted, at the outset, that he makes believers by the
Holy Spirit? It was, and without any reservation. He unquestionably does it by
the Holy Spirit. But can it not be that he makes believers through the Gospel
and by the Holy Spirit? There can be no difficulty in this, for the Gospel
itself was preached by the Holy Spirit, sent down from heaven, which things the
angels desired to look into. See 1Pe 1:12. Paul says of these things, "But God
has revealed them to us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searches all things, yes,
the deep things of God." See 1Co 11:10. The very same Gospel preached by the
apostles, was preached also by the Holy Spirit speaking in them. Indeed, it was
not the apostles that spoke, but the Spirit spoke in them; and the person who
believed the words which the Holy Spirit spoke, certainly was made a believer by
the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit operates on men by words or through words.
Please attend to a few examples:

"Which things also we speak, not in the words which man’s wisdom teaches, but
which the Holy Spirit teaches." See 1Co 11:13. The Holy Spirit teaches in words,
then.

The Lord said to the apostles, Mat 10:20, " For it is not you that speak, but
the Spirit of your Father which speaks in you." The Spirit of the Father speaks
in the apostles, and those who hear his words and believe them, are certainly
made believers by the Spirit. Many men are lauding the Spirit for what they
ascribe to him, as a work done without words, while they attend not to the words
spoken by the Spirit.

How did the Spirit operate on Philip to induce him to join himself to the
chariot? Acts 8:29. "The Spirit said to Philip, join yourself to this chariot."
The Spirit said--he uttered words, that were remembered and embodied in Luke’s
narrative--"join yourself to this chariot." The Spirit, by words, moved him or
influenced him to join the chariot.

How did the Spirit influence Peter to go down to the three messengers from
Cornelius when he was on the housetop, in Joppa? Luke says, Acts 10:19, "While
Peter thought on the vision, the Spirit said to him, Behold, three men seek you;
rise, therefore, and go down and go with them, doubting nothing: for I have sent
them." The Spirit operated on him through words. These words were remembered by
Peter, and reported, so that Luke embraced them in his narrative.

Paul says, 1Ti 4:1, " Now the Spirit speaks expressly, that in the latter times
some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and teaching
concerning demons; speaking lies in hypocrisy, having their conscience seared
with a hot iron." How is the Spirit said here to operate? The Spirit speaks, and
not only speaks, but "speaks expressly."

Again Paul says, Heb 3:7, quoting from the Psalms: "Wherefore, as the Holy
Spirit says, To-day, if you will hear his voice, harden not your hearts, as in
the provocation, in the day of temptation in the wilderness; when your fathers
tempted, proved me, and saw my works forty years in the wilderness." How did the
Holy Spirit operate in the time of David? By words: "The Holy Spirit says." What
the Holy Spirit says in this instance is repeated. Heb 4:7.

Rev 14:13, we have a clear instance of the Spirit speaking: "Blessed are the
dead who die in the Lord from henceforth: yea, saith the Spirit, that they may
rest from their labors, and their works do follow them." We not only have the
words, "Yea, says the Spirit," but the precise words said.

Among the last words of the book of God, we find this: "And the Spirit and the
Bride say Come." See Rev 22:17. How does the Bride, or the Church, say Come? She
says it in words. In the same way the Spirit of God says Come. He says it in
words.

If it is desirable to lengthen out the lists of Scripture references, in the
second and third chapters of Revelation the following expression is found seven
times: "Hear what the Spirit says to the churches." We are not commanded to feel
some impression that the Spirit makes on our hearts without words, but to hear
what the Spirit says.

Here, then, are some fifteen passages referred to, in which it is seen that the
Holy Spirit operates through or by words. In this class of scriptures it is also
clearly shown that the Gospel, preached by the apostles, was not in their words,
but in the words of the Holy Spirit. The influence or power, then, of these
words of the Holy Spirit is the influence or power of the Holy Spirit, and the
man made a believer by these words of the Spirit, is made a believer by the Holy
Spirit. This is simply intuitively clear and certain. Rom 1:16, we are taught by
Paul that the Gospel is the power of God to salvation to every one that
believes, both to the Jew and also to the Greek. It is not power of God, a power
of God, or one of his powers to salvation, but the power or influence of God for
salvation, not to some but to every one that believes. That is, all that are
saved at all. The power or influence of God for salvation is the power or
influence of Christ, and also the power or influence of the Holy Spirit. God
does not exercise one power or influence, the Savior another, and the Holy
Spirit another; but the influence or power of God is also the influence of C
Christ and of the Holy Spirit. There is one power or influence of God, Christ,
the Holy Spirit, and the apostles. That one influence God puts forth through
Christ, through the Holy Spirit in the apostles, through the apostles, and
through the word, to make believers, and turn them to God. The man who yields to
that one influence, and is led by it, yields to and is led by the power or
influence of God, Christ, the Holy Spirit, the apostles, and the word; and the
man who turns his ear away from and resists that one influence, turns his ear
away from and resists God, Christ, the Holy Spirit, the apostles, and the
Gospel, and will certainly be lost. He turns his ear away from and resists the
power of God for salvation. No matter if he does say he believes in the
immediate power; no matter if he does really believe in the immedate converting
power; that is not mentioned in the word of God, and there is not one particle
of authority for looking for it. The Gospel is the power of God to salvation to
every one that believes. But when we are talking of "converting power or
influence," what is the precise meaning? Some kinds of power or influence will
take effect on you, if you are placed in range, whether you understand anything
about them or not. If you place yourself in the cold, it will take effect on you
whether you know anything about it or not. The same is true of heat. If you come
in contact with an electric battery, no matter whether you know anything about
it or not, you will be shocked. The same is true of the influence of contagion.
But these all take effect on the body, the flesh, and blood. The influence or
power is rather, and to some extent, mysterious, and we may not be able to know
precisely how it takes effect; but we know it does not come through the mind or
understanding to the system, but through the system to the mind. But spiritual
influence or power does not take effect in the flesh and blood, or in the
physical man, only as it does it through the understanding. Put a man in an
assembly where the greatest spiritual impression ever made exists, blind and
deaf, and the power or influence will take no effect on him. But electricity
will take effect on him as readily as those who see and hear. Gravitation takes
effect on him; so does pestilence, heat, and cold. The reason is, that these
latter affect the body only--the mere animal man. But the power of God for
salvation is spiritual, and relates, not to the animal, but to the spiritual
man. The intangible and almost unintelligible idea that some appear to have in
reference to this matter is, that in order to conversion a man must place
himself in a favorable position, make himself passive, and, "in the Lord’s own
good time," the power will come, make him a believer, and convert him. On this
same intangible and unintelligible vague idea, modern Spiritualists have grafted
the theory that, by sitting in circles, holding each other’s hands, and becoming
passive, the spirits will communicate with them. These deluded men have already
gone into some of the most romantic, vague, and ridiculous absurdities ever
known among intelligent and accountable beings. But spiritual power or influence
does not take effect in the flesh and blood, but in the spirit. It is not a
subtle influence, that is felt in the flesh, like electricity, cold, or heat,
and that does not come through the mind. It is not a subtle influence, that you
sit and watch for, as a Quaker preacher watching for the spirit to move him to
speak, and that manifests itself first by some strange sensation in the flesh,
or some queer feeling. The power of God to make believers and save men does not
take effect in the flesh of men, but in the spirit. It is spiritual power, put
forth in spiritual intelligence, to the human understanding. As the intention is
here to develop and discuss the subject pretty thoroughly, the inquiry may be
put as follows: Is the power that God exercises in making believers, and turning
men to God, the power of intelligence addressed to the human understanding? Or,
is it a subtle power of the Spirit, immediately from God, that takes effect on
man, as heat, cold, or electricity, not in words, addressed: to the human
understanding, that makes believers and turns men to God? It cannot be this
latter, for the following reasons:

If it is an immediate power or influence, it is without the Mediator, and men
are made believers and turned to God, or converted without Christ, the Mediator
between God and men. An immediate power or influence is a power or influence
without a medium or mediator. The first objection to this theory is, then, that
it sets aside the Mediator, the Lord Jesus Christ, in turning men to God.

It sets aside the mission of the apostles, in making believers and turning men
to God, and sets up a theory of making believers by an immediate power or
influence without the apostles. This we know is not the Lord’s way.

It sets aside the work of the Church entirely in making believers, and makes
believers and turns men to God without the Church. In this theory the Church
does not work with God at all in converting sinners.

It sets aside the Gospel entirely in making believers and turning men to God.
The Gospel has nothing to do with it, performs no part in it, and is completely
nullified by this theory, so far as converting sinners is concerned.

All Bibles, tracts, books, papers, and missionaries, as means for converting
sinners, are swept away by this theory forever. If God, by an immediate power or
influence, makes believers and turns men to God, all these means are a nullity.

All meetings for preaching to sinners, the preaching to them, and all talk to
them, is sheer mockery if they are made Christians by an immediate power.

Human accountability is at an end, so far as being made believers and turning to
God, if men are made believers and turned to God by an immediate influence. If
the influence comes and makes a man a believer, the work is done. If it does not
come and make him a believer, he is not made a believer. Who is to blame if the
power does not come? Who is to be praised if the power does come? This strikes
out all idea of responsibility in believing or not believing. If a man is not
made a believer it is not his fault, and the reason is not in him but in God,
who could send the power and make him a believer, but would not.

It may be deliberately stated, and is here deliberately stated, that this theory
of men being made believers and turned to God by an immediate influence, has
done more harm and prevented more sincere and honest people from becoming
Christians, than any other one error in the land, or even infidelity itself. But
that the power the Lord exercises in making believers and turning men to God, is
the power of intelligence addressed to the human understanding, is clear from
the following:

Because the Gospel is the power of God to salvation. The power in the Gospel is
the power of intelligence. It contains intelligence, and is addressed to men and
women, and, when they hear it, they are moved by this intelligence to believe
and turn.

Paul says, 1Co 4:15, "I have begotten you through the Gospel." The literal
meaning is, "I have made you believers through the Gospel." If they were
begotten, or made believers through the Gospel, it was not by an immediate power
without the Gospel. Through the Gospel, is by bringing the power of the
intelligence in the Gospel to bear on their minds or understandings.

The Lord, in the commission, Mat 28:19, said, "Go, disciple all nations;" and,
Mark 16:16, "Preach the Gospel to every creature;" and added, "He who believes."
He who believes what? The Gospel--the intelligence preached. This shows that the
Lord intended intelligence to be brought to bear on their understandings, and
for them to believe it.

Acts 26:18, we find the words of Paul, where he says the Lord sent him to the
Gentiles, "to open their eyes, and turn them from darkness to light, and from
the power of Satan to God." The Lord, then, through Paul, opened the eyes and
turned the Gentiles, or converted them from darkness to light, and from the
power of Satan to God. This he did by bringing the divine intelligence of the
Gospel to bear on their minds.

Paul says, 1Co 1:21, "It pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save
them that believe." This does not mean that it pleased God, by an immediate
influence, to save men without preaching.

In all cases, in the time of the apostles, where persons were made believers and
turned to the Lord, the Gospel and some one to preach it, were present. There is
not an instance of one being converted without the Gospel.

James says, Jas 1:18, "Of his own will begat he us by the word of truth." This
is true of all who are begotten of God. It is by the word of truth, and not
without the word of truth, that they are begotten of God.

Peter also says: "Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of
incorruptible, by the word of God, which lives and abides forever." See 1Pe
1:23. How are persons "born again," or begotten again? " Not of corruptible
seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God." Born, or begotten, used as a
figure, means being made believers. This is done by the word of God.

Men are turned to God by Christ. "No man comes to the Father but by me," says
the Lord. John 14:6. It is through him, as the Mediator between God and men.

The Almighty puts forth intelligence through Christ, through the apostles,
through the Holy Spirit, and through the Gospel, preached by the Holy Spirit
sent down from heaven, to the understanding and heart of the inner, makes him a
believer, and turns him to the Lord. This work is, in some instances, ascribed
to God; in some instances, to Christ; in some instances, to the apostles; in
some instances, to the Holy Spirit; and, in some instances, to the word. But he
who would express the whole, in one sentence, says, God does this work through
Christ, the apostles, the Holy Spirit, and the Gospel. But it is the same, no
matter whether ascribed to God, Christ, the Holy Spirit, the apostles, or the
word. The power of God, of Christ, and of the Holy Spirit is put forth, through
the Gospel, to save man. But some one objects, saying, Do you think there is
power in the mere word to quicken a sinner, dead in trespasses and sins, and
turn him to God? Men of faith never say, "the mere word," nor "the bare word,"
when speaking of the word of God, which is quick and powerful, and sharper than
a two-edged sword, but call it the word of God. The power of God is in it, the
power of Christ and the power of the Holy Spirit is in it. It would be precisely
the same power if put forth immediately. Men must be deluded beyond description,
if they cannot see that it is neither more nor less than the power of God for
salvation that is put forth in the Gospel. No one argues that sinners can be
quickened without the power of God; but the Gospel is the power of God. That
power, we have now fully seen, is not a subtle influence, that takes effect in
the human system, without intelligence, but it is the power of intelligence
addressed to the mind. Hence, not a convert was ever made to Christ, where the
divine intelligence of the Gospel was not, in some way, conveyed to the mind.
Nor was a convert ever made to any system of religion, either true or false,
without conveying a knowledge of the same to the mind. The converts, too, are
the same in kind as the operators. If the operators are Methodists, the converts
are Methodists. If the operators are Presbyterians, the converts are
Presbyterians. If the operators are Christians, the converts are Christians, and
nothing else. But who, in his right mind, believes that the Holy Spirit
operates, by an immediate influence, on the hearts of the people in a Methodist
meeting, and converts people to Methodism; then in a Baptist meeting, and makes
Baptists; and then in a Presbyterian meeting, and makes Presbyterians? The power
of the Spirit is in the Gospel, and when that is brought to bear on the minds of
men, it leads them to believe on Christ, turn to God, and become Christians, and
nothing else. But some one is ready to inquire, Is there power in mere ink and
paper? Certainly there is no power in mere ink and paper to turn a sinner to
God, but there is power in the divine intellence, communicated through signs of
ideas, made in ink on paper--viz. the Gospel--the power of God to salvation. The
power iss not in the words, only as the intelligence is in and communicated
through the words. Why should any man doubt that there is power in the
intelligence of the Gospel to turn men to God, when he has seen the power in the
proclamation of a president or a general, move a nation? Why should sensible
people doubt the power of intelligence, when they have seen a whole family
stricken to the heart by a single dispatch of three lines, announcing the death
of some beloved friend? If uninspired communications, about earthly things, can
strike grief or joy through a whole family or community, why may not a
proclamation from the Almighty Father of heaven and earth, involving the
destinies of the human race, take effect on the hearts of mankind? But why argue
that which men and women have seen all over the land? Who has not seen whole
audiences melted to tears under the preaching of the Gospel? Who has not seen
the most wicked and stout-hearted men melted down, subdued and penitent as
little children, under the overwhelming power of the Gospel, and, in scores
coming and yielding themselves to the authority of Heaven? What if teachers of
religion have told the people that the word of God is a dead letter--that it is
powerless, etc.? Have not men been seen visiting the people from house to house,
warning them not to hear the man who preaches nothing but the word, thus
contradicting all they have said? They know there is power in it, and dread that
power. Why do not these men, claiming such wonderful spiritual illumination--the
immediate influence of the Spirit--come out and put to flight the men who preach
the word and nothing else? There is a good reason for it. They are weak as water
before the men who preach the word and nothing else. Trepidation seizes their
souls the moment you suggest a meeting with a man who preaches nothing but the
word. What did the Lord command to be preached?--"Go into all the world and
preach the Gospel to every creature." "Preach the word." What were men required
to believe? Of course, to believe what was preached--the Gospel. What were men
to obey? Christ is the author of eternal salvation to them that obey him, and he
will take vengeance on them who obey not the Gospel. What are men to hope
for?--For all things which the Lord has promised. This places the responsibility
where it is, and where it ought to be--on the part of man. God has given him the
Gospel and ability to believe it. If he does not believe the Divine and credible
testimony which God has given of his Son, as he has the ability to do, God can
be just and good, and condemn him for not believing. God has laid commandments
before man, just, reasonable, and easy, and given him ability to obey; and
therefore if he does not obey, the Lord can be just in condemning him for
disobedience. This is in perfect accordance with all the invitations of the
Gospel, and with our Lord’s weeping over Jerusalem, and exclaiming, "How oft
would I have gathered your children, but you would not." Again, he says, "You
would not come to me that you might have life." And again: "He is not willing
that any should perish, but all should come to repentance." "The Spirit says,
Come; and the bride says, Come; and whoever will, let him take the water of life
freely." "All the day long have I stretched forth my hand to a gainsaying and a
disobedient people." These and many other expressions of the Scripture are
foolishness with the idea of this direct converting power, of which we hear so
much, without which a man cannot believe, repent, or do anything pleasing to
God. All such invitations and expressions involve the idea that man is free;
that he can turn to God, and may justly be condemned if he does not do it. But
if men cannot believe, repent, and turn to God till an immediate power is sent
to make them believers, how can they be justly condemned for their unbelief
before the power comes to make them believers? They are no more to blame for not
believing before this power comes, than a mill-wheel is for not turning before
the power that turns it is put on. If two men are sitting on the same seat, and
the power comes and makes one a believer, and leaves the other without the power
to believe, no justice can blame the one left for not believing. This would not
be leaving men without a cloak for their unbelief; out it is making a cloak for
their unbelief where the Lord left them without one. Does a man say he cannot
pray with the view here advocated--that if the Lord does not make believers, and
turn sinners to God, by an immediate influence of the Spirit, the Lord cannot
answer prayer? In your empty theorizing, you have thus limited the Almighty and
circumscribed him to your narrow theory. Your faith, too, is limited to your
narrow theory, so that you not only do not believe that God does answer prayer
without your theory, or in any other way than you have marked out for him, but
you do not believe he can. If your theory is exploded, therefore, you will not
pray. A little more faith is what you need. You must believe that the Infinite
One can answer the prayers of his saints, whether finite creatures can see how
he does it or not. The Lord, the Jehovah, is not limited to the narrow
conceptions of men, nor to their narrow theories and speculations for the
channels of his operations. Men theorized many ages about the movements of the
heavenly bodies before they understood their motion; but the Lord moved them on,
not according to the theories of ignorant men, but according to the laws he had
ordained. So he answers the prayers of the saints, not through the narrow
channels prescribed in the theories of men, but according to his infinite wisdom
and will. He can and will perform his work, whether we can understand how he
will do it or not. The great matter for us to understand is, how to perform our
part of the work. We must know how to do this, or we cannot do it. The view
taken in this discourse opens the way for the Gospel, the Church, the preachers,
private members, books, tracts, missionaries, school-teachers--in one word, for
human instrumentality, in every form, in making believers and turning the world
to Christ, and views the sinner as an accountable being. The theory here opposed
strikes out the Gospel, the Church, the preachers, private members, books,
tracts, missionaries and school-teachers--in one word, all human instrumentality
in making believers and turning the world to Christ. This difference is wide
enough--so wide that the view here opposed strikes down the Gospel entirely, so
far as converting men is concerned. The only reason why it has not done more
harm is, that those who hold it, in spite of their theory, operate on the plan
here advocated. Let us, then, preach the unsearchable riches of Christ, and make
all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery which, from the beginning of
the world, has been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus the Christ.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 5: GP1 - 04-THE DIFFERENT THINGS TO WHICH SALVATION IS ASCRIBED IN THE NEW TESTAMENT.
========================================================================

SERMON, No. IV.

THEME.--THE DIFFERENT THINGS TO WHICH SALVATION IS ASCRIBED IN THE NEW
TESTAMENT.

TEXT.--"By grace are you saved, through faith; and that not of yourselves; it is
the gift of God: not of works, lest any man should boast."--Eph 2:8.

THIS text is selected, because it contains the clear statement concerning our
salvation, that it is by grace and through faith. The theme for this discourse
will be the different things to which salvation is ascribed in the New
Testament, or the different things by which we are said to be saved, or
justified. We are said to be saved, or justified, by faith, by grace, by his
blood, by his life, by the Spirit, by works, by baptism, and, in one instance,
the apostle exhorted his audience, saying, "Save yourselves from this untoward
generation." The leading purpose of this discourse will be to explain,
illustrate, and show in what sense all these expressions are used; that they are
perfectly consistent; with each other, and with all the other Scriptures, and,
at the same time, each one strictly true in itself. The intelligent Christian
not only believes every one of them, but, in his religious meditations and
conversations, has use for every one of these expressions. The well-instructed
Christian man does not select a few verses, claim them as his, and build a
religious system on them, but learns how to receive the entire Scriptures as one
consistent and harmonious whole. He does not give out one class of scriptures to
the Calvinist, another class to the Arminian, an other to the Unitarian, and
another to the Trinitarian, but receives the whole as from God, and for him.
Probably as convenient a place as any, at which to begin, will be to reconcile
an expression in the words already quoted, with an expression, Jas 2:24. Paul
says of our justification, Eph 2:9, "It is not of works, lest any man should
boast." James says of our justification, that "by works a man is justified." How
can it be true, as Paul asserts, that our justification is not of works, and yet
true, as James says, that we are justified by works? The great Luther felt this
difficulty so keenly that he repudiated the Epistle of James and decided i’ was
not canonical. He thought the language of the two apostles utterly
irreconcilable. He made up his mind that Paul was right--that justification is
not of works--that by the deeds of the law no flesh can be justified in the
sight of God. He saw no way to harmonize James with this, and decided that the
Epistle of James was not of divine authority. But this will not do, if it was
from a great man. There is no serious doubt among the authorities about the
genuineness of the Epistle of James. The matter, then, is not to be settled in
that way. Some have tried to solve the difficulty by supposing that Paul was
speaking of one kind of faith and James of another kind. But this will not do,
for two reasons. In the first place, they were neither of them talking of faith
at all. In the second place, we find no such expressions as "different kinds of
faith" in the Bible. The Bible knows but one faith. As Pollock has, in
substance, expressed it, All faith is the same in kind, though not the same in
degree. Hence, we read of "much faith," "little faith," "great faith," "weak
faith," "strong faith," "faith growing," etc., yet all the same in kind, but not
the same in degree or quantity. If you had one pint of clean wheat, it would as
certainly be wheat as if there were a thousand bushels, the same in kind, but
not the same in quantity. Precisely so, from the first impression the truth
makes on the heart, or from the first confidence the truth inspires in the human
heart, up to the fullest assurance of faith ever attained by the most devout
saint, it is faith, nothing but faith, the same in kind, though not the same in
amount or degree. The matter is not to be settled, then, by any subtleties or
speculations about faith. How, then, is the matter to be settled? The difficulty
is not about faith, but about works. Two different sorts of works are alluded to
by these two writers--one sort, the works of the law of Moses; and the other,
the works of the Gospel. Paul speaks of the works or the deeds of the law of
Moses, and declares that our justification is "not of works"--the works of the
law of Moses; or not by the deeds of the law, the deeds of the law of Moses. To
this James would have assented as heartily as Paul. But James is not speaking of
the works, or deeds of the law of Moses at all, but of the works or deeds of the
Gospel of Christ--"good works, which God has ordained that we should walk in
them," as Paul expresses it, Eph 2:10, and says, "By works"--the good works of
the Gospel--"a man is justified, and not by faith only." To this Paul would most
freely have assented. It is simply true that a man is not justified by the works
of the law of Moses, but the works of the Gospel; or, to express it differently,
that a man is not justified by keeping or obeying the law of Moses, but he is
justified by obeying the Gospel of Christ; or, he is not justified by the law,
but by the Gospel--not justified by Moses, but by Jesus. But now, attention is
invited to another class of expressions, more directly in accordance with the
theme in hand. Heb 11:7, Noah’s salvation is ascribed to faith. In the same
verse his salvation is ascribed to an ark. 1Pe 3:20, his salvation is ascribed
to water. How can it be true, as said in one place, that he was saved by faith;
true, as said in another place, that he was saved by an ark; and yet true, as
said in another place, that he was saved by water? Shall one man preach that he
was saved by faith alone, another that he was saved by an ark alone, and yet
another that he was saved by water alone? This would be absurd. Nothing can be
clearer than that, if he was saved by faith alone, he was not saved by the ark
at all. The moment it is established that he was saved by faith alone, it is
established that the statement that he was saved by an ark is not true. It is,
at the same time, established that the statement that he was saved by water is
not true. Faith alone, is faith without anything else. If he was saved by faith
alone, he was saved by faith without anything else, and, of course, without the
ark or water. But this is not true. It is true that he was saved by faith, but
it is equally true that he was saved by an ark. It is also true that he was
saved by water, but certainly not by the ark alone, nor by the water alone. The
antediluvians had water, as much water as Noah, but no faith nor ark--the water
alone--and they were all lost. We should be careful about taking things alone
which the Lord has joined to something else, or separating that which the Lord
has joined together. It is not only true that Noah believed God, and was saved
by faith, but in his conduct we have a clear example of the strength of faith
necessary to save, or when faith is strong enough to save. He believed God, and
was "moved with religious fear." Do you inquire to what extent he was moved? His
faith was strong enough to move him to obey God; to do what God had commanded;
to prepare an ark. When faith is strong enough to move men and women to obey
God; to do what he commands them to do, in order to salvation; it is strong
enough to save them. When it is not strong enough to lead them to obey God, it
is not strong enough to save them, but simply strong enough to make them
miserable if the Lord should summon them to judgment. Noah believed God, and his
belief was strong enough to create within him religious fear, and lead him to
obey God, or prepare an ark, to the saving of himself and family. But he was not
saved when he believed God, nor yet when he prepared an ark, so that the faith
and ark alone did not save him. He believed God for the space of one hundred and
twenty years, and performed the great work of preparing the ark. During this
time, too, he had done a vast amount of preaching, for he was "a preacher of
righteousness." See 2Pe 2:5. Still, he was not saved! What did he lack to save
him? He had the faith, the ark, the righteousness, and was evidently a praying
man, as all holy men are, but was still not saved. There was one item still
wanting to complete God’s plan to save him, and that was "water," and, in that
case, a drop was not "as good as an ocean." Another beautiful thing opens up
here. That is, that what man can do himself, the Lord requires him to do, and
when he comes to what he cannot do himself, the Lord does that for him. Noah
could believe God. This the Lord required him to do. He could prepare an ark.
This, too, the Lord commanded him to do. He could preach righteousness and pray.
All this the Lord required him to do. But he could not provide the water for his
salvation. The Lord did this for him. By means of his faith, the Lord moved him
to prepare the ark, and by means of the ark and the water, the Lord saved Noah,
not by faith alone, nor the ark alone, nor water alone, but by faith, the ark,
and the water combined. What a scene it must have created when the time had
expired! Noah and his wife, his three sons and their wives, entered the ark and
took in of every living creature as God had commanded. The Lord shut him in.
This was his separation from "the world that then was." He had preached the last
sermon, given the last exhortation, sent up to heaven the last prayer for that
people, heaved the last sigh over them, and shed the last tears for them. He had
given them up to their doom. The wrath of God had been long kindling. His
goodness had long been despised and his mercy rejected. Nor did the number
involved in sin prevent the execution of the guilty. Some say, if certain
teaching is true, the great mass of humanity will be lost. This might have been
said truthfully in the days of Noah, and in reference to his preaching. But his
preaching was true, no matter how few were saved according to it. He was a
preacher of righteousness, and none but those who received his preaching and
lived according to it were saved. In the civil governments of the world, if the
number found guilty is very great in proportion to the whole population, the
authorities cannot inflict the punishment. The popular feeling will revolt at
it, while they will stand it to punish a few. But, in the divine government, the
guilty are punished, no matter whether many or few. The arm of Jehovah is strong
enough, and his justice searching enough, and the guilty shall not go
unpunished. When the appointed hour had come, the engines of destruction were
opened upon the world, and the mighty judgments of the Holy, the Just, and the
True were let loose. Fearful and terrible clouds made their appearance,
spreading over the entire canopy above. The lightnings played across the heavens
and horrific thunders rolled. The fountains of the great deep were broken up.
The windows of heaven were opened wide. The massive waters surged. The guilty
world stood condemned before God, and the executioner had come. There no escape.
Down they were hurled forever, and their destruction recorded for an admonition
to the nations to come. By faith, the ark, and the water--the same water made a
means of destruction to the wicked--the precious treasure, the few, the small
church, were safely carried over to the new world. Take warning, if you boast
that you belong to the "big church," by what became of it in the time of Noah.
Let men be warned; the Lord will judge the world in righteousness. It is not,
however, desirable to hear man preach about Adam, Noah, Abraham; the
Antediluvians, the Egyptians, and Jews, and have nothing for the people of our
time. To that, then, which relates more directly to the men of our day,
attention must be directed. What has the Lord said for us, for our salvation?
This is what more immediately concerns us. Paul has a general statement to this
effect, Rom 5:1, "Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God
through our Lord Jesus Christ." This is a general statement, and relates alike
to the justification of every person reconciled to God under the Gospel
dispensation. If there were not another word about it in the New Testament, a
man might stand on this and maintain that every man justified by Christ at all,
is justified by faith. That, what is aimed at here, may be more clearly
understood, it may be stated that it is not necessary that faith should be
mentioned in every instance; but where we find a mention of justification, or
salvation, whether faith is mentioned or not, it is by faith in every instance.
Not that a person is justified or saved without faith. It is present in the
justification of every one whether mentioned or not. For instance, we read of
the justification of three thousand on Pentecost, but in the whole account it is
not said that they were justified by faith. Yet, every one of them were
justified by faith. The same is true of the five thousand mentioned in the third
chapter of Acts, those mentioned in the eighth, ninth, tenth, sixteenth, and
every other chapter where we read of persons being justified. They were all
justified by faith, and so were all who have been justified at all. Not one has
been or can be justified without faith. This is true, also, of justification by
grace. The one utterance, that we are saved by grace, is general. It is no
special utterance for a special case, but it is general and for all cases. No
matter whether grace is is mentioned in every case or still, in every case,
justification or salvation is by grace. No man is saved without grace. It is
present in the justification of every man, whether mentioned in every case or
not. The same is true of the blood of Christ. We are said to be "justified by
his blood." Rom 5:9. This, like the examples just given, is a general
expression, and relates to the justification of every man justified by Christ at
all. It is no special case, for a special person or persons, but a general
expression relating to all cases of justification by Christ. No matter if it is
true that we are not told, Acts 2:37-38, that the three thousand were justified
by his blood; no matter if this is not mentioned in connection with the
justification in another case in the New Testament; the one general statement,
that we are justified by his blood, shows that the blood of Christ, as the
efficacious cause, is present in the justification of every person. Not a soul
is justified without it. It is never omitted. The same is true of the life of
Christ and the Spirit. We are justified by the Spirit and by his life. So far,
not a man of any church demurs. Is the inquiry made, Why be thus particular? The
answer is that there is a hard place a little ahead, and the object is to get
over it. The same principle indorsed in what has just been said, will assist us
in that hard place. Peter says, 1Pe 3:21, "Baptism doth also now save us." This
is a general statement, not of a special few, but of all saved or justified.
They are saved by baptism. It is present in the justification of every person.
It is never omitted. Some objections must now be considered. Too much is made of
baptism. That is not the trouble. You may say it is the least commandment if you
know it to be so, and no argument will be instituted against you. But then the
question comes up, Is it a commandment of God at all? All parties exclaim,
"Certainly it is." What is to be done with a commandment of God? There is but
one thing that can righteously be done with a commandment of God. That one thing
is to obey it. No matter whether a great commandment or a small one, it is right
and infallibly safe to obey it. This no one denies or can deny. Though the
people do not put it on a par, in value, with the grace of God or the blood of
Christ, yet all the commandments of God are important in their place, and should
be obeyed. To fill out the system the Lord has been pleased to ordain to save
men, it is as indispensable to insert the items appearing to man to be of the
least value, as those appearing to be of the greatest value. But now, it is
said, too much is made of baptism! How much do our religious neighbors make of
it? So much that they cannot, according to their standard authorities, receive
one soul without it. This statement is made in reference to what they hold to be
baptism, without any regard to the action. Or, what is meant is, that not a
church of any note will receive a member without what it calls baptism. This
remark is not made of every irresponsible preacher, who will do anything, and
for whom no church is responsible, but responsible men, acting in accordance
with their standard authorities, or acting legitimately. Not a church, then,
thus acting will receive a member without what it esteems to be baptism. No
matter how honest the person is, how strong his faith, how much he has repented,
how much he prays, nor how great a change he has experienced, he cannot get into
a church, into full membership, without what it esteems baptism. Essential or
not, fundamental or not, whether the Lord receives him or not, without what the
church calls baptism he cannot legitimately enter. There stands what they call
baptism at the entrance, and no man can enter without it. How essential has the
Lord made baptism? Precisely as essential as these churches have made it. He
will not receive a person into his church without what he calls baptism. His
church is his kingdom, and who a man is, what he is, or where he is, may not be
known, but without baptism he is not in the church, body, or kingdom of Christ.
Precisely so; who a man is, what he is, or where he is, if he has not been
baptized he is not in the Baptist church. The same is true of all other
churches, except that some of them call sprinkling or pouring baptism. Who a man
is, what he is, or where he is, is not here explained, and may not be known, but
he is legitimately in no Protestant church if he has not received what is called
baptism. Do they say that persons may be pardoned and the Lord receive them
without baptism? Then they differ from the Lord, and require something more than
the Lord does, before they will receive them. But who is received of the Lord?
Every justified or pardoned person. His terms of justification, or remission of
sins, are precisely the same as his terms of admission into his body or kingdom.
He receives into his kingdom every justified person and no other. In Christ all
are new creatures. Out of Christ there are no new creatures. These modern
churches, according to their own showing, are more uncharitable (using this word
in their sense--not the true) than the Lord, for they try to prove that the Lord
will receive unbaptized persons, while they will not. In other words, they
reject persons because they have not received what they call baptism, but
maintain that the Lord receives them. What reason they have for not receiving
persons, when they say the Lord receives them, it would be difficult to
conceive. Is it objected that there is too much preaching on baptism? The Lord
says, "Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the
kingdom of God." "But born of water is not an allusion to baptism," says a man.
Then all the ancient fathers were mistaken, for they all understood it to be an
allusion to baptism. Then the entire church of Rome has always misapplied it,
for that church has always expounded it to be an allusion to baptism. The Greek
church has so expounded it. Luther, Calvin, and Wesley so understood and applied
it. It is quoted and applied to baptism in the Methodist Discipline and the
Presbyterian Confession of Faith. It is so applied in all the standard
authorities of all the principal churches in the world. There is no authority of
any note that denies it. No matter who a man is, what he is, or where he is,
"Except he is born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom
of God;" and "born of water" is an allusion to baptism. No matter how much
greater the value of the part relating to the Spirit than the part relating to
the water, there stand "the water and the Spirit," in the same sentence, from
the lips of Jesus, and the unequivocal utterance, that "Except a man be born of
water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God." It is not
except a man be born of the Spirit he cannot enter, nor except he be born of the
water he cannot enter, but "Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he
cannot enter into the kingdom of God." No matter how much more important the
work of the Spirit, how much greater or more valuable, still there we find
water, in the same sentence, connected by the conjunction "and" with it, and
except a man be born of "water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the
kingdom of God." Nor is this, as some have supposed, two births--one of water
and one of the Spirit--but one birth, of water and of the Spirit, begotten by
the Spirit and born of water, as the child is begotten by the father and born of
the mother, or, laying aside the figure, made a believer by the Spirit, through
the Gospel, and baptized. Except a man shall be begotten through the Gospel, or
made a believer by the Gospel, and immersed, he cannot enter into the kingdom of
God. We are said to be begotten by the "word of truth," by the apostles, by the
Spirit, and by God. It requires but a small amount of intelligence to see that
this is all the same thing. It is of God, through Christ, the apostles, the Holy
Spirit that spoke through the apostles, and through the word spoken. The literal
of it is, that God makes believers through Christ, through the apostles, through
the Spirit, and through the word preached and heard. The man thus made a
believer is, figuratively, said to be begotten of God, and when baptized he is,
figuratively, said to be "born of water." The literal meaning of the passage is,
Except a man believes and is immersed, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.
It requires belief, repentance, and immersion into the name of the Father, and
of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, to constitute the new birth, or what is
meant by being born again. "But you preach too much on baptism," says an
objector. True, there is much preaching on it, but there is an apology for
preaching so much on it. When faith is mentioned, preachers of all denominations
approve of it. All approve when repentance is preached. All help with prayer,
and so of many other things; but mention baptism, and down go their hands; they
step back and begin to tell that it is not essential--that many have gone to
heaven without it, etc. Of course, those determined that every item in the
Lord’s process shall be inserted where the Lord ordained it, will have to preach
much more on baptism than if all the preachers would do their part. But there is
a way in which those weary of hearing so much on baptism can change the
programme. Let them turn and preach that faith is not essential; that repentance
or prayer is not essential; and tell how many they have known, good and pious,
that nave gone to heaven without faith, or repentance, of prayer, and they will
soon hear less on baptism and more on these other items. The determination now
is to maintain the Gospel, the whole Gospel, and nothing but the Gospel--every
item, from the least to the greatest, from the first to the last. That which men
ignore, neglect, or oppose, will be most assiduously defended. There are to be
no encroachments on the kingdom of God. Every item is to be inserted where the
Lord has ordained it. The grace must have its place. The faith must be
faithfully inserted, maintained, and defended where the Lord inserted it. The
blood of Christ must be most sacredly guarded and maintained in its divinely
ordained place, and so of every other item. If any man desires to know precisely
the extent of the dangerous doctrine advocated in this discourse, it would be as
well to let him know it here as in another part of it. It is, then, that not an
item in the Gospel may be ignored, omitted. or opposed; that God will strike the
preacher’s name out of the book of life, and his part out of the holy city, who
dares to strike out an item of the Gospel, small or great, no matter whether
grace, faith, the blood of Christ, the life of Christ, the Spirit, works, or
baptism. These are important matters with which we are dealing, and not to be
trifled with. To the man who desires to understand, it is a matter of profound
interest to note the chain in the divine procedure in his way of saving man.
Where, then, did it have its commencement? In God’s infinite goodness. His
infinite goodness, so to speak, moved him to put forth his last effort to save
man; his infinite grace or favor brought the Savior to the world; his blessed
mission among men followed; then followed the mission of the apostles; then came
the mission of the Holy Spirit to inspire the apostles; then followed the
preaching of the Gospel by the Holy Spirit through the apostles; this was
followed by the hearing of the Gospel and its being believed; this belief-of the
Gospel changes the heart and leads to repentance; this is followed by the
confession of the Lord Jesus; then comes the immersion into his death; this
brings the man to the blood of Jesus, that cleanses from or washes away sin;
then follows the impartation of the Spirit, to strengthen and comfort the saint;
then follow all the blessings of the church. Now, let any man look back over
this list and tell us which item may be stricken out. It will not do to strike
out the infinite goodness, for then not another item would have followed, and
there would have been no salvation for man. We may not come one step further and
strike out the grace of God, or the favor that brought the Savior to the world,
for then no mission of Christ, of the apostles, and of the Holy Spirit would
have followed, and the whole system would have been defeated. So, if you come
one link further down the chain, and strike out the mission of Christ, all below
it would be cut off. We would have no apostles, no Holy Spirit sent, no Gospel
preached, no faith, and no salvation. So, it will not do to strike out the
apostolic mission, or the mission of the Holy Spirit, as then we would have no
Gospel and no faith. Nor will it do to strike out faith, repentance, confession,
baptism, or the blood of Christ, as all below the item stricken out would be
lost. It is not the grace alone, faith alone, blood alone, Spirit alone, life
alone, works alone, or baptism alone that saves on justifies, nor does any one
of these save or justify in the same sense as any other one. In other words. no
two of these perform the same part in our salvation or justification. The part
that the grace of God performs in our justification is that it brings our Lord,
the Gospel, and the entire new institution to man. Without this part, then,
there would be no justification for any man. Faith performs an entirely
different part, without which we could not be saved. It brings the authority of
God to bear on our minds, reveals to us our condemnation on account of sins,
changes our hearts, and leads us to repentance and confession. Baptism performs
no such part as this at all, produces no change in the heart or life, but
changes the relation, initiates the man, previously changed in heart and life
into a new state or relation, into the body of Christ. It transfers the man into
the new state or relation. In this new state he comes to the blood of Christ,
which performs another part of the work, without which he would be lost. It
takes away his sin, cleanses or washes him from the guilt of sin. The Holy
Spirit, his advocate in the Church, announces him justified, or advocates him a
justified person, or one not guilty. After he is a Christian, he is justified,
in the sense of approval, by good works "which God has ordained that we should
walk in them." In short, the favor of God brings the justification to man, the
faith changes his heart and life, thus preparing him for it, and baptism
transfers him into the new relation, the blood of Christ cleanses him from sin,
and the Holy Spirit advocates him as a justified man. God, then, justifies him
through his grace, which brings salvation to all men, through the faith which
prepares man in heart and life for salvation, and through immersion, which
transfers him into the new relation, and through the blood of Christ, which
cleanses him from all past sins. God puts forth his power through his goodness,
his grace, the Savior, the apostles, the inspiring Spirit in the apostles, the
word, the faith of the sinner, his repentance, confession, immersion, the blood
of Christ, the impartation of the Spirit, the prayers, the communion--in one
word, the entire agencies, means, and instrumentalities which the Lord has
ordained--and saves the sinner. The salvation, coming through these agencies,
means, and instrumentalities is divine, from God; and the sinner, when saved,
owes as much gratitude to God as if he had been saved by an immediate exertion
of omnipotent power. When the favor of God that brought salvation to man is the
theme of the preacher, and he is speaking of the part that the favor of God
performs in saving man, he says he is saved by the favor of God, but with the
understanding that faith, the blood of Christ, etc., are in their places; but
when he is speaking of faith, and the part it performs in saving the sinner, he
says he is saved by faith, with the understanding that every item is in its
place. When the blood of Christ is the theme, and he is looking to the part
performed by the blood, he says we are saved by his blood, with the
understanding that each of the other items is in its place. In precisely the
same way, when baptism is the theme of the preacher, and he is looking at the
part it performs, as the initiatory rite into the new institution, he says
baptism saves us; but if he desires to state the matter more fully, he says,
through his grace, the faith, baptism, and the blood of Christ, God saves us.
But when he makes yet a fuller statement, he says, by his goodness, which moved
him to send the Savior; by his favor, which brought the Lord from heaven to man,
with salvation; by his Son, our Savior; by the apostles; by the Spirit of
inspiration that spoke in them, by the word spoken; by the belief of the truth,
the repentance, confession, immersion, his blood, his Spirit, his life, the
Church, and all the means ordained, God saves us; and we will give all the
blessing, the glory and honor, to him, forever and ever. This style of speaking
is common everywhere, and none but weak men would ever think of isolating any
one of these items from all the others, and arguing that we are saved by it
alone. Such an argument would be not only weak, but as silly as the man who
would argue, that because a man is said to have cut down a tree with an ax, that
he did it without a handle in the ax; or because a man is said to have plowed
the ground with a span of horses, that he did it without a plow; or because a
man is said to have traveled a day with a staff; that he traveled without shoes.
The circumstance that man is saved by grace does not prove that it is without
faith, without the blood of Christ, without baptism, or without anything else
which the Lord requires. In the text, we are said to be saved "by grace through
faith," and not by grace without faith, nor by faith without grace, nor "by
grace through faith," without the blood of Christ, nor withoutbaptism; but, as
already shown, the grace, in its own place, did its part, the faith, in its own
place, did its part, the blood of Christ, in its own place, did its part, and
the baptism, in its own place, did its part. Without the grace or favor of God,
the Gospel, with its salvation, would never have been brought to man. Without
faith, the heart of the sinner would not be changed; he would not be led to
repentance, to confess or yield to be a servant of the Lord. Without the
baptism, or the immersion, he would not be initiated or baptized into Christ,
into one body; and without the blood of Christ he would not be cleansed from
sins, or pardoned. The grace brings salvation, the faith prepares the man in
heart and life to receive it, the immersion initiates him into Christ, the body,
the Church, the blood of Christ cleanses him from the guilt sin, and thus he is
saved, not by grace alone, faith alone, baptism or the blood of Christ alone,
but by grace, through faith, baptism, and the blood of Jesus. God saves him, and
the gratitude he owes to God is as great as if he had saved him without an
agency, means, or instrumentality. The saved man, if he is intelligent, does not
give the glory to the grace, the faith, the immersion, or the blood, but to God,
who gave the grace, the faith, the immersion, and the blood, and saved him by
his grace, through faith, baptism, and the blood of Christ. If illustration can
make the subject plainer, try one more illustration: A man falls into the river,
and is likely to drown. Two men see him struggling in the water, jump into a
skiff, and hasten to him, and, before he sinks, push out an oar, and call to him
to seize the oar and save himself. He grasps the oar; they pull him into the
skiff, bring him to the shore, and save him from drowning. The question now is
immediately asked, How was that man saved from drowning? In one instance, it is
said two men saved him. In another conversation. it is said he was saved by a
skiff. In another circle, it is said he was saved by an oar. On another
occasion, it is said he saved himself. How is all this? Are these
contradictions? Certainly not. How, then, is it? It was not said, in any
instance, that he was saved by the two men alone, the skiff alone, the oar
alone, or his own act alone. How, then, was it? The man who said two men saved
him was looking at the agency of the two men and the part they performed,
without which he would not have been saved, and truly said the two men saved
him. The man who said he was saved by a skiff, was looking at the part performed
by that agent, without which he would not have been saved, and very justly said
he was saved by the skiff. The person who said he was saved by an oar, was
looking at the part performed by that agent, without which he would not have
been saved, and properly said the oar saved him. The one who said he saved
himself, was looking at his important act, taking hold of the oar, without which
he would not have been saved. But, to put the whole together, instead of two men
alone saving him, the skiff alone, an oar alone, his act alone, the two men,
with a skiff, an oar, and the man’s own act in taking hold of the oar, saved him
from drowning. So it is not grace alone, nor faith alone, nor baptism alone, nor
the blood of Christ alone, that saves the sinner; but God, by grace, through
faith, immersion, and the blood of Jesus, saves the sinner. There is no question
about what God can do--whether he can save the sinner without grace, without
faith, without baptism, or without the blood of Christ. Men of faith,
intelligence, and reverence for the Lord, do not discuss any such questions.
They are questions for skeptics. The question is not about what God can do, but
about what he does, and that, too, not in an extraordinary case, an exceptional
or an unusual case--not what he does with infants, idiots, or persons who never
hear and never can hear the Gospel, but where the Gospel is preached; in the
legitimate administration of the Gospel; how he does save the sinner. This is
the question. Every one is saved by grace. Not a man, in the legitimate
administration of the Gospel, is saved without the grace of God; but every one
saved at all is saved by it, but not by it alone. So, in the legitimate
administration of the Gospel, every one saved at all, is saved by faith, but not
by faith alone; by immersion, but not by immersion alone; by the blood of the
covenant, but not by the blood alone. Does any one inquire about infants,
idiots, and those who never hear the Gospel, and never can? They come not within
the scope of this discourse. This discourse is for Gospel subjects, and not for
such as cannot be Gospel subjects. The Lord has not set us to puzzling our brain
about infants and idiots, who cannot understand the Gospel or believe. They are
not Gospel subjects. The Lord will take care of them without the Gospel or
Church. We can do nothing religiously for them. There is but one thing that can
be done for the heathen, and that is not to try to frame a plan of salvation for
them without the Gospel, but do all in our power to send the Gospel to every
kindred, and tribe, and tongue, and people. Send the Gospel forth to all the
nations of the earth, as it is, indeed, the wisdom of God and the power of God.
All we can do to save men, must be done by the Gospel, and not without it. We
cannot save men without the Gospel. What the Lord intends to do for infants,
idiots, and pagans, without the Gospel, he will do without any regard to our
opinions, views, or theories touching that matter and without our aid. We have
no hand in that matter. Our whole duty is in the Gospel plan--in a legitimate
administration of the Gospel. He has not called on us to help him save
unconscious infants or idiots, who cannot believe the Gospel or obey it. He will
take care of these whether we have correct views of it or not; whether we know
how he will do it or not. Officious priests are very forward to help where the
Lord never invited them, and even theorize how the Lord will do things, where
they can do nothing. The preacher of Jesus can do nothing toward saving a person
where there can be no faith. Where there can be no faith, it is in the hand of
God, the righteous judge of all the earth, who will do right. Even where there
is faith, and can be no obedience, the preacher can do nothing--all is in the
hands of the Lord. In every case where a soul is lost, there must be a point
somewhere beyond which there is no turning. By some means, the popular view has
settled down in the conclusion that death is that point. Hence, have been
singing, and others are yet-- "While the lamp holds out to burn, The vilest
sinner may returns."

But no man can prove that this is true. That no sinner beyond death can return,
is doubtless true. But that at any time this side of death the sinner can turn
to God and be saved, no man can prove. God can be vindicated--be shown to be as
holy, just, and good, and refuse to receive the man who has sinned against him,
rejected all his mercy, and despised all his grace, till he cannot obey the
Gospel, as if he would refuse to receive him when he desired to turn just after
death. When a man refuses to obey the Gospel till he cannot, refuses to come to
the Lord till he cannot come according to the Gospel, it is disloyal in the
preacher of the Gospel to promise him salvation without obeying the Gospel, and
preach at the funeral that the man who lived and died without obeying the Lord
Jesus is saved. What if a man did express a desire to be saved just before he
died? Did not the rich man in Hades express a desire to be saved just after he
died? Neither obeyed God while he could. When his time was out he could not.
When he could not come according to the Gospel, the door of the kingdom, body or
Church, was shut, no matter whether before death or at death. If a man will not
come to the Savior while he has health and strength to obey the Gospel; to come
to God according to his law; if he will not become a Christian, or a disciple of
Christ, while he can, shall any man of God stand up and tell him that the Lord
will receive him when he cannot become a Christian, according to the law of God?
This is a case in which the enemy tries preachers of the Gospel. Many times, by
appeals to their sympathies, he overcomes their judgments and induces them to
forsake the Gospel. It is not the business of preachers, in visiting the sick or
preaching about the dead, to decide who will go to heaven, or who has gone
there. The business of preachers is to teach men and women, in life and while
they can, how to become Christians or disciples of Christ, and how to live to
the glory of God; but not to save people who have sinned away all their strength
and time with which they could have obeyed the Gospel and served God, but have
never done it. In other words, they can do nothing toward saving any human being
who cannot obey the Gospel. It is doing an injury to man, to teach that persons
can come to the Lord as long as there is breath in them. No man can prove this.
While persons can come according to the Scriptures, obey the Gospel, be born of
water and of the Spirit, they can become Christians and be saved. When the Lord
puts his hand on them, cuts them down, so that they cannot obey the Gospel, the
time is past, the harvest is ended. Trifle not, then, with the eternal matters
of the soul, but "save yourselves from this untoward generation." Rest not in
the delusion that you will call for mercy when dying, and be saved. If you love
not God now, and will not serve him; if you love not the Gospel, and will not
obey it; love not the people of God, and will not walk with them; you need not
expect all this alienation to be done away in a moment, when you come to a dying
hour. If you prefer the wicked for your associates now, select them and walk
with them; if you turn your back on God now, his cause, and people, he will turn
his back on you then. Turn, then, accept the great salvation, and live.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 6: GP1 - 05-MEN MUST DO SOMETHING TO BE SAVED
========================================================================

SERMON, No. V.

THEME.--MEN MUST DO SOMETHING TO BE SAVED.

TEXT.--"Not every one who says Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of
heaven, but he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven."--Mat 7:21.

IN our Lord’s introductory address, usually styled "the Sermon on the Mount," he
laid down the ground on which he discriminated between wise and foolish men.
"Those," he says, "who hear these sayings of mine and do them," I will liken to
wise men." Those who hear these sayings of mine," says he, "and do them not, I
will liken to foolish men." The wise he compares to a man who dug deep and
founded his house on a rock. The rains descended, the winds blew, and the foods
came and beat on that house, and it fell not, for it was founded on a rock. The
foolish he compares to a man who built his house on the sand. The rains
descended, the winds blew, and the floods came and beat on that house, and it
fell, and great was the fall of it. The difference between the wise and foolish
was not that one class heard while the other did not, nor that one class
believed while the other did not, but that one class did what was required in
the teaching of Jesus, while the other did not. The whole matter turned on doing
and not doing what the Lord commanded. The matter of being accounted wise or
foolish did not turn on the orthodoxy of their views, on Trinitarianism or
Unitarianism, Calvinism or Arminianism, but on doing the will of God. The matter
does not turn on some abstruse question of theology, metaphysical distinction,
or speculation of learned men, nor does it turn on the understanding of learned,
difficult, and mysterious terms, requiring great depth of profound learning, but
on doing or not doing the commandments of God. Every man ought to be most
devoutly thankful that the question of our being put down with the wise or
foolish does not turn on something beyond our control, but on something over
which we have control. It does not turn on understanding something that we
cannot comprehend, or even something difficult to comprehend, nor on receiving
some influence that we cannot obtain, nor on our Savior or our heavenly Father
doing something that he will not do, nor yet on our doing something that we
cannot do, but on our doing commandments that are not grievous, but
easy--something that we can do, and perfectly in the bounds of reason. The
question does not turn on what we think, how we feel, what we have experienced,
our dreams, the sights we have seen, or the strange sounds we have heard, but on
doing the will of God. Those who do his commandments shall enter by the gates
into the city and have a right to the tree of life. The theme of this discourse
is, therefore, doing and not doing the will of God; or, in other words, it will
be shown that the Lord requires man to do something in order to be saved. He
does not save men in doing nothing. It will not be shown in this discourse what
that something is that a man must do in order to being saved; but the abstract
proposition that he must do something will be discussed. To illustrate the main
principle involved, three different theories will be here stated:

One of these theories starts out by affirming that "God unchangeably ordains
whatever comes to pass." This is followed by the additional affirmation that
"the number of the elect is so definite that it can neither be increased nor
diminished." If a preacher of respectability, talent, and fair acquirements were
to preach the theory just stated for twelve months, in any community in this
country, he would find a few who would believe it. What would be the result when
they believed it? They would sit down, fold their hands, and do nothing.
Inquire, Why is it that they do nothing? They will reply, We have no ability to
do anything. God ordained whatever comes to pass before the world was, fixed the
destinies of all men and angels, and we are waiting for him to solve the
problem, and, in his good time, show whom he has elected. Thus these continue to
do nothing, waiting for the Lord to show whether they are of the elect or not.
If they are of the elect, they believe that the Lord, in his own good time, will
bring them in by his irresistible power and save them. If they are not of the
elect, they cannot be saved, though they may pray and fast in sackcloth and
ashes till the trumpet sounds.

Another theory starts out differently from the one just described, maintaining
that salvation is conditional; that God saves men on the condition of faith. But
it immediately proceeds to inform us that a man cannot believe till God sends
power or influence from himself to the heart, and gives him faith or makes him a
believer. The advocate of this theory takes great pains to prove that faith is
an immediate gift of God. Many, on hearing this theory, believe it. What is the
result when they believe it? Precisely the same as in the other case; they sit
down, fold their hands, and do nothing. Inquire of them, Why is it that you do
nothing? The reply is, that we can do nothing till the Lord gives us faith. We
are waiting for the direct gift of God--faith; and when the Lord gives us faith
we expect to be saved on the condition of faith.

Another theory starts out with the proposition that God will save all men
ultimately. But few men ever get fully settled in the belief of this theory.
Many will tell you that they have tried to believe it, that they wanted to
believe it, but never could believe it without some lingering doubt. They
generally come as near to it as the man who argued it dogmatically for an hour,
but concluded by saying that he would give his oxen to know it. What is the
result where men make the nearest approach to believing this theory? The same as
in the other cases; they sit down, fold the hands, and do nothing. Approach them
and ask, Why is it that you do nothing? They reply, that we can do nothing in
this matter of our salvation, nor need we, for the Lord will save us all,
whether we do anything or not, whether we belong to any church or not, or even
believe on the Lord that died for us.

Now, here are three theories, starting out very differently, but resulting in
the same thing--leading those who believe them to do nothing. Large books have
been written and read on these theories, and men have studied them till their
heads ached, and then were grieved that they did not understand them. They have
said to themselves, "If I cannot be saved until I understand these theories, I
can never be saved." The truth is, that it is useless to trouble a man’s brain
with these or any similar theories. No matter whether you can see through them
or not, whether you can understand them or not, any theory that leads men and
women to disobey God is wrong. Any theory that leads men and women to do
nothing, when God has commanded them to do something, is sinful. The theories
alluded to, and many more that might be mentioned, puzzle the minds of men,
cause them to study and wonder, but lead the people all the time to do
nothing--to disobey the Lord. These are unquestionably of evil tendency and
sinful. They not only have no salvation in them, but are in the way of the
salvation of men. But the reader is now ready to demand Scripture--that he does
not desire to trouble himself with the theories of men. To the Scriptures, then,
shall reference be made. Mark 10:17, there is an account of one coming to the
Savior and saying, "Good Teacher, what shall I do that I may inherit eternal
life?" If the Lord had intended to teach that men cannot do anything, it is a
little remarkable that he did not insert it in his reply to this man. He would
have simply replied, "You cannot do anything." This would have settled the
matter in all time to come; but he did not so reply. The Lord said, "You know
the commandments," at the same time repeating them, as given by Moses. The man
replied, "All these have I kept from my youth." The Lord replied, "One thing you
lack." What was that one thing? "It was grace," says a man. No, sir, it was not
grace. The Lord had extended to him the same grace as he had to all other men.
"It was the influence of the Spirit," says another. That cannot be, for the Lord
would not withhold from him the influence of the Spirit, and then cut him off
from eternal life for the want of that influence. Not only so, but the influence
of the Spirit was doing as much to save him as any other man. It was something
which the Lord required the man to do himself. When he heard what it was, he
concluded that he would not do it. The Lord then decided (though it is said "he
loved him") that he would not have him for his disciple. Do you say it was hard
or uncharitable to reject him simply because he would not do that one thing? You
ought not, for in refusing to do that one thing, he made a square issue with the
Lord. The Lord required one thing to be done. He refused. This was clearly
refusing to be governed by the Lord. On this account, the Lord rejected him, and
for the same reason he would reject any other man or an angel of heaven. He
would not do what was required in the sayings of Jesus, and the Lord likened him
to a foolish man who built his house on the sand. The last account of that man
is that he went away sorrowful. The question of his acceptance turned on his
doing or refusing to do that one thing. Be careful how you refuse to do even one
thing commanded by the Lord. Take another example. On the great Pentecost, the
apostle, for the first time, opened out under the last commission--delivered his
first discourse after the full endowment from heaven, as Jesus had promised, to
guide his apostles into all truth, and, at the close, a cry came up from the
multitude, from the lips of those who heard and were pierced in their hearts,
"Men, brethren, what shall we do?" Here, as in the case of the man just
mentioned, the very first thing is the question about doing. Why did not the
apostles tell them that they could not do anything? Because it was not true.
They could do something. The apostle proceeded, and, in one sentence, told them
what to do. They did what he commanded, and the Lord received them--likened them
to wise men, who heard his sayings and did them. There were many present on that
day who heard, but refused to do what the Lord commanded. The Lord did not
receive one of these. He counted them foolish men. Take one more example, as
found, Acts 9:1-43. Young Saul was on his way to Damascus, persecuting the
saints. On arriving near to the city, he and his associates had such a
visitation as they had never witnessed before. A great light from heaven shone
round about them, and a voice was heard, exclaiming, "Saul, Saul, why
persecutest thou me?" Young Saul lifted his voice, and inquired, "Who art thou,
Lord? "The Lord replied, "I am Jesus of Nazareth, whom thou persecutest." Saul
again inquired, "Lord, what wilt thou have me to do?" Here comes the same
question about doing. Why did not the Lord reply, "You cannot do anything?" For
the best reason in the world. It was not true that he could not do anything, but
it was true that he could do something. The Lord commanded him to rise, and
said, "Go into the city, and there it shall be told you what you must do." When
the Lord says a man must do a thing, it is not worth while for preachers to
argue that he cannot, ought not, or need not. Ananias was sent to Saul to tell
him what he must do. He told him what he must do. He hesitated not, but did what
he was commanded to do, and the Lord received him. He counted him a wise man. He
heard the sayings of Jesus, and did them. One more example will be sufficient
for the purpose of this discourse. We learn, Acts 16:1-40, that Paul and Silas
came to Philippi to introduce the Gospel there, but, at first, received but
little attention. A few obscure individuals gave some heed to the things that
were spoken. A woman, possessed of an unclean spirit, followed after them for
days, crying, "These be the servants of the most high God, who show to us the
way of salvation." Paul never went to persons possessed of unclean spirits,
spirit-rappers, spirit-mediums, or table-tippers, to get revelations. He had
revelations of a higher order than they know anything about, and, being grieved,
he, in the name of Jesus Christ, commanded the unclean spirit to come out of
her, and the spirit came out. Her masters, who were carrying her around and
making a matter of gain from her magic arts, laid hold of Paul and Silas, and
drew them into the market-place, before the rulers. And having brought them to
the magistrates, they said, "These men, being Jews, greatly disturb our city;
and teach customs which it is not lawful for us to receive." The magistrates
rose up in the midst of the clamors of the multitude, rent off their clothes,
and commanded them to be beaten with rods. When they had laid many stripes on
them, they cast them into prison, and charged the jailor to keep them safely.
Receiving such a strict charge, he put them into the inner prison and fastened
their feet in the stocks. At midnight Paul and Silas prayed and sang praises to
God. Suddenly there was a great earthquake, shaking the foundations of the
prison, the doors were opened, and the manacles fell off the prisoners, and they
were all loosed. The jailor, awaking from sleep, and seeing the prison doors
open, drew his sword, and was about to kill himself. But Paul cried with a loud
voice, and said, "Do yourself no harm, for we are all here." And calling for
lights, he sprang in, and fell down before Paul and Silas, and said, "Sirs, what
must I do to be saved?" Here comes the same question: What must I do? It is not,
How must I feel? What must I experience? nor, What must the Lord do? but, What
must I do to be saved? They proceeded to speak to him the word of the Lord, and
to all that were in his house; in doing which, they told him what he must do. He
rose and did what was commanded, and the Lord received him--likened him to a
wise man. He was so anxious to do what the Lord commanded, that he did not wait
till morning, but went the same hour of the night. This shows the importance
then attached to doing the sayings of the Savior. To these another class of
Scriptures may be added, showing that this principle of doing the will of God
runs through the entire Christian life; that it is not something confined to
becoming a Christian, but will extend to the resurrection of the dead--to the
eternal judgment. Mat 25:31 --The Lord says, he will say to those on his right
hand, "Come, you blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from
the foundation of the world." What does the Lord give as the reason of this
grand reception? "For," says he, "I was an hungered, and you gave me meat; I was
thirsty, and you gave me drink; I was a stranger, and you took me in; naked, and
you clothed me; I was sick, and you visited me; I was in prison, and you came to
me." What was the reason of all this? It was something they had done, and,
because they had done these good deeds, the Lord will say, "Come, you blessed of
my Father." They appear not to understand how they had done these good deeds,
and he explains that, inasmuch as they had done these things to his servants,
they had done them to him, or that, in doing those charitable deeds to his
servants, they had done them to him, and he makes them the reason for the final
reception in the great day. Turn to John 5:28, and read the word of the Lord:
"Marvel not at this, for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the
graves shall hear his voice, and shall come forth; they that have done good, to
the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, to the resurrection of
condemnation." What is here laid down as the reason for coming forth to the
resurrection of life? Having done good. They that have done good, to the
resurrection of life. What is the reason here assigned for coming forth to the
resurrection of condemnation? Having done evil. They that have done evil to the
resurrection of condemnation. This is the great turning point--doing good and
evil. To whom is Jesus the author of eternal salvation? Heb 5:9 --Paul says:
"And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation to all them
that obey him." To obey him is to do his commandments. The question turns on
doing his sayings. On whom will the Lord take vengeance, when he comes in
judgment? 2Th 1:7-8 --Paul says: "And to you, who are troubled, rest with us,
when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, in
flaming fire, taking vengeance on them that know not God, and obey not the
Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ." What is the reason here assigned for taking
vengeance? Knowing not God and obeying not the Gospel, or not doing the
commandments or the sayings of Jesus. Among the last words of God to man, he
says: "Behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me to give to each one
according as his works shall be."--Rev 22:12. Some man is ready now to file a
bill of objections. "I see now," says he, "the whole tendency of your teaching.
You make man his own savior. He does every thing himself, and thus saves
himself. This robs God of his glory, the Savior of all praise, the work of the
Spirit and the grace of God of having any participation in man’s salvation. The
creature, by his own acts, saves himself. If he should get to heaven on this
ground, in heaven he would forever shout praises to himself, that he had done
the work and saved himself." If this objection could be made stronger, it should
be done, for the object is not to annihilate a shadow, but to meet the objection
in its full force and most formidable proportions. In order thus to a full
elucidation of the subject, it must be explained that there are two parts in
this great work of saving man--a human and a divine part, or a part that man
performs and a part that God performs, and that neither part, alone, will save
man. We must have the human and the divine parts together to accomplish the
great work. These two parts are not only found in the kingdom of favor, but also
in the kingdom of nature. They run through all of man’s temporal pursuits in
this life. Some illustrations may be found of the principle here involved in
those pursuits. Suppose, for illustration, A and B are ready to commence farming
in the spring. They have land precisely alike in quality and quantity. They walk
out together and view the premises, and enter into a conversation touching the
forthcoming operations. Mr. A proceeds to present his theory for the coming
spring and summer. He says: "The Lord is infinite in goodness. He is also
infinite in love. He loves me better than any earthly parent can love a child.
He is also infinite in power. He has all power. He can cause a crop to grow
without my feeble and imperfect works. His love and goodness are so great that
he is willing to give me a fine crop without my working. As he has the power and
is willing, I argue that he will give me a crop without work. I intend to stand
off and let the Lord do the entire work, and then I will give him all the glory.
I will not rob him of his glory by plowing, sowing, planting, and cultivating."
Mr. B says: "I have no doubt about either the infinite power or goodness, but I
have some doubt about its being his will to give me a crop without work, and not
much doubt either, for I am very certain he will not give me a crop without
work. I remember of reading in his good book, that I should eat my bread in the
sweat of my face. I intend to work, plow, plant, sow, cultivate; to toil
faithfully and honestly, believing the Lord will give me a crop. These two men
proceed according to their programme, the one working and the other going about
preaching on the attributes of God, and arguing with his neighbors against
works. Thus they continue till about the 1st of November. A company, who have
been listening at their arguments and noticing the different courses pursued by
them, walk out to see what the Lord has done for these two men. They look over
the farm where the man had been honestly and faithfully at work all the season,
and find that the Lord has blessed him abundantly, crowned his labors
richly--every thing abounding all around him. But what has the Lord done for the
man who has been preaching and disputing with his neighbors about the attributes
of God all season and not working? He has carpeted his farm over with weeds,
briars, and thistles, and you involuntarily say, "Served him right." What made
the difference? When the Lord gave one, capacity to work, he did the same for
the other. When he gave one, good rich land, he did the same for the other. When
he sent the sun to shine on the one, he sent it to shine on the other. When he
sent rain on the one, he sent it on the other. What, then, made the difference?
The difference was, that one worked and the other did not work. Who had ground
for giving God glory? The man that worked--that joined the human and divine part
together. The Lord blessed him and not the other. In precisely the same way, it
will turn out with those who do and those who do not the will of God. Those who
do not will be likened to foolish men. Suppose you were to visit a man that you
knew twenty years ago, and who then had no property, but you find him with his
broad acres of rich land, his storehouses filled, and abundance of every thing.
You inquire of him, how he came by all this. He explains, that by his close
application, industry, good management, and economy, he had secured it; but, on
being seated at his table, before eating, he returns thanks to the Lord. You
inquire of him: What do you mean, sir? Did you not tell me that you made all you
possess by your close application, industry, good management, and economy? "I
did," he replies. "Why, then, did you give thanks to God for it and not to
yourself, seeing that by your own works it was acquired?" I see," continues he,
"that I shall have to explain the matter to you. There are two parts in this
matter, a human part and a divine part. For the sake of making the distinction,
I call what I do myself the human part, and the part the Lord does the divine
part. When you were inquiring how I obtained my property, I supposed, as a
matter of course, you had reference to my own personal efforts in obtaining it;
but when I gave thanks I was looking at the Lord’s part, without which my own
part would have amounted to nothing, and I gave thanks to the Lord, as if he had
laid the loaves on my table. Or if you would have me elaborate the matter more
fully, the Lord created me and capacitated me for business. He created the lands
I own. He sends the rains, causes the sun to shine, gives the seasons, and
causes every thing around me to grow and prosper. When I view all this
stupendous part, and compare it with the small part which I do myself, my part
sinks into such utter insignificance, that my heart rises in gratitude to God,
as if I had done nothing myself. This is what I mean by the human and the divine
part." These two parts run all through the temporal as well as the religious
departments. What would all our hard toiling, plowing, planting, sowing, and
cultivating amount to, if the Lord did not send the rain, the sunshine, the
season, and cause the growth? It would all avail nothing. So absolutely
dependent are we on our heavenly Father. These two parts run through the entire
system the Lord has ordained to save man. There is a human and divine part--a
part for man to do himself, and a part which the Lord does for him. These two
parts go hand in hand. Neither will go without the other. Now, please make out a
list, and make it as large as possible, of what you have done yourself, and let
us compare it with the divine part. Do you say, "I have believed on the Savior
of the world?" Well, it did not require much time nor labor to do that. In a
land where the Gospel is preached, and a man hears it, it requires a greater
effort to resist than to believe the Gospel. In the act of believing, a man
renders no equivalent for anything, but simply does that which was perfectly
reasonable and consistent, easier to do than not to do--to believe the divine
testimony which God has given concerning his Son Jesus. A man certainly ought
not to speak of it as a great labor he has performed, to believe the truth of
God. He would be very unreasonable not to believe, and certainly would not be
saved. Still, it is no hard or difficult work to believe. "But I have repented,"
says a man. That is certainly well, for he could not have been saved at all if
he had not repented. "Except you repent, you shall all likewise perish." Still,
there is not much work in repentance. Repentance can be performed in a short
time. Thousands have repented in a single day. Repentance is like this: A man,
going from one place to another, takes a wrong road. When he learns that he is
wrong, inquires whether he cannot pass across, shorten the distance, and get
into the right road. He is told that he cannot; that the only chance there is of
getting right is to turn back. When he gets back to the right road, he claims
great credit for the work he has done in going back and correcting himself. It
would be difficult to see that he has performed any great work, or that he
should have any special credit, but it is easy to see that he would have been a
great simpleton if he had not gone back when convinced that he was wrong. No man
can speak of repentance as a work of merit, a great work, or a work that can
purchase salvation; yet man could not be saved without it. Another man exclaims,
"I have confessed the Savior." That is well; for he says, "Whoever confesses me
before men, I will confess before my Father and before the angels." "If thou
shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and believe in thy heart that God
raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved; for with the heart man believeth
to righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made to salvation." It is no
great honor to the Savior to have sinful mortals confess him, but a great honor
to the sinner to sanctify his lips in confessing the Savior of men. Still, that
confession was no great work; it is made with one breath. It costs nothing, and
requires but little time. There was no work in that. It ought not to be
mentioned when speaking of work. "But I have been immersed," exclaims another.
There was not much work in that; it required very little time, and was attended
with very little inconvenience. It was a mere circumstance, when speaking of
work. There was nothing in it to merit anything, or to be mentioned in the shape
of work. Under ordinary circumstances, in an hour from the time of starting, a
man is through with immersion. There can be no merit in this. "But I have
prayed, and prayed much," exclaims another. Indeed! and do you mention that as
any great work you have done? You have asked for the things you needed, and
obtained them. That is certainly getting things on very liberal terms. But much
as you have asked, it is very probable that you have obtained more blessings
that you never asked for, than you ever obtained even by asking! But it is most
astonishing that the ingratitude of the human heart should ever become so great
that we should mention our prayers as any great thing we have ever done. But
prayer is no equivalent for any blessing. Many a poor beggar asks for the
pittance he gets many times where you ask once for the rich gifts of heaven
which you enjoy, and never refers to his much asking. Asking for blessings
renders no equivalent, but we must be ungrateful beyond degree if we ask not for
the blessings of heaven. "You receive not, because you ask not." It is certainly
kind, merciful, and liberal in our heavenly Father to give when we ask, and
certainly ungrateful in us to refuse to ask; but surely our asking returns no
equivalent any more than the asking of the beggar. When we are speaking of the
work we have done, we ought not to mention our prayers; they merit nothing; they
are no works. "I have done a vast amount of going to meeting," says one. That is
very well; but he should not mention that as any great work done; there was no
other place he could have gone to and enjoyed so much; he could not have been so
happy anywhere else. It is no great work for a man to go where he wants to be,
and where he has the greatest happiness. It does not amount to much when a man
goes to meeting if he has to be hunted up by the preacher, overseer, or deacon,
persuaded, entreated, and exhorted to go to meeting when he does go. It might be
as well for him not to go as to go; the heart is not in it, and his going is not
free and voluntary; it is pretty much a matter of constraint. But the true
disciple goes to the house of the Lord of preference. He longs to see the hour
come, that he may go up to the house of the Lord and greet his brethren. "One
thing have I desired of the Lord; and that is, that I may dwell in the house of
the Lord all the days of my life, and inquire in his temple." We speak not of
going to meeting as a part of the good works we have done, but as an item of
what we have done in seeking happiness in this world. We could have done nothing
that would have rendered a greater amount of happiness in this life. It is no
great work, then, any more than the attending of other places of enjoyment. "But
I have communed many times in my life." That was well; but you certainly do not
mention that as any great work you have done. If you are truly a child of God,
walking in the unity of the Spirit and the bond of peace; if you love our Lord
Jesus Christ, you certainly do not look on it as a work to commemorate his
death. You might esteem it a great privilege to sit at the Lord’s table and
meditate on the death of the Savior--the great sin-offering of his own most
precious blood, with which he entered heaven, the true holy place, to appear in
the presence of God for us, and not a work, a mere duty, an obligation, but a
most gracious privilege. It is the place where the children of God come into the
most intimate union with their Lord and Redeemer. They meditate on his great
love for us as displayed in his wonderful sufferings--the crown of thorns, the
nails that pierced his hands, the spear that pierced his side, the blood that
ran down, like water, on the ground. This should be the highest delight of a
Christian; it is the nearest possible approach he can make to the Savior in this
world. But it is nothing that should be mentioned as any great work we have
done; and certainly no merit in it, but a great ingratitude if not done. Another
man exclaims, "I have paid a vast amount of money." That is all very well; but
has he not paid as much for tobacco, to carry an election, or some other point
in worldly ambition, or for the pride of life? If he has, which yielded the
largest amount of happiness in this life? Certainly he will say what he expended
for religion. But please inquire into this matter a little. What does a person
want money for? The reply is, "To secure the necessaries of life and the
greatest amount of happiness." Very well; has he ever expended the same amount
in any other way that returned so large a revenue of happiness? Is he not
happier to-day, in view of what he has expended in religion, than in view of the
same amount expended in any other way? Would he have any of it back again? He
certainly would not. If the Lord shall please to give him composure at death and
right reason, do you think he would then have any of what he has contributed
back? Would he have it expended in any other way? He certainly would not. The
amount, then, he has given to the Lord has rendered him already a larger revenue
of happiness than the same amount expended in any other way, and will still
render a larger amount of happiness at death than the same sum otherwise
expended. We cannot say much, then, even in view of the money contributed, of
the works we have done. The human part even here has been very small. Sum up and
put all a man has ever done, or can do, together, and make it look as large as
possible, on the one hand, and then turn and see what the Lord has done on the
other; or look at the divine part. Let us now survey the other side. Of what
does the divine part consist? What has the Lord done? The Lord has given us
existence. This is a wonderful gift. The man who is not grateful for his
existence must think meanly of himself. It is a wonderful thing to have an
intelligent human existence; to be capacitated and endowed as man is. This one
item, in the divine part, looms up so grandly that it overshadows all the human
part. But the Lord has not only given us existence, but given it in the grandest
period of the world since creation’s dawn. What period has there ever been in
which existence was so desirable as the present? Improvements and facilities for
human happiness and usefulness abound all around us. A man, so to speak, can
live more and do more, in a short life-time of fifty or sixty years, than he
could in eight or nine hundred years before the flood. The means of securing the
comforts of life, the beautiful countries, the stupendous improvements, the
means of travel, transportation, of communication, etc., are inconceivable. The
facilities for learning, knowledge, etc., in general, are immense. The means for
Bible knowledge; the manuscripts, translations, histories of the Bible, of the
Church, of men, and of the world; the critical works, commentaries,
concordances, lexicons, icons, etc., are so abundant, that if a man does not
learn something, he must be stupid in the extreme. The fields the Lord now opens
to men of enterprise, in all the great departments in life, are great and
inviting beyond anything in any other age of the world. We should bless God for
existence in this grand period of the world. But when we had sinned against
Heaven, forfeited all, and were lost--without God, and without hope--the Lord
had mercy on us, and opened up a way, new and living, whereby we could return to
him and obtain pardon. In pity, in infinite compassion, he looked down on us and
extended his Almighty hand to lift us up and give us glory and honor. "Know you
not," says Paul, "the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ; that, though he was rich,
for our sakes he became poor, that we, through his poverty, might be made rich."
From riches, and glories, and honors, he descended to the abodes of
wretchedness, sorrow, and woe, to lift us up and crown us with glory and honor.
He condescended so low that he had not where to lay his head. When we come to
this, all we have ever done sinks into insignificance and nothingness. Then
follow the Savior during his mission, and see him stooping to the poorest, the
lowest, and humblest, in acts of mercy and compassion, kindness and benevolence.
Be hold his deep sympathy, his great love, his divine pity--none were too low,
too humble, or too degraded for his divine compassion. Then look at the great
and commanding displays of supernatural power, the mighty miracles, in
attestation of his divine mission: the blind saw, the deaf heard, the dumb
spoke, the lame walked, the dead rose, and the poor had the Gospel preached to
them. "The works that I do, they testify of me," said he. The vast multitude, in
the open blaze of daylight, are fed by miracle; the sea is calmed, and the
furious winds subside at his mandate. When he dies, there is a great earthquake:
the rocks rend, and darkness spreads down over the whole land, from the sixth to
the ninth flour. The vail in the temple is rent from the top to the bottom, as
if to symbolize, that the way into the true holy place was about to be opened.
Men in all directions are overwhelmed and filled with most profound awe. But
even now, after the body is dead, they fear that something will come from it,
and, with caution, place an armed guard of sixty men over it. A great stone is
rolled to the entrance of the tomb, in which it is laid, and the governor’s seal
placed on it, with the charge, "Make it as secure as you can." His friends are
disheartened. The enemies are exultant. They feel that they have gained a
victory. But the question is not settled yet. He has only so far gone through
the programme, precisely as he said he would before he died, and died the
precise death he predicted. But he said he would rise again the third day. His
enemies remember that he said this, but do not believe it. All they do is to
guard against deception--against the body being stolen, and a report put in
circulation that he has risen. The predicted time for his resurrection comes.
The grand test is at hand--the decisive trial. Will he rise? Early on the
morning of the third day, as the day began to dawn, an angel descended and
rolled away the stone from the entrance of the tomb. The Lord rose from the
dead, and, as if the Almighty determined a still fuller demonstration and
attestation, a vast number of others--it may be, old saints, whose bodies rested
about Jerusalem--rose, also, after his resurrection, and were seen of many in
the holy city. By the time you view these scenes, on the divine part, or in "the
wonderful works of God," what think you of the human part--of all man does or
can do? But the story is not near told. Follow on till the Lord ascends to
heaven, is crowned Lord of all; till he sends the Holy Spirit to guide the
apostles into all truth, inspires the apostles, endues them with unerring power,
sends them into all the world to preach the Gospel to every creature, gives them
the Gospel, through them opens the door of the kingdom of God, receives men and
cleanses them from all their pollutions in the blood of the Lamb; takes away the
guilt, the condemnation, and justifies sinners--those who had forfeited every
thing--and receives them as children, sons and daughters of the Lord Almighty.
He then extends to them line upon line, precept upon precept, saying to them,
Come, my dear children, let me take you by the hand; I will never leave you nor
forsake you, but will grant you grace and glory, and withhold from you no good
thing. I am able to hold you up; to keep you from falling; I will be a strong
tower round about you, realizing to you continually that the everlasting arm is
underneath. In all your trials, afflictions, and fears, I will be a father to
you, and you shall be my children. Call on me and I will hear you. Such are a
few of the consolations he furnishes as we pass along through this life. Then,
when we come to the end of the race, to the conclusion of this life, and are
called on to bid adieu to all that is dear on earth--father, mother, husband,
wife, brother, sister, son, daughter; when the most tender fleshly ties are to
be cut asunder and all earthly relations severed forever; when houses, lands,
moneys, goods, chattels; in one word, when all kinds of worldly interests are to
he surrendered; when the body itself is sinking, and the cold hand of death
approaching; when the earthly powers are all failing, and even life itself is
fading away, and the summons comes to cross the river, and the Lord reaches his
hand and says, "Come, ye blessed of my Father enter into the joys of your
Lord"--little will we think of all we have ever done. Thus, beyond the "rolling
river," when he shall send a convoy of his blessed angels to escort us to
Abraham’s bosom, to the paradise of God, to a state of rest, of comfort, till
the resurrection morning, the immensity of the divine part, the work of the
Almighty Father, for man, will begin to show up grandly. But beyond this again,
when the grandest day, since creation’s dawn, shall come; when the world, as in
the days before the flood, shall be rushing on its wild career, suspecting
nothing, suddenly the ears of all nations will be saluted by the voice of the
archangel and trumpet of God, announcing the grand summons, "Arise, you dead,
and come to judgment." The graves will be opened, and all that are in their
graves will come forth: they that have done good, to the resurrection of life,
and they that have done evil to the resurrection of condemnation. The saints
will not simply be raised from the dead, or restored to what they were before
they died, but changed, from mortality to immortality, from dishonor to a
glorified body, like the glorified body of the Lord himself. God gives to every
seed its own body, not as it was when sown, but the glorious body of the
resurrection, a glorified, or immortalized body. When we think of this part of
the work of our heavenly Father, all we ever did sinks out of sight. This
prepares us for the interesting and glorious associations of the angels, the
redeemed, happified, and glorified, in the heaven of heavens, in the presence of
God and the Lamb. But there is still another chapter in the work of the Almighty
Father. His infinite hand fitted up the new heavens and new earth. When the old
world, or the world before the flood, was filled with violence, polluted and
corrupted so as to be beyond the reach of repentance, beyond the reach of all
moral power, the Lord destroyed it by water. When the world that now is, shall
culminate in crime, hardness of heart, and rebellion against God, the Lord will
baptize it not as he did in the days of Noah, in water, but in fire. This
prepares the way for the "new heavens and new earth," which the Lord shall fit
up for the saints, in which righteousness shall dwell. When we are contemplating
the divine part, then, we must take into the account this stupendous work of
fitting up the new heavens and new earth. This all belongs to the divine part.
Man has no agency or instrumentality in it. There is, however, one more chapter
in the divine part. The new Jerusalem, which John saw descend from God out of
heaven, prepared as a bride for her husband, belongs to the divine part. "I
saw," says John, (Rev 21:2), "the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down out of
heaven from God, prepared as a bride for her husband. And I heard a loud voice
out of the throne, saying, Behold the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will
dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and GOD-WITH-THEM shall be their
God. And he shall wipe away every tear from their eyes; and death shall be no
more, nor shall mourning, nor crying, nor pain be any more; because the former
things are passed away." In view of this and what has preceded of the divine
part, what shall we say of the human part? Certainly it will not hinder us from
ascribing the blessing and the glory, and the honor of our salvation to God and
the Lamb forever and ever. What we do, or can do, is but little; but our most
gracious Father can do much. We are weak, but he is strong. We are poor, but he
is rich. We may, then, in the language of the Old Book, say, "Not to us, not to
us, but to thy great name be all the honor and glory, O Lord of hosts." When we
look to a house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens; a rest remaining
for the people of God; a city whose maker and builder is God, where all tears
shall be wiped away, and there shall be no more sorrowing, nor any of the causes
of sorrowing; where our hearts shall never ache; where the weary are at rest and
the wicked cease from troubling; where peace, joy, and love shall abide forever
and ever; where we shall see Jesus, whom we have loved, praised, and adored, and
dwell with him forever, in the presence of the Father, we shall say, It is
enough. In view, then, of the great things the Lord has done and proposes yet to
do for the children of men, and the small amount he requires of man, what can be
said to those who have never taken interest enough in these wonderful matters to
take the first step, or do the first thing, of that small part required of man
in order to his salvation? Can it be possible that men will live in a land of
civilization, churches, preachers, and Bibles; in a Gospel land, and hear that
Jesus died for them; that he rose from the dead, and will judge the world in
righteousness, and utterly disregard his authority? Can they, will they hear and
know, that he stands all the day long, stretching forth his hand to a
disobedient people, and inviting them, by all his tender mercies, to come to him
and live? Shall he appeal to them by all his love, his goodness, and compassion
to come to him and live, and will they, in hardness of heart, impenitence, and
unbelief, turn away and refuse to have his grace? While the Lord holds up before
their eyes a history of the people before the flood, of the Egyptians and
Sodomites, and warns them, by their terrible example, shall it fail to reclaim
them? Shall the men of Nineveh, of Tyre, and Sidon, and the Queen of Sheba rise
in the judgment and condemn the men of our time? Be warned by the fate of the
people before the flood, the Egyptians, those of Sodom and Gomorrah, Tyre and
Sidon, the Jews and all the nations and peoples who have turned away their ears
from the counsel of heaven, and turn to the Lord. Be warned by the terrors of
the Lord, by the eternal judgment and the eternal condemnation of the wicked; be
warned by the value of your precious soul and the imperishable glories and
honors to be awarded at the appearing and kingdom of Jesus Christ. Be warned by
all the nearest, dearest and most sacred interests of humanity; by all your
relations in this life; the love you bear to fathers, mothers, husbands, wives,
brothers, sisters, sons and daughters, as well as the community in which you
live and which you owe your influence and means, in a liberal degree, to
elevate, ennoble and save. You will, to some extent, be held amenable in the
last judgment, for the moral and religious condition in which you leave the
community where you lived. If you never try to make yourself any better, not
even so much as confessing the name of Jesus, or by any direct act, indorsing
his religion, you will be held accountable for insubordination to the Lord and
the life you have wasted in opposition to the will of God, that ought to have
been spent in doing good. Think of these things and turn, while it is called
To-day. Be entreated by all the tender mercies of our God, his goodness and
compassion, to turn and live. To-day, if you will hear his voice, harden not
your hearts, but bow your will to the will of God.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 7: GP1 - 06-CONVERSION, OR TURNING TO GOD
========================================================================

SERMON, No. VI.

THEME.--CONVERSION, OR TURNING TO GOD,

TEXT.--"Repent, therefore, and turn, that your sins may be blotted out, in order
that the times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord."--Acts
3:19.

THE introduction of the religion of Christ into the world, is the grandest event
connected with the entire history of man. The founding of empires, kingdoms and
republics, their revolutions and downfalls, hold no comparison in point of
magnitude, with the one grand and transcendently sublime event of founding this
new institution of religion, called the kingdom of Christ. The infidel that
denies Christ and the divine authority of the Bible, still has this wonderful
event, the most astounding one ever recorded--the founding of Christianity--to
reason on and account for. There stands the undeniable fact, confirmed by the
testimony of Jews, infidels, pagans and Christians; the united testimony of all
history; uncontradicted by any authority, at the time, in the place, and by the
persons, as reported in the Bible. Admitting all this, as a man of reason, and
one who claims to account for the position he takes, it devolves on him to tell
us how it was that a poor carpenter, a Nazarene, who had never received even
common schooling, the society of influential persons, any power from wealth or
birth, at the head of a dozen fishermen of Galilee, fresh from their humble
avocation, uncouth, unaccomplished and unlettered, stood up in Jerusalem, the
center of the most violent religious bigotry, in opposition to the sanhedrim,
the distinguished rabbis, scribes, and doctors of Jewish divinity, with their
magnificent temple, imposing synagogues, altars, victims, and ancient ritual, on
the one hand; and outside of all this, paganism, with the civil governments, the
money and philosophy of the world at command, on the other; and in defiance of
this combined opposition of the Jewish and pagan world, swept away their
religious rites, forms, ceremonies and institutions, declaring them null and
void, and established a new religion on the ruins! How was this done, if God was
not in the work? How did twelve unaccomplished, unlettered and moneyless
fishermen, in defiance of the doctors, priests and scribes, in a few days after
their leader had been put to an ignominious death, and they had shown themselves
to be cowards, stand up boldly in Jerusalem and induce three thousand of the
people to believe that God had raised this same leader from the dead and turn
away from their former religion, associations, and every thing earthly that was
dear to them, and commit themselves to this new faith? How did they persuade
five thousand, on another occasion, to fall in with them? How did they, in a
short time, extend the doctrine to Samaria, and in ten years to the Gentiles,
bringing thousands on thousands to the faith? By what means, natural or
supernatural, human or divine, did they, in forty years, extend it the length of
the great Mediterranean Sea, to all the cities, towns and villages of note
throughout Asia Minor, in the mere strength of ignorant fishermen? This they
did, if the skeptic is right. How credulous the man must he who believes all
this! Paine, in his book, falsely styled "The Age of Reason," delighted to array
Moses, Jesus, and Mahomet, in the same class, as three great impostors, and
skeptics still delight to speak of the similarity between the rise of
Mohammedanism and Christianity; but certainly there was no similarity between
the early progress of Christianity and Mohammedanism. Christianity proselyted
three thousand persons the first day the death, resurrection and glorification
of its founder in the heavens was fully unfolded, but Mohammedanism did not make
one hundred converts in the first ten years. No impostor ever converted three
thousand persons at the first speech, nor five thousand at the second; nor could
the religion of Christ have done this, if nothing more than human power had been
in it. Its success was not attained either by pandering to the pride of life,
the lusts of the eye, the customs of the world, nor by enticing words of man’s
wisdom, or any effort to please man. The holy life, the pure morals, the austere
manners it enjoined, forbid this. Nor was it done by sympathizing with other and
false systems of religion in the world, nor the true one which the Lord had
abolished; nor by aping the priesthood who taught these systems and bound them
on the necks of the people. They remembered the command of their leader, "Be you
not like them." On the one hand, they openly declared the Jew’s religion null,
void, abolished, taken out of the way, and that by the deeds of its law no flesh
could be justified. On the other hand, they declared all paganism an abomination
in the sight of" God; that pagan idols were not gods, but the workmanship of
men’s hands; that there was no salvation in them. They openly declared the whole
world to be under sin, under the power of the wicked one--guilty before God; and
that there was no other name given under heaven nor among men by which any
person could be saved, but the name of Jesus. This was offensive to all, both
Jew and Gentile alike, sweeping away every thing they held sacred under the name
of religion. It was revolutionizing religiously, in all its bearings. He who can
believe that twelve fishermen, without learning or any superior natural ability,
money, or popularity, in their own mere human strength, stood up in the face of
the priests and scribes of Israel, on one hand, and the statesmen, philosophers,
and men of wealth, combined with the entire pagan priesthood, on the other, as
described; and advocated this new doctrine, defended, propagated and perpetuated
it, as the facts in the case, admitted by Jews, pagans and skeptics show they
did, never ought to speak of the credulity of mankind. The man who can believe
all this is too credulous to be a Christian. He can believe without evidence.
The Christian system only requires a man to believe with credible evidence.
Shortly after the great Pentecost, Peter and John went up to the temple at three
o’clock in the afternoon, as we count time, it being the hour the Jews were
accustomed to assemble for prayers. There were two causes moving them, if no
more, in going there at this time. 1. The natural desire of the human soul, when
in possession of good news, to tell it--to publish it abroad. They had the best
news ever published--the news of a free and gracious pardon for a guilty and
condemned race. 2. They had a divine commission from the great head of the
Church, to "Go into all the world and preach these good news to every
creature"--to "Go, and disciple all nations." Impelled, then, by the natural
desire, burning in their breasts, to publish the good news of salvation to a
perishing world, and a divine commission requiring them to do it, they went up
to the temple. As they were passing the gate called Beautiful, their ears were
greeted by the importunities of a beggar, a man lame from his birth, who was
carried and laid there to implore the charities of the people as they passed
into the temple. Looking on Peter and John, he asked them for money. These
preachers were in a similar predicament with many others of whom we have heard;
they were poor men and had no money, nor were they ashamed to acknowledge the
fact. Peter with John, looking intently on the man, as he lay before them,
helpless, said, "Look on us." He anxiously gave heed to them, expecting to
receive something. Peter said, "Silver and gold I have none; but what I have I
give you: in the name of Jesus Christ, of Nazareth, rise up and walk. And he
took him by the right hand and raised him up. And immediately his feet and ankle
bones received strength; and leaping up, he stood, and walked, and entered with
them into the temple, walking, and leaping, and praising God." This attracted
the attention of the people, and thus served one of the principal designs of
miracles. Miracles never converted any body, nor was their design to convert.
The design of this miracle was twofold: 1. To attract the attention of the
people to induce them to hear. 2. To prove to them that God was with these men,
or, in other words, to confirm their divine mission. Another matter worthy of
note, in this grand transaction, is, that it occurred in broad daylight and
openly, as if the Lord would challenge the world to investigate--to test the
claims of the newly-authorized ambassadors of Christ. Nor was this done in vain,
for in the council held over the matter, by Annas the high priest, Caiaphas,
John, Alexander, and as many as were of the kindred of the high priest; alluding
to the healing of the lame man, they admitted, not only that a miracle had been
done, but a noted miracle; and not only a noted miracle, but that it was known
to all who dwelt in Jerusalem, and that they could not deny it. Peter, seeing
the eyes of the people earnestly fixed on himself and John, proceeded to guard
against another evil against which no impostor ever does. "Why," says he, "look
you so intent on us, as if by our own power or holiness this man has been made
whole?" This is in a very different spirit from that of Pope Pius IX, who claims
to be the successor of the apostle Peter. When they look intently on this modern
Peter--the false Peter--the Man of Sin--or when they bow down before him, he
never inquires, "Why look you so earnestly on us, as if by our own power or
holiness this man had been made whole?" He claims that it is by his own power
and holiness that wondrous things are done, and requires them to address him by
"His Holiness," "Vicar of Christ," "Visible Head of the Church on Earth," "Lord
God the Pope," etc. But the Peter whom Jesus sent, unlike this venerable head
and representative of the great apostasy, when Cornelius, in his unenlightened
condition, desired to worship him, forbade it, saying, "I myself also am a man."
He would not permit any person to fall before him, as to the Lord. In the same
style, in Solomon’s porch, he inquired, "Why look you so earnestly on us, as if
by our own power or holiness this man has been made whole?" This was abundant
caution that he might not fall into the sin of Moses, on account of which he was
not permitted to lead the Israelites into the promised land. Some have supposed
this sin was, that Moses became angry. Others think it consisted in his striking
the rock. There is no evidence, however, that it consisted in either of these,
but clear evidence that it consisted in an entirely different thing. He took the
glory to himself and Aaron, that was due to God alone. Said he to the
Israelites, "You rebels; must we bring you water from this rock?" The Lord says
to him, "Because you sanctified me not in the eyes of this people, you shall not
go before them into the land I have promised them." He did not set God apart
before that people, or in their eyes, as the source of the water from the rock,
but said, "Must we give you water from this rock?" Peter avoids a similar sin,
in inquiring, "Why look you so intently on us, as if by our own power or
holiness this man has been made whole? The name of Jesus Christ, through faith
in his name, has given this man this perfect soundness in the presence of you
all." How bold, manly, and self-denying this language, losing sight of himself,
and carrying the minds of his hearers to his Lord and King. The name of Jesus
Christ, through faith in his name, has made this man whole. This is done, too,
in the presence of you all. As Paul said, before Agrippa, "This thing was not
done in a corner," but openly and in broad daylight, before the gaze of a
numerous multitude. This convinced them of the truth, and he proceeded as
follows: "Repent, therefore, and turn, that your sins may be blotted out." This
opens the way for the main topic of this discourse, which is conversion. Many
fears of unsoundness are entertained on this subject. On this account, it will
be necessary to examine the subject with much care. The first thing, then, will
be to consider the word convert, and examine its use, and ascertain its meaning
in Scripture. The original Greek word, strepho, occurs eighteen times in the New
Testament, and is translated turn, in every instance, in the common version,
except Mat 18:3 : "Except ye be converted and become as a little child," etc.
The Bible Union translate it turn, here, and read it as follows: "If ye do not
turn and become as little children," etc., thus making the turning their own
act, and at the same time making them accountable beings. If man can turn from
sin to the Lord, he is an accountable being and may justly be condemned for not
turning. But if a man cannot turn from sin to the Lord, he is not accountable,
and cannot be justly condemned for not turning. We do not condemn the wheel,
which cannot turn itself, for not turning, when there is no power on it
sufficient to turn it. In every instance where the word strepho occurs in the
New Testament, except the last one, Rev 11:6, the person, or that which was
turned, turned itself, as for example, Acts 7:42, "God turned;" Acts 13:4, Paul
says, "We turn to the Gentiles;" Luk 7:9, Jesus "turned him about;" Luk 7:44,
"He turned to the woman." The original Greek word, epistrepho, occurs thirty
times, and is translated, in the common version, turn, or its equivalent,
twenty-two times. It is eight times rendered converted, or convert. In a large
majority of these cases, that which was turned, turned itself, as Mat 9:22,
"Jesus turned him about;" Mat 10:13, "Let your peace return to you;" Mark 5:30,
"Turned him about in the press," etc. There is nothing in the meaning of this
word, showing which way the turning, or conversion is, whether from bad or good.
This must be learned from the connection, as for example, 2Pe 2:22, "The dog
turned to his vomit again;" Mark 13:16, "Let him not turn back," etc. In one
instance, where the turning is to the Lord, the turning is ascribed to the
preacher; as, for example, Acts 26:18, Paul was to "turn them from darkness to
light, and from the power of Satan to God." The turning is here ascribed to the
preacher, in view of his agency, or instrumentality, in turning them. The
turning is never ascribed to God, to Christ, or to the Holy Spirit. Still, it is
true, when we are looking to God as the author of the entire scheme, by which we
are turned and saved, we say that God turns us. When we are looking at the
instrumentality of the preacher, we ascribe the turning to him. When we are
looking at the act of turning, we ascribe the turning to man. Converted to God,
means turned to God, and nothing else. It is the purpose of this discourse to
elucidate this whole-matter fully. In order to this, it is necessary to make a
few preliminary statements: No person turns to God properly, or in the sense of
the Gospel, without undergoing three distinct divine changes. 1. A distinct
divine change in the heart. 2. A distinct divine change in the life, or
character. 3. A distinct divine change in the state or relation. When a man is
divinely changed in heart, life and relation, he is a new creature, a child of
God. In order to these three distinct divine charges, there are three distinct
appointments in the Gospel. 1. The Lord has appointed faith to change the heart.
2. He has appointed repentance to change the life. 3. He has appointed immersion
to change the relation. The heart is never changed by repentance. The character
is never changed by immersion. The state is never changed by faith. Faith and
repentance together, never changed the state or relation. Immersion never
changed the heart, or life. These three grand items, in turning to God, cannot
be reversed in their order. The state or relation cannot be changed first, then
the life, and then the heart. The life cannot be changed first and then the
heart. The heart is the beginning place. The change in the heart must be
produced first. There can be no repentance, or change in the life, produced by
repentance, till the heart is changed. The change in the heart leads to
repentance, and produces it. Repentance results in a change of life, or it is
worthless. The order of heaven is, that faith must come first, producing a
change in the heart. Repentance must follow next, producing, as its legitimate
fruit, a change of life. When the heart and life are both changed, the person is
ready for a new state or relation. The way is now clear for the investigation of
this work, as a whole, and each of these items separately, in particular.

What, then, is meant by a distinct divine change in the heart? Such a change as
destroys the love of sin and establishes the love of God in the heart of the
sinner. The love of sin must be completely destroyed in the heart, so that the
subject hates it and no longer desires to practice it; and the love of God, of
righteousness, and holiness, established in the heart, so as to create hunger
and thirst after righteousness. In nine-tenths of the cases where preachers talk
of "experimental religion," and require persons to tell experiences, the amount
of the experience is no more than that the subject has experienced a
change--that what the subject once loved he now hates, and what he once hated he
now loves. This is all right as far as it goes, but, in many churches, it is
taken for more than there is in it. It is taken not only for what it is--a
change in the heart--but for the entire process of turning to God; a work of
grace, evidence of pardon, the impartation of the Holy Spirit--a new creature.
This is too much. All this is not in it. Where the statement is true, there is
this much in it, a change in the heart--no more. The love of sin is destroyed in
the heart and the love of God established there. That is all. There is no
repentance, no change of relation, no pardon, no impartation of the Holy Spirit.
The person is simply prepared in heart for all the balance of the work which
should follow. Those who thus limit conversion do not comprehend the work. They
stop with a single item.

What produces this distinct divine change in the heart? It has already been
stated that faith produces it. This must now be elaborated and elucidated.
Perhaps a description of a case and the manner in which the change in the heart
was effected, will, at least, illustrate the subject. Suppose, then, there is a
man in your community forty-five years old. In his business operations, he has
prospered greatly. Success attends all his plans and financial operations. He is
a true gentleman in the worldly sense. He attends fairs, takes the premiums; has
fine stock, bets on them when he can find a gentleman who will bet five hundred
or a thousand dollars. When he drinks, he goes to an elegant saloon, where they
have imported wines and brandies, and only drinks enough to make him feel a
little richer and sharper in trading than he would otherwise be. Never swears,
only when angry and "can’t help it." He attends the races; goes to the theater;
never gambles, except where the first class, in some place of refinement and
elegance, engage in games for large sums. At balls associates with the first
class and refined. He rides in an elegant carriage drawn by superb horses. He
assists to build churches, especially if he thinks it will enhance the value of
his property two or three times as much as he gives; gives a little to the poor,
but don’t see any use in being poor. He never goes to meeting, except on some
extraordinary occasion; but has no use for preachers, Bibles, and churches. They
may be of some service to moralize and keep down ignorant and vicious people.
Thus a rich and successful operator goes through the world, and to the eternal
judgment, making money, seeking pleasure, and thoughtless about his soul and his
relation to God.

In the midst of this mad career, the Lord puts his hand on a little son of seven
years, and after some fifteen days of terrible suffering, the precious and
innocent child breathes the last breath, struggles the last time, and closes its
eyes in death. He stood over and ministered to the little sufferer till the last
struggle was over, and saw it sink away in death. Many times already he had
planned for the education of that child in some fine university and thought of
the property he would give him, but alas! he is gone. His breast swells, he
heaves a deep sigh, and groans inexpressibly. Secretly, he inquires, "What is
the meaning of all this?" Down he sinks, with his heart broken. The world
appears now to be one vast gloom. A new theme has come up for his consideration,
and one that cannot be put off. Arrangements for the funeral, the coffin,
cemetery, and grave are the matters that now rush up before him. In awful
solemnity and inexpressible grief they are considered. But now what is to be
done? A preacher must be had and a funeral sermon must be preached, but what
preacher shall be had? He knows nothing of the merits of preachers or churches;
but he had a grandfather or a grandmother that belonged to some popular Church,
and if he leans at all, it is toward that Church and preacher. He remembers how
said preacher entered the "sacred desk" with a black robe on, in a very solemn
manner, with other evidences of wisdom, piety, and orthodoxy. It is decided that
he is the man to preach the funeral sermon. He is sent for, comes, and preaches
the sermon. The heart of the afflicted man has become tender, and is susceptible
of good impressions. He is willing to hear something about the soul and the
other world. He is satisfied that his little child has gone to rest. In the
sermon the preacher repeats the words: "What shall it profit a man if he shall
gain the whole world and lose his own soul?" What an awful question! He
meditates on it, and, in inexpressible grief, looks back at his effort to gain
the world, or as large a share of it as possible. He looks at the other part of
it, losing his own soul! Is it possible that a man may lose his own soul? The
funeral is over. He and his wife return to their fine mansion. But pride is
stricken down. Their hearts are broken. All is gloom. The sweet voice of a dear
little son is heard no more. His quick step is no more heard. His little toys
are found and laid carefully away as mementoes. He inquires, "Wife, where is
that scripture quoted by the preacher?" He cannot repeat it, but gives her some
idea of it. She knows not where it is, but after a long search, they find and
read it many times over: "What shall it profit a man if he shall gain the whole
world and lose his own soul?" They sit and and weep over it. "Shall we," said
he, "in our stretch to gain this world, lose our own souls?" This theme engages
their attention much of the time till the next Lord’s day. By this time they are
both anxious to attend meeting. In the discourse, the preacher repeats the
words: "The wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life through
Jesus Christ our Lord." In his mind he repeats the words, "the wages of sin is
death." "Is it possible," says he, "that this is the wages for which I have been
working all my life?" He ponders this in his mind during the week, and commences
reading his Bible and talking of what he reads, in his family. He longs for the
next Lord’s day, that he may hear preaching again. You can see now that he is
changing rapidly. He attends meeting again, and the preacher quotes the words:
"These shall go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into life
eternal." This strikes down deep into his heart. "And," he exclaims, "is this
the end to which I am coming?" Thus he continues on, week after week, struggling
under the power of faith. He now is reading and talking about religion much of
his time, and inviting religious people home with him. He begins to approach the
preacher, and invites him to visit him, and to find his chief delight in
religious conversation. About this time, one of his former associates informs
him of some great races soon to come off, and invites him to accompany them. He
replies kindly but very decidedly, "I shall not be there." Another invites him
to attend a great ball, soon to come off. He replies, with decision, "I shall
not be there." All such follies and vanities have lost their attraction to him.
The change that he has undergone is so great, that the amusements and pleasures,
as he once called them, not only have no attraction for him, but would make him
unhappy if he were where they are. He has no taste or relish for them. The love
for them is utterly destroyed in his heart. The matters of the kingdom of God
are opening up to him. His soul is now seeking rest, peace and joy in the things
of God. His moral sensibilities are all alive and shocked at the thought of
vanities and follies such as here alluded to. Truly can he now say, "The things
I once loved I now hate, and the things I once hated I now love." This is what
is meant in this discourse by "a change of heart"--such a change as destroys the
love of sin in the heart and plants the love of God in its place. This would be
received as a divine change of heart in any church in the land. The affections
are changed from the love of the world to the love of God. As the popular style
of expressing it is, "his feelings are changed." One grand mistake, very current
at the present time, is to regard this change in the heart and, as they say, "in
the feelings," as an evidence of pardon! It is no evidence of pardon, nor of
acceptance with God. Pardon is not a change in us, but an act of the pardoning
power in heaven for us. We do not feel pardon in us, as it is not in us, but
done in heaven for us. In time of the war, a man was condemned to be shot, and
the day set for the execution. His friends sent a petition to the President to
pardon him. No reply came, and the general expectation was that he would be
executed. His wife took cars and went in person, to make her plea for pardon.
She obtained admittance to the President’s apartment, and as she entered his
room, she shrieked out, "O, my husband!" The President took her by the arm,
raised her up, and inquired, "Madam, what of your husband?" She exclaimed, "My
husband is condemned to be shot, and I have come to seek and obtain pardon for
him." The President wiped away his tears and invited her to be seated, adding,
"Your husband shall be pardoned." She instantly sprang to her feet, thanked him
from the depths of her heart, and praised God. But her husband did not rejoice
yet, because this work was not going on in him, but in Washington for him. The
pardon was written out and handed to his wife. She hasted to the telegraph
office and dispatched to a friend near the prison of her husband, in the words,
"I have obtained a pardon for my husband." Still the husband felt no pardon, and
did not rejoice. The dispatch was soon read to him, and he then wept tears of
inexpressible joy, though yet bound in prison, and praised God for the pardon
that had been obtained. The change in the heart of the sinner, as described in
this discourse, is not pardon, nor an evidence of pardon, but a change in his
heart, preparing him in heart for pardon. This change, then, is here taken for
just what it is, no more, no less. The heart is turned to the Lord. He is now
right in heart. This is the first distinct divine change.

The next distinct divine change, is a divine change in the life. All the change
a man can have in his heart amounts to nothing, unless there is a corresponding
change in his life. The Lord’s appointment to produce this, is repentance.
Repentance is a change in the mind or purpose. When this repentance is what it
ought to be, and what must be, to be acceptable to the Lord, it is a change of
mind or purpose sufficient to result in a change of life, or in a reformation of
life. Repentance does not change the past life. This is beyond the reach of the
sinner. Nothing short of the hand of God can change the past life. Pardon
separates the sinner from the past life, all its guilt, and the consequences
that would follow in the world to come without pardon. The penitent regrets the
past life, sorrows for the sins with which it is filled up, and grieves over
them, but this in no way changes his relation to the past life. Nothing but an
act of mercy from the Sovereign, in graciously granting pardon, can change the
sinner’s relation to his past sins. This is not repentance. Repentance looks to
the future life. When it is genuine, such as it must be in order to be
acceptable to God, it is a change of mind or purpose so great as to result in a
change in life for the time to come. It looks forward and promises to cover the
whole future life, while pardon looks back and covers the whole of the past
life, saving him from the past as repentance does from the future. This
repentance prepares the sinner in life or in character for pardon, but is not
pardon itself. When the sinner is changed in heart, so that the love of sin is
destroyed in his soul and the love of God established in him, and so changed in
his mind as to destroy the practice of sin, as to induce him to cease to do evil
and learn to do well--to desire from his heart to do the will of God--to hunger
and thirst after righteousness--he is a proper subject for pardon.

Though the sinner is now changed in his heart and life, the love and practice of
sin both destroyed in him, there is yet no change in his relation. He is still
in the same state. He is greatly changed, but the relation is not changed. The
change, so far, is only in him, not in the relation, at all. Being now changed
in heart and life, and thus fitted for the new relation, he is now a proper
subject for a new state or relation. What is it, then, that transfers the person
into the new state or relation; the person whose heart has been changed by
faith, and whose life has been changed by repentance? Immersion into the name of
the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, is the divine appointment to
change the state or relation. Immersion does not change the heart nor the life,
but the state or relation of the person whose heart and life have been changed
by faith and repentance. This accounts for one trouble that many people find.
They find many good people who have never been immersed, and many bad people who
have been immersed. This is a plain matter. Immersion does not make them good.
It changes neither their hearts nor lives. If persons are immersed who have not
the faith to change them in heart, or the repentance to change them in life, as,
no doubt, is the case with many, they will be no better than they were before.
But that does not prove that the person who is changed in heart by faith, and
changed in life by repentance, is in the new state till immersed into Christ, or
that he need not be immersed into Christ. He is the very person that ought to be
immersed into Christ.

Some one may inquire, What do you mean by a change of state or relation? The
very act itself of entering into the kingdom or Church, is what is meant. It is
not the change in the heart that prepares a man in heart to enter, nor the
change in life, that prepares a man in life to enter, that is here meant by a
change in relation, but the act, on the part of one already changed in heart and
life, of entering into the kingdom. Faith changes no relation, but changes or
prepares a man in heart for a change of relation. Repentance changes no
relation, but prepares a man in life for a change in relation. Immersion changes
no man’s heart or life, but changes the state or relation of the believing
penitent, transferring him into the new state or relation. But it is very
desirable to have a distinct idea of what is meant by this new state. A change
of state’ is simply to change from one state to another. The change alluded to,
in the state or relation is expressed in several clear passages of Scripture, as
the following: "Immersed into one body"--"immersed into Christ"--"enter into the
kingdom"--"immersing them into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of
the Holy Spirit." Each of these expressions has the idea of transition from one
state to another. The transition is into a state of justification. Every man
immersed into one body is in a justified state. "Immersed into Christ" amounts
to the same thing. To "enter into the kingdom of God," amounts to the same, for
all who enter into the kingdom of God are justified, and none who do not enter
into the kingdom of God are justified. All believing penitents, immersed into
the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, are in the
kingdom, in one body, in Christ, in a state of justification. When the Lord
says, "He who believes and is immersed shall be saved," it is equivalent to he
who believes and is immersed shall be pardoned or justified. When he says,
"Except a man be born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom
of God," the amount of it is the same as if he had said, Except a man be born of
water and of the Spirit he cannot enter into the body of Christ or be pardoned.
A man can be changed in heart, be good in heart, and not be in the kingdom of
God. He can be good in life and not be in the kingdom of God; but no matter how
good he is in heart and life, he is not in the kingdom or body of Christ unless
immersed into the body. Immersion into the name of the Father, and of the Son,
and of the Holy Spirit, on the part of a believing penitent, is the visible act,
in which he is transferred from one kingdom to another. Before this act, though
he may be prepared in heart and life to enter, he is out of the body or kingdom;
after this act, he is in the body or kingdom. No two persons can properly enter
the marriage relation without three similar changes. 1. A change in heart. 2. A
change in the life. 3. A change in the relation or state. In the acquaintance
the parties form, the faith or confidence in each other becomes such as to
change their hearts or affections. Here there is a change in their feelings, and
the desire to enter the marriage relation is established. This is followed by a
visible change in their lives. A series of preparations for an anticipated new
relation commences. They are still single, notwithstanding the change in heart
and life. The time is appointed and the marriage ceremony is performed. Before
that ceremony they were each in a single state. Now they are married, the state
is changed. When did they enter the marriage covenant? When did they enter the
new state? When their hearts and feelings were changed? Certainly not. When
their lives were changed and a change was seen in their actions? By no means.
But when the marriage ceremony was pronounced. This is the time when they
entered the new relation. The whole relationship throughout the entire train of
connections, on both sides, was changed the moment that ceremony was pronounced.
It did not change their hearts or lives, make them any better, or love any more
ardently, but it changed the relation. The marriage is not dated from the time
of the first change they experienced in their hearts, nor from the time of the
first change in their lives, but from the time when the marriage ceremony was
performed. If the gentleman is worth a million of money, and falls dead one
minute before the ceremony would have been performed, the lady is not legally
entitled to one dollar interest in his estate. If he falls dead one minute after
the ceremony is pronounced, she has a life interest in it. There is something in
an "external performance," an "outward act." The changes in the heart and life
were necessary, and they were not prepared to enter the new relation without
those changes, but the act of entering was a separate thing. So the changes in
the heart and life of the sinner are necessary, and he would not be prepared to
enter into the kingdom of God without these changes, or to enjoy the kingdom
when in it, but they only prepare him to enter, and do not transfer him into the
kingdom. And in like manner, immersion into the name of the Father, and of the
Son, and of the Holy Spirit, of a penitent believer, has no tendency to change
the heart, and is not designed for that purpose, but is solely to change the
relation. In it the proper subject is transferred "into the name of the Father,
and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit," "into Christ," "into one body," "into
the kingdom," into a state of justification or pardon. The person, then, being
turned to the Lord in heart by faith, in life by repentance, and in his relation
by immersion, is, in heart, and life, and relation a new creature. It is of
great advantage, in looking at all subjects, to keep the items all distinct. Men
sometimes say, the Lord gives faith. This is true in a certain sense, but not
the sense generally intended. In creating man, he gave him intelligence, or the
ability to believe facts on credible testimony. He gave us the Gospel; sent men
to preach it to us, that we might hear and believe it. When men ask whether they
can believe in and of themselves, if they mean without the facts given to
believe, or the Gospel that brings them to us, they should be answered that they
cannot. But if they mean to inquire, whether a man can believe the Gospel when
preached to him, without some supernatural power performed directly on him, to
enable him to believe, or on the Gospel, to make it believable, they should be
answered, he can. If he cannot, he cannot be justly condemned for not believing.
The part, then, the Lord performs in making a believer, is in giving a man the
Gospel, which he can believe. He will, therefore, condemn him for not believing.
The part that believing performs, in preparing a man for the enjoyment of God,
is in changing his heart, thus destroying the love of sin and establishing the
love of God in him. The part that repentance performs, is in changing his life;
destroying the practice of sin for the future. The part that immersion performs,
is in changing the state or relation of the man previously prepared in heart by
faith, and in life by repentance, for the kingdom of God. He is immersed into
the name, the body or kingdom. Pardon is not done in the sinner, in the water,
nor on earth, but in heaven, for the sinner, separating him forever from all
past sins, and receiving; him as innocent, as if he had never sinned. The
impartation of the Holy Spirit, is the consummation in turning to God. Because
you are sons, he has sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, saying,
Father, Father. Now, is Peter the same in Solomon’s porch as Peter on Pentecost?
Where did he begin on Pentecost? He began by preaching the Gospel. He did the
same in Solomon’s porch. On Pentecost, when they heard, the Gospel preached,
they were cut to the heart. They would not have been cut to the heart if they
had not believed. When he made his appeal in Solomon’s porch, upon the healing
of the cripple, they heard and believed. On Pentecost, he commanded them to
repent. He did the same in Solomon’s porch. On Pentecost he commanded them to be
immersed in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins. Instead of this,
he commanded them, in Solomon’s porch, to "be converted," as it reads in the
common version, or "turn," as it reads in both the New Translation, by Anderson,
and the Revised Version, by the Bible Union, "that your sins may be blotted
out." There will be no difficulty in seeing that "the remission of sins," and
"sins blotted out," amount to the same. But some will be troubled to see how "be
immersed" and "be converted," or "turn," amount to the same. Yet this is the
case. "Be immersed," is a literal command. There is nothing figurative about it.
But the command, in Solomon’s porch, to "turn," puts the result accomplished in
immersion for immersion itself. These persons were already turned in heart by
faith, and they are, in the connection, commanded to repent, which turns or
changes the life. There was nothing remaining to turn or change but the
relation. This was the turning commanded, and as this is effected in immersion,
the command here amounted to the same as the command to be immersed on
Pentecost. That on Pentecost was "in order to the remission of sins;" and that
in Solomon’s porch, "that your sins may be blotted out." On Pentecost he says,
"and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit;" and in Solomon’s Porch, he
has "the times of refreshing from the presence of the Lord;" the same, expressed
in different words. A man says, "That is all clear enough, but I am afraid I
have not the right kind of change of heart." The following case will illustrate
a proper change in the heart, and the Lord’s mercy and love in receiving the
penitent sinner when he turns to Him: A young man ran off from his father and
mother, and was absent a year before they knew where he had gone. Many prayers
had fervently gone up to heaven for him, many tears had been shed over him, and
many long and solemn conversations had been held, by an anxious father and
mother, about him. After about a year, a friend found him in California, and,
knowing the anxiety about him, immediately wrote his father a letter, informing
him where he could write to him. The father received the letter, and lost no
time in writing his son. The young man took the letter from the office and said,
when he saw his father’s handwriting, it moved him to his heart. But he
determined to read it, as he expressed it, "like a man," and not shed any tears
over it, as he thought "weak people" do. He decided, however, not to read it
till he was alone. As he was returning, he stopped in a path in the dense
forest, and opened the letter, nerving himself against weeping. He thought he
was succeeding finely as he read down through the main body of the letter, as he
restrained all his tears. At the bottom he saw a postscript, in something like
the following words: "My dear son, it is late at night, and your dear mother is
sitting by my side, bathed in tears, weeping over you." His manliness, as he
falsely styled it, gave way, and he sank down by the path and wept like a child.
Immediately he rose up, and resolved, "I will go home to my father and mother."
This illustrates the right change of heart when the sinner resolves to turn and
go home. The balance of the history of the case, illustrates the mercy and
goodness of God in receiving the sinner when he turns. As early as possible, he
started homeward, and reached his father’s house one morning at eight o’clock,
and rapped at the door. The father, not knowing that his son was within three
thousand miles from home, opened the door, and saw his son. The young man
stretched forth his hand and exclaimed, "O, father, can you forgive me?" The
father’s heart melted; he sprang forth and embraced him, replying, "With all my
heart, I forgive you, my dear child." In a moment he was brought into the house,
and, looking into another apartment, he saw the mother, who wept while that
letter was being written, approaching, when he cried out, "O, mother, can you
forgive me?" You know how a good mother can forgive! Young man, your mother
stands next to God. If you do so badly that your mother cannot forgive you,
there is but one more you can go to. Your mother will forgive when no other
human being will forgive. The mother, in an ecstasy, sprang forward and clasped
her boy in her arms, exclaiming, "With all my heart, my dear child, I forgive
you" "So there is joy in heaven among the angels of God when one sinner
repents," says Jesus. How kind and compassionate is our heavenly Father, against
whom we have sinned, not only one year, but every year of our life, till we
turned to the Lord, to forgive all our sins--blot them from the book of
remembrance and remember them no more forever--not even permit them to be
mentioned; and how wonderfully ungrateful must man be to refuse to come and
accept this most gracious pardon, when freely and mercifully offered! And when
we remember that he stands all the day long, stretching forth his hands to a
gainsaying and disobedient people, the ingratitude is heightened if men and
women refuse. By all his tender mercies, then; his goodness, his great love; his
wonderful compassion; by the value of your precious souls; by the sufferings of
the bleeding, dying Savior; the shame and indignation heaped on him, when he
bore our sins on the cross; by all that is lovely and endearing, be persuaded to
turn to the Lord and live forever.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 8: GP1 - 07-THE ADAPTATION OF THE BIBLE TO MAN
========================================================================

SERMON, No. VII.

THEME.--THE ADAPTATION OF THE BIBLE TO MAN.

TEXT.--"All scripture given by inspiration of God, is profitable for teaching,
for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: that the man of
God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished for every good work."--2Ti 3:16.

THE leading theme of this discourse, is, the adaptation of the Bible to man. If
it could be shown that the Bible is not adapted to man--that the author of it
did not comprehend man’s nature, the exigencies of his being, the demands of his
existence, and had not met them in the Bible, it would be a stronger argument
against its claims to be divine than any one ever offered, and, no doubt, a
better one than will ever be offered. On the other hand, if it can be shown that
the Bible is adapted to man--that the author of it knew what was in man, fully
comprehended his nature, all his wants, the demands of his existence, and
completely provided for them in the Bible, it furnishes a conclusive argument in
favor of its divine authority. In this discourse, the ground is taken that the
Bible, as it is, is adapted to man as he is. To explain what is meant by this, a
fuller statement is demanded. The Bible, as it is, means the Bible as every man
has it, without any miracle performed on it since it was given to the world to
give it life or power, to make it intelligible or credible--simply the Bible,
printed in every man’s own. Man, as he is, means man as he now exists, without
any miracle performed on him, any new faculties given him, any supernatural
quickening, awakening, or enlightening, to enable him to believe the Bible. It
is here claimed that no immediate power from God is demanded to give the Bible
life, power, or credibility; nor to give man intelligence, new faculties, or
ability; but that man, as he is, when he has the Bible in his own language, can
believe it, as it is, to the saving of his own soul. Hence you never read of any
holy man, in apostolic times, praying to the Lord to give his word power, to
accompany it with an immediate energy; to infuse life into it, quicken it, or
make it intelligible. Nor do you ever read of any holy man of that day praying
to the Lord for the impartation of immediate power, intelligence, new faculties,
or ability to enable the sinner to understand the word of God and believe it.
There are some leading and important questions that come into the minds of all
thinking persons. Some of these are put to parents, school teachers, and
Sunday-school teachers, by the children; such, for instance, as the following:
1. Why did the Lord create us? 2. What did the Lord come into the world for? 3.
What did the Lord give us the Bible for? These are important questions, and
should be carefully answered, as they lie at the foundation of correct religious
knowledge.

Why did the Lord create us? In their early studies, some of our readers may have
met with a little work, called the "Shorter Catechism." As now recollected, the
first question in it is, "What is the chief end of man?" This is an important
question. What is the chief end, object, or purpose of man’s existence? What is
or was the chief purpose or object of the Lord in creating man? The answer given
in the Catechism is "To glorify God and enjoy him forever." This is a correct
answer and an intelligible one. The chief purpose of God in creating man was
that he might glorify God and enjoy him forever. No matter if you cannot
reconcile this with another part of the Catechism: it is true, nevertheless. Man
was created for a high and noble purpose, and when he does not attain to it, he
fails by his own perversity.

No doubt some are saying they prefer Scripture--that the Catechism is not
synonymous with Scripture, in their estimation. To the Scriptures, then, turn:
"Thou hast made him a little lower than the angels, and hast crowned him with
glory and honor. Thou madest him to have dominion over the works of thy hands;
thou hast put all things under his feet."--Psa 8:5-6. What does the sweet singer
of Israel say the Lord made man for? He made him to have dominion, and put him
over the works of his hands. He created man for no ignoble purpose--no low and
servile end; but intended him to have an exalted position--to have glory and
honor--to be placed over the works of the hands of God. All men know that
wonderful something exists in them--no matter what you call it--that never was
fully satisfied with what they are and what they have. There is continually in
them that craving, aspiring and unsatisfied something, reaching forward, looking
ahead, anticipating, hoping for and desiring happiness never yet attained. Why
is this? Is it not that man was created for something better than he has ever
reached--that, by some means, he has fallen short and needs lifting up? The
All-wise Creator has certainly not created a desire for happiness, or for glory
and honor, and made no provision for it. God made man for dominion, for glory
and honor, and has provided dominion, and glory, and honor for him. If man does
not attain to it, the reason is in his own perversity in thwarting the
benevolent purpose of God, and thus disqualifying him for the enjoyment of the
blessings provided for him.

It may be that some man will say that a finite creature, in a finite state, has
no ability to thwart the benevolent purpose of God and deprive himself of
happiness which the Lord provided for him. Are you sure of that? Can not a man
destroy his health by excessive eating, drinking, and other dissipations, so
that he cannot enjoy food, drink, and sleep? Many have experienced this to their
sorrow. Can not men destroy and corrupt themselves to such an extent that they
cannot enjoy good society, even if admitted into it? Certainly they can. If men
will not read of God, thus keeping the company of the prophets, the apostles,
evangelists and saints of Bible times; will not associate with the pure and the
holy, the good and the true, of our own time, but associate with the low, the
corrupt, the enemies of the Bible, will they not so pervert their nature,
destroy themselves, and become so averse to God and all that is godlike, that
they could not enjoy God, Christ, angels, or saints, if they were in heaven?
Men, by their perversity and dissipation, have destroyed their hearing, their
sight, their appetite, and even their reason, and thus rendered themselves
incapable of enjoying the blessings which God has graciously and freely provided
for them in the world. They may, and many are, doing the same in reference to
the world to come.

In Paul’s address, that he delivered on Mars’ Hill, in Athens, in the presence
of the most distinguished judges and philosophers, is found a fine statement
touching the purpose of God in creating man. He says, "He has made of one blood
every nation of men, that they might dwell on all the face of the earth, having
marked out their appointed times, and the bounds of their dwelling; that they
might seek for God, if perhaps they would feel after him, and find him,
although, indeed, he is not far from every one of us."--Acts 17:26-27. The Lord
anticipated the fall when he created man, and made him that he might seek the
Lord and find him. This is true of the whole race. All were created that they
might seek God and find him--that they might have dominion--that they might
glorify God and enjoy him forever.

What did the Lord come into this world for? "God sent not his Son into the world
to condemn the world, but that the world, through him, might be saved." He did
not send his Son to irresistibly save any body, but that the world through him
might be saved. He reprobated none by any original decree, or decree before the
world was, so that they cannot be saved! We repeat, the Lord "came into the
world, that the world, through him, might be saved." This was the object or
purpose of his coming. He thus gave the world the privilege of being saved. It
was his most gracious and benevolent design in coming into this world, and
perfectly accords with his design in creating man.

What did God give the Scriptures for? "All Scripture is given by inspiration of
God, and is profitable." Profitable for what? If one were to notice the popular
custom of the preachers, he might infer that the Scriptures were given that they
might have a convenient book from which to get texts, for this is one use made
of them. But Paul does not say the Scriptures are profitable for that use. If
one were to look again, he might suppose that the Lord designed the Scripture as
proof of the doctrines and commandments of men, for a man in one church is
busily engaged in quoting Scripture to prove Universalism, in another
Unitarianism, in another Trinitarianism, in another Calvinism, in another
Arminianism. If this was the purpose of God in giving us the Scriptures, it is
certain that the apostles and first Christians never so understood it. They
never used them any such purpose. What, then, does Paul say they are profitable
for? They are profitable for doctrine or for teaching. Is it not astonishing
that men should be hesitating about what doctrine to adopt, and debating about
what the true doctrine is, when the apostle so clearly states, that "all
Scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable for doctrine or
teaching." He does not say it is profitable to prove our doctrine by, but it is
the doctrine itself. There certainly need be no further confusion about which
the true doctrine is. If God gave the Scriptures for doctrine, take them and
stand by them as the doctrine or teaching of the Lord. You will have the true
doctrine, the doctrine admitted to be true by all, and the only true doctrine.
This is the doctrine for the people of God--the disciples of Jesus. They do not
desire to be annoyed by being called on to prove their doctrine every week or
month, and they therefore take the Scriptures given by inspiration of God,
divinely declared to be profitable for doctrine or teaching, and proved true in
the time of the apostles and not denied by any but open skeptics. These
Scriptures are profitable for doctrine, reproof, correction, instruction in
righteousness, that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished for
every good work. What more can any man want?

The Lord created man that he might glorify and enjoy God forever; that he might
have dominion, glory, and honor; that he might seek the Lord and find him. Jesus
came into the world that the world, through him, might be saved; and the
Scriptures are profitable for doctrine, to perfect the man of God, and thus
thoroughly furnish him for every good work. This all agrees with the one great
and benevolent design of the Lord to open the way for the happiness of man. How
grateful he should be for those benevolent provisions!

The Scriptures, given for and adapted to man, have supreme ascendancy over all
human systems--all creeds, confessions, and disciplines ever made by uninspired
men. This lofty and sublime claim of the Scriptures cannot be treated here
except in a single particular, to wit, their broad and extended benevolence,
when compared with all the creeds of men. Suppose, for illustration, a man
should approach you with one of the best of all the creeds made by uninspired
men, and you inquire of him: Who made your book? He replies: Our great and good
men. You proceed: Who did they make it for? He answers: For us. You inquire: Who
do you mean by that narrow word "us?" He answers: Our church. You press the
matter: Who do you mean by that narrow expression "Our church?" He explains: Our
brethren. You inquire: Are there no good people only those whom you designate
"us," "our church," "our brethren?" He replies: Certainly, there are many
others, I doubt not, just as good. You proceed: And was not your book made for
them? Certainly not, he replies. Does not your book propose any good thing, or
any blessing, for any only those you call "us," "our church," "our brethren?"
you inquire. He honestly and truthfully replies: No; it was not made for any
body but us, and, of course, contains no blessing for any body else.

This is enough against this book and all of the same kind. It is useless to look
through them, or to talk of the good things contained in them, or the proportion
of truth in them. There is not a grain of benevolence in them for any of the
human race outside of the parties for which they were made. What claim, then,
has such a book on the attention of mankind? It is nothing but a partisan
concern--not made for mankind, but for a party; not intended to bless the human
race, but a party; not made with an eye to the happiness of the world, but
merely with an eye to the interests of a party. It has not one spark of divine
benevolence, but is confined to the narrowness and selfishness of a religious
faction, separated from other religious people by a few human opinions. This is
enough against books of this kind. They are too narrow, circumscribed, and
limited in their benevolence. Men whose souls have been impressed by the
widely-expanded benevolence of the Bible, if for no other reason, on account of
their narrowness, selfishness, and partisan character, will go against all such
books, living and dying.

Now, in contrast with this, open the Lord’s book and read the promise to
Abraham--Gen 22:18 : "In thee shall all nations be blessed." This promise
contained Christ, the Gospel, the Church--in one word, the blessing of the
entire new institution. Who did our heavenly Father intend the blessing of this
promise or the new institution for? All the nations of the earth. It is not for
a party, a section, or faction, but for the human race. Paul, in commenting on
this blessing of the Gospel, or the new institution, styles it "the grace of
God," and says, it "has appeared to all men." See Tit 2:11. In the same spirit,
Isaiah, looking down through long centuries to the Messiah, says, "He shall be
set for salvation to the ends of the earth." When the Savior was born, the
angels sang, "We bring you good news of great joy, which shall be to all
people." See Luk 11:10. The Lord’s benevolence is not confined to a party, to
any one nation or people, but is to, and for, all people. Hence, in the
commission, the Lord commanded the Gospel to be preached to every creature; to
all nations; and Peter, on the first opening out of this great work, said, "The
promise is to you, and to your children, and to all them that are far off." This
comprehensive and glorious benevolence is in perfect keeping with what has been
said in this discourse, of the purpose of God in creating man, in sending the
Messiah into the world, and giving us the Scriptures. his grand system of
benevolence and humanity, secured to the world by our most gracious and merciful
heavenly Father, has another feature of immense importance that must be noticed
here, viz.: It has nothing sectional in it. It is not for Eastern, Western,
Northern, nor Southern people, in any exclusive sense; but for all people, of
all sections, all nations and languages, alike. It makes no distinction on
account of blood or section of country. The preacher with the love of Jesus,
when he meets a human being, need not ask what country he is of, or what nation,
but may at once proceed to communicate the good news of the kingdom. God has
shown him that he should "call no man common," but that, in every nation, and in
"all the world," "he who fears God and works righteousness is accepted with
him." He is actuated by the highest, the noblest, and broadest
benevolence--literally, the benevolence of God, extending to the whole race of
man.

What a pity it is, what a misfortune to the human race, that the system which
the Lord has freely given to all men, should have been checked and hindered in
its work by speculations and sophistical theories of men. Yet it must be
conceded, that such has been, and is the case. One speculative theory must be
mentioned here, as a sample. Though all men of ordinary intelligence know that
they are daily believing certain things; believing the words of men--uninspired
men; relying on them, and acting from their faith, where vast amounts of
property and money are involved, there are some men, of fine intelligence in
other matters, that claim that they are so peculiarly organized that they cannot
believe. They claim that they are not credulous, as other men. In hearing such
men talk, we are led to pity them as the unfortunates of humanity. Men so
peculiarly organized that they have no credulity! cannot credit truth! cannot
believe facts! That is singular in the extreme! Such men could not act as
magistrates, for they could not believe the testimony of witnesses. They could
not act as jurors, for they could not believe testimony, and decide according to
law and testimony. They could not act as judges, for judges must be men who can
believe testimony, and act on it. They cannot act as physicians, for, when sent
for, they cannot believe that any body is sick, and will not go. It would be
difficult to think of any place for men thus peculiarly organized, unless it
would be in some benevolent asylum, for they certainly could not be expected to
get a living in this world. The truth in the matter is, that all men, of even
common intelligence, can believe and do believe, as easily as they can and do
exercise any function of soul or body. But the will has some control over the
faith of men. They believe what they are willing to believe much more readily,
or with much less testimony, than they do what they are not willing to believe.
But for a man to be so credulous as to be gulled into the duplicity that he
cannot believe his God, when he knows that he can believe men, is a little too
credulous for a Christian. The true state of the case is, that the very men who
are trying to make the impression that they have no credulity, are the most
gullible men of these times, and, positively, give credit to, and countenance
some of, the most incredible, unlikely, and unreasonable things ever reported.
They are the most easily-imposed-on, deceived, and deluded men in the world. The
best apology out for them is, that some unenlightened preachers have taught that
man, unregenerated, cannot believe. But if they were only half as industrious in
scanning such sophistries as they are in framing excuses for not believing the
Bible, they would soon discover the fallacy. But another man comes up from
another angle, with a difficulty of a different nature from the one just
considered. He takes broader ground, and maintains that the unregenerate man can
do nothing--has no ability to do anything. He claims that he has many
profoundly-learned and able preachers on his side. He and the preachers, he
claims, even quote Scripture to prove that the sinner can do nothing. They have,
thousands of times, quoted the words: "Stand still and see the salvation of the
Lord," to prove their position. But there are several things here that ruin
their theory:

The command, "Stand still," could not consistently be given to persons who have
no ability. It requires some ability to stand still. A man with no ability to do
anything cannot stand still. A dead man cannot stand.

The command, to "see the salvation of the Lord," implies some ability. A man
with no ability cannot see. It is implied, in this instance, that those who were
the subjects of the command and had not only ability to see common things, but
to see "the salvation of the Lord."

A careful discrimination should constantly be made between seeing the salvation
of the Lord and obtaining it. The command is not to stand still and obtain the
salvation of the Lord, but see it.

Another thing of importance with intelligent people is in reference to where the
passage may be found. It is generally quoted by the class in question, when they
are treating the subject of conversion. Was the language uttered in reference to
the conversion of sinners? Did the apostles say to sinners, "Stand still and see
the salvation of the Lord?" They never did. This is not the language of an
apostle, nor of the New Testament. It is the language of Moses when leading the
Israelites from Egyptian bondage, and at the crossing of the Red Sea. These
words are found in Exo 14:13. The people had ability and obeyed the command of
Moses, and did literally stand still and see the salvation of the Lord. Moses
added: "And the Egyptians, whom you have seen this day, you shall see them again
no more forever." When the people found the sea before them, and no escape to
the right or left, and a furious army in their rear, they were frightened, and
reflected on Moses for involving them in their fearful situation. Moses
commanded them to stand still and see the salvation of the Lord. They obeyed the
command. They stood still, and saw the sea cleft asunder and a dry passage made
for them. But there was not one saved yet. They only saw salvation, but had not
obtained it. The Lord next addressed Moses, saying, "Speak to the children of
Israel, that they go forward." Certainly the Lord did not command Moses to say
this to people whom he knew had no ability--people who could do nothing! What
followed? The people demonstrated that they had ability--that they could do
something. The vast column moved forward till all were safely on the other
side--every soul saved, not by standing still, but by going forward. They
received the salvation after they went forward, and then united in the praises
of God. The passage, then, instead of proving that the persons addressed could
not do anything, proves that they could do something, and did it, before they
were saved. That is not all; when the people went forward, they went forward in
immersion, and were "all immersed into Moses, in the cloud and in the sea." But
where is the use in arguing with a man so confused and blinded, so completely
deluded by the wicked one, that though he is saying every day of his life, in
regard to other matters, "I will do this," and "I will not do that," that he
argues that he cannot do anything? There is but one step beyond this in
delusion, and that is, when the adversary has so completely deceived a man that
he does not believe there is an adversary. This is the climax in delusion. A man
cannot go beyond it.

But more time must not now be consumed with these absurd theories. The Bible
proceeds with man on the same principle as man proceeds with his fellow-man; or
the same principle, as all the civil laws in the world--the principle that man
can believe and obey. If he could not do this, he would not be man. The law of
Moses was not a universal law; not for all the world, but for the nation of
Israel. The New Testament is adapted to and designed for all the world. It is
not simply a book for the church, for "us," "our brethren," "our church," but
for the world. The world is mainly in three divisions: The unbelieving; the
believing who are not Christians; not in Christ, and those in Christ. For these
three classes the New Testament has also three divisions: The four records of
testimony concerning Christ by Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. These are not, as
many style them, "four Gospels," nor "the four Gospels," but four records of
testimony concerning the Messiah, written by four different men. These records
are all of the same nature, all on the same subject, and evidently all have the
same design. When we get the design of one of them, we have the design of all.
John, the last one, as arranged in the volume called the "New Testament," and
the one last written, informs us what the design was, John 20:30-31. He says,
"Many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are
not written in this book; but these are written, that you may believe that Jesus
is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life through
his name." No man can state his purpose, in writing a book, more clearly than
this writer does here, and, as before stated, in doing so, he also states the
purpose of Matthew, Mark, and Luke. That design is, that the reader may believe
"that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God." Whatever else the reader may find in
these records, he should constantly bear in mind that the leading design is that
he may believe. These records of testimony were not made to prove any doctrine
or creed in the world, but to lay before the reader the evidence concerning
Jesus, the Anointed Son of God, that he may believe. Such being the purpose of
these records, how appropriate it is that they should appear first in the
volume. In this, too, this book proves its adaptation to the world as no other
book in the world does. The apartment for the unbeliever meets his eye first,
and he finds it adapted to him and prepared for him. The books that men have
made have left out this grand department entirely, and passed by the
unbelieving, making no provision for them. The creed-makers have been so busily
engaged in distinguishing their opinions from those differing from them, that
they appear to have overlooked and passed by the unbelieving part of mankind. In
the Lord’s book, special provision is made for them, and it is the first thing.
In making a believer there must be two things: 1. Something to believe. 2.
Credible testimony, bringing that something to the human understanding. In the
case in hand, the Lord has furnished that which is to be believed--the truth
concerning Jesus, that he is the Christ, the Son of the living God. This truth
is not always found in precisely the same form, or the same words, but always
amounting to the same. As the Lord stood on the banks of the Jordan, the
Almighty Father embodied it in the following words: "This is my Son, the
Beloved, in whom I am well pleased." In the mountain of transfiguration this was
repeated, and the following added: "Hear you him." As in the brief but
all-important confession made by Peter, Mat 16:16, it reads as follows: "Thou
art the Christ, the Son of the living God." "On this," the Lord says, "I will
build my Church," or, "on this rock." This is a very perspicuous statement of
the central idea of Christ’s religion, the transcendently important truth, to be
believed. It is not, Thou art Christ, or Anointed, for others had been anointed;
but thou art the Anointed, in a much higher sense than any other had ever been.
It is not "Son of God," nor "a Son of God," for there were other sons of God;
but "the Son," in a higher sense than any other. It is not "of God," nor "of a
God," but "of the living God;" transcendently above all others called God--THE
JEHOVAH--THE I AM. The truth to be believed is not that Jesus is Christ, or
Anointed, but "the Christ, the Son of the living God." The records of Matthew,
Mark, Luke, and John, are four records of testimony concerning this great truth.
Whoever reads these records understandingly, reads them with his eye fixed on
this all-absorbing question, Is Jesus the Son of the living God, as they bear on
it from first to last? The Lord having furnished the proposition to be believed,
and the testimony on which to believe, how should the preacher go to work to
make believers? Should he preach a sermon on the philosophy of faith? Certainly
not. A sermon on faith? By no means. Preaching sermons on faith never made a
believer in the world. How does a sensible attorney make a jury believe? He
delivers no speech on the philosophy of faith, or on faith. How, then, does he
make his jury believe? He calls his witnesses and has them give their testimony
to the jury. After all the testimony is stated, he makes a speech, summing up
and applying the testimony and the law to the case. How should the preacher of
Jesus proceed? The people whom he would convince are his jury. The testimony
found in the records of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, is the testimony he
should lay before them. He should array it, sum it up, apply it to his
proposition, that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God, showing that
it is conclusive. To show the nature of this testimony and its tendency, when
properly used, suppose a Jewish rabbi were to step in and say, "Please let me
look at your New Testament." A copy is handed to him. He reads the title page:
"The New Testament of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ." This title is not of
inspiration and not correct. "New Testament of our Lord and Savior Jesus
Christ," implies an Old Testament of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. The Old
Testament was not given by Christ, but by Moses. Moses was the mediator of the
Old Testament, but Christ of the New. The law, or the first covenant, was by
Moses, but grace and truth by Jesus Christ. But the Jewish rabbi proceeds to
look at the New Testament. He turns to the first of Matthew’s record and reads
the genealogy of Christ, as probably transcribed from the Jewish records, and
the first thing arresting his attention is the fact, that Jesus of Nazareth was
born in the lineage, the line, or family from which the Messiah was to come,
according to the prophecies. This strikes his mind with much force. "If you
please," says he, "let me look a little further." He looks again, and reads that
Jesus was born in Bethlehem, as clearly predicted by one of the prophets, and
finds the language of the prophet quoted in the narrative. This strikes him with
still greater force. He reads on, and finds another and a more remarkable fact,
viz., that he was born of a virgin, and the language of the prophet that had
many ages before declared that he should be born of a virgin is quoted. This
strikes his mind with still greater force. He reads again, finding the account
of the jealousy and persecution of Herod, Jesus escaping his wrath by being
carried into Egypt, and God calling him out of Egypt after the danger had passed
away, corresponding to the language, "Out of Egypt have I called my Son." He
reads the examination of the sketch concerning John the Immerser, and finds an
account of the Elijah that was to come--that he came according to the prediction
of the prophet--did the work assigned him--prepared the way before the
Lord--prepared a people for the Lord. By this time his attention is completely
engaged, he is inquiring, "Is it possible that Jesus of Nazareth, whom my nation
did and still rejects, has entered by the door of prophecy, and step after step
fulfilled the prophecies? Please let me examine a little further," says he. He
reads through Matthew’s record, and is astonished to find some seventy
predictions of the prophets more or less clearly fulfilled on Jesus. His mind is
becoming deeply impressed, and the question is frequently in his heart: "Have we
not rejected the true Messiah?" He carefully traces Mark’s record through. His
convictions are deepened and strengthened. He traces through Luke’s record, and
finds corroboration and confirmation of what had gone before. He is almost ready
to yield. He pushes on eagerly through John’s testimony, and finds other,
fuller, and clearer confirmation. He is sensibly affected with one of the
predictions of Jesus, spoken some forty years before the destruction of
Jerusalem, viz.: "They shall fall by the edge of the sword, and be led away
captive among all nations; and Jerusalem shall be trodden down by the Gentiles,
till the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled." Our rabbi revolves this in his
mind, and quietly reflects on it. "Jesus of Nazareth, whom we Jews rejected,
uttered this forty years before Jerusalem was destroyed. The devoted city was
invested with armies, it was destroyed; literally buried in ruins; not one stone
left upon another not thrown down; the Jews have been led away captive among all
nations; Jerusalem has been trodden down by the Gentiles for ages past. All this
was, in one short sentence, in prophecy. It is now recorded on the pages of
history, and the wonderful events of this prophecy cover over some eighteen
centuries! I am fully satisfied," he exclaims. "I believe, with all my heart,
that Jesus of Nazareth is the Christ, the Son of the living God." But now, that
he has examined these holy records of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, and become
a believer, the next thing that opens to his mind is the question, what must I
do, as a believer, to obtain the mercy and favor of that God against whom I have
so long and greatly sinned, in my madness and unbelief? "Since this book has led
me safely on from the cold and cheerless icebergs of unbelief, to the bright and
glorious hope of the faith of the Messiah, I will read on; it may be that it
will lead me safely through." He turns over another leaf, to a new department,
in the New Testament, erroneously called, in the common version, "The Acts of
the Apostles." This book is a record of acts of apostles; only some of the acts
of some of the apostles. But it is more than this; it is a record of the
election of Matthias; the descent of the Holy Spirit; the supernatural endowment
of the apostles with power from heaven; their first preaching under the last
commission; the first conversions; the founding of the Church; a history of the
apostolic preaching and practice, and some of the first evangelists, in planting
and setting churches in order. Our rabbi reads the first chapter of this book,
in which he finds the account of the election of Matthias to supply the vacancy
occasioned by the apostasy and fall of Judas from the apostolic office. He finds
the college of the apostles thus completed, and all things ready, as Jesus had
pointed out before he died and after he rose from the dead. He reads into the
second chapter of Acts, and finds the wonderful account of the descent of the
Holy Spirit, the endowment of the apostles with power, as Jesus had promised, to
guide them into all truth. This all comes right to him. He reads Peter’s sermon,
directed to the Jews, to convince them that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the
living God. "All this," says he, "I believe; but I desire now to know what I
must do, as a believer, to obtain pardon and become a disciple of Jesus." He
reads a little farther on, and finds the question from those who heard Peter:
"Men and brethren what shall we do?" "That," says he, "is the question to which
I desire an answer." He reads on for the answer: "And Peter said to them,
Repent, and be immersed, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ, in order
to the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit." He
praises God for the answer. This begins to clear the way for him. He reads
Peter’s discourse in the third chapter of Acts, learns what he preached, what
the people believed, what they were commanded to do, what it was for, what they
were promised. He reads on, follows Philip down to Samaria, noticing the record
carefully of all he said, and all the people said and did, learning all about it
as found in the eighth chapter of Acts, finding where many, both men and women,
became obedient to the faith. In the latter part of this chapter, he finds the
account of the conversion of the Ethiopian officer. He notices every particular
in the case, what was preached to him, what he believed, what he did, and how he
did it. In the ninth chapter he finds the account of the conversion of young
Saul, the chief of sinners. This case he notices with great care in every
particular. He proceeds on through the tenth chapter, noticing all that was
preached, believed, and done, and all the results, in the conversion of the
first Gentiles. He reads down through the sixteenth chapter, finding the account
of the conversion of Lydia and the jailer, and so on through the book, noticing
carefully all that was preached, what was commanded to be believed and done,
what was believed and done, what was promised, what was given, and all about it.
From this book he learned what a believer must do to become a Christian, did it,
bowed his soul to God, confessed Jesus, was immersed into him, and thus became a
disciple. He praised God for the book, that found him in the cold and gloomy
regions of unbelief, and raised up his soul by the mighty faith of the Gospel,
and thus, when made a believer, took him by the hand, and guided him into the
kingdom of God. But now a new chapter has come. A new want is opened up to him.
He wants new directions, showing, as he is now a Christian, how to live as a
Christian or a disciple of Christ. He says, "I have found, by perusing my book,
all I needed thus far; I will go on, and hope I shall find all I need in time to
come." He turns over another leaf, and comes to Paul’s letter to the church in
Rome, and finds that every word in it is addressed to Christians, or disciples
of Christ, those in Christ, showing them how to live as Christians, serve God,
and find their way home to the everlasting city; as if God had taken them by the
hand, and said, "Come, my dear children, and I will lead you home." As he reads
this letter, he praises God for its instructions, comforts, and consolations. He
reads Paul’s two letters to Corinth, and finds every word addressed to the
saints, the people of God, giving them, as the prophet said, "line upon line and
precept upon precept," to guide them safely home. He reads the letter to
Galatians, the one to the Ephesians, the one to the Philippians, the one to the
Colossians, and the two to Thessalonica, and finds that all these letters were
addressed to the children of God, and abounding in exhortations, entreaties,
admonitions, warnings, threatenings, and promises; cheering, comforting, and
encouraging them on their way to heaven. This fills his highest expectations,
meets all his wants, and clears his entire pathway through this life and this
world onward to his final home. He goes on through the two letters to Timothy,
the one to Titus, and the one to Philemon, from the apostle Paul, teaching those
young men, preachers of the Word, how to behave themselves in the house of God.
He reads through the long and argumentative letter to the Hebrews, converted
Israelites, warning them against apostasizing from the faith, from Christ, and
returning to the law of Moses; showing that if they forsake Christ, the great
sacrificial offering, that there is no more sacrifice for sins. He passes on
through the letter of James, the two of Peter, the three of John, and one of
Jude, and finds all, from Romans to Revelation, addressed to the saints, the
children of God, teaching them how to serve God, how to please him in all things
as his children, and how to obtain the final and eternal salvation. These holy
instructions, "teaching him to live soberly, and righteously, and godly in this
present world, looking for that blessed hope and the glorious appearing of the
great God and our Savior Jesus Christ," he honestly and faithfully follows for
forty years. But now he is an old m an, and bending over his staff. He says, "I
have found the Lord’s book adapted to man. The first department in the four
records of testimony, by Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, led me to the Lamb of
God, and made me a believer on the Savior of the world. The second department,
Acts of Apostles, showed me, after I was a believer, the way into the kingdom of
Christ, to justification or remission of sins. The epistles of the apostles,
addressed to the saints, showed me how, after I had become a Christian, to
follow Jesus, to live and serve God as a Christian or a disciple of Christ.
These holy instructions I have followed many years, and am now old. I shall not
be here long. I should like to have a view of the other side of Jordan, into the
sweet fields of Eden. Like Moses, when he ascended Mount Pisgah, he viewed
Canaan, though he was not permitted to enter. So I should like to have a view
beforehand of the wonderful future." He turns over and. reads that wonderful
book, Revelation, from the first to the twenty-first chapter, and finds passing
before him a grand panoramic view, commencing before the new dispensation,
extending down through it, and through the intermediate state, and terminating
in the eternal state, in the holy city, New Jerusalem, which John saw coming
down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. He
reads the twenty-first chapter, and the grand description of the final state of
the redeemed, where all tears are wiped away, no more sorrowing nor sighing,
sickness nor death; where there is access to the river of the water of life, and
to the tree of life. He reads the description of the holy city, the final home
of the saints, and, in the language of good old Simeon, he exclaims, "It is
enough; my eyes have seen the salvation of the Lord; now let thy servant depart
in peace." Thus it is seen, that the Bible is the book for man, adapted to man,
giving him a knowledge of his creation, of God’s dealings with him for four
thousand years, before Christ; the grand series of preparation for the new and
better covenant, based on better promises; the full and complete introduction of
the new institution. On opening the new covenant, we have found three
departments for the three great classes of humanity, the unbelieving, the
believing who know not the way to God, and those who are in Christ. The Lord has
graciously prepared his divine testimonies, as reported by Matthew, Mark, Luke,
and John, for the unbelieving, that they may have the privilege of believing.
This important department is rightly placed first in the volume we now, by
common consent, call the New Testament. The second department is a report of the
election of Matthias to fill the vacancy occasioned by the apostasy and fall of
Judas from the apostolic office, the supernatural endowment of the apostles,
their preaching, the first conversions and others afterward, the planting of
churches, setting them in order, etc. In this department the believer, who knows
not what to do to become a Christian, can learn that which is the first thing
before him and all-important to him--the way to God, to justification, or
remission of sins. After a man has found the way to God, and has become a
Christian, he needs a guide for his life and practice, as a Christian or a
disciple of Christ. In the third department, the letters of the inspired
apostles, he finds all this. These letters were all written to the saints, those
in Christ. Hence, there is not an effort to make a believer in one of them, nor
to show any one how to become a Christian. The entire matter of these letters is
to show those who are Christians how to perform their part well, as Christians,
that they may reach the heavenly Canaan. This is the book this world needs. We
need not pray to the Lord to make it what it is not, or to give it a power it
does not possess, thus offering insult to the author of it. He has made it what
he designed it to be, and, as it is, it is adapted to man as he is. Nor need we
pray to the Lord to make man something else than he is, till we give him the
Gospel. Give him, as he is, the Gospel as it is, as the power of God, to change
him and make him what he ought to be. This is the Lord’s way of working. He,
therefore, sent men to preach the Gospel to every creature; to all nations; to
turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God. Where they
went and preached, men were turned to God. Where the Gospel was not, in some
form, conveyed to the minds of men, they were never turned to God. The Bible is
the book for man, to make him a believer, show him how to become a Christian
after he is a believer, and how to serve the Lord after he is a Christian, and
make his way home to the eternal rest. This is the final aim of all the sincere.
How we should delight to talk of that final rest!--that home in the everlasting
city! and with what delight we should talk of the way leading to it, inquire all
about it, and try and make a sure work of finding it! This is the great matter.
It is like a man, sixty years of age, inquiring about Oregon, speaking of its
advantages, the health, climate, productions, etc. He appears never to grow
weary of talking on the theme. His whole countenance brightens every time the
subject comes up, and, as he enlarges on it, he becomes eloquent. He delights
even to talk of the way to that country, and has learned all the particulars
about the way. You feel amazed, and wonder why a man at his time of life should
be so much employed in thinking and talking of that country and the way to it;
but, after inquiring more particularly into the matter, you learn that his
father, some eighty-five years of age, has gone to that country, and still lives
there; that his precious mother, in her advanced years, is also there; that his
brothers and sisters have gone there; that his children have left him and gone
there. This furnishes a reason for his heart being there, and so much of his
conversation about that country, and the way to it. Finally, he tells you that
he is going there himself. This makes a full explanation of all his anxieties
and solicitudes about that country. Where are many of our fathers? Many of you
would answer, In Abraham’s bosom; in paradise; gone to rest. Where are many of
the precious mothers? Many of these also are gone to the same place of rest.
Where are many of your companions? They, too, are gone there. Where are many of
your brothers and sisters? You answer, Gone to the same place of repose. Where
are many of your precious children? They have followed. Do you remember how you
wept, grieved, and mourned as you committed their bodies to the graves? Can you
now live as if you had no thought of them, the state of rest to which they have
gone, or the certainty that you shall soon follow? Can you now live as if you
never thought of him who consecrated the way through the veil, and has, for us,
entered into the true holy place, with his own blood, to appear in the presence
of God for us? Can you live in this world with the certainty in view that you
might enter eternity any hour, and yet neither talk, act, or even think of that
state, the way leading to happiness, the loved ones gone, or him who died for
you? Do you say, "There is time enough yet." How do you know there is time
enough yet? How do you know how much time you will need? How do you know how
much time will be granted? These momentous matters are all in the dark. You have
not one ray of light on them. You are here now--hear the way of life pointed
out, and can come and walk in it. "Now is the accepted time," says the Lord.
"To-day, if you will hear his voice, harden not your hearts," is the reading in
the book of God. Will you hear his voice and live? Will you accept life and be
happy forever? or will you die in your sins and forever lament your folly? Be
entreated by your best friends, by the love of Christ, by the tender mercies of
our God, by all that is sacred, lovely and endearing, to turn to the Lord while
it is an accepted time and day of salvation. Commit your all into the gracious
and merciful hands of him who has loved you, endured the cross, despised the
shame, and laid down his life for you. He is your best friend, your only Savior
and Redeemer, and if, in madness, you turn away from him and dash the cup of
salvation from your lips, despise his goodness, love and mercy, you will lament
your folly forever. In one hour the whole scene may be changed with you--the
other side of the picture turned to your eye. Turn now, learn to love
righteousness and the God of righteousness; to love purity and holiness, the
pure and the holy, and the God of purity and holiness. Assimilate yourself to
the good, the true, the lovely and excellent of heaven and earth, and thus
prepare for the holy, the heavenly and sublime associations of the eternal
world. To God, who loved us, and to the Lamb that was slain for us, be the
glory, the dominion, the honor and power, forever and ever!


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 9: GP1 - 08-THE SIMPLICITY OF THE GOSPEL OF CHRIST
========================================================================

SERMON, No. VIII.

THEME.--THE SIMPLICITY OF THE GOSPEL OF CHRIST.

TEXT.--" . . . . . Wayfaring men, though fools, shall not err therein."--Isa
35:8.

THE Gospel of Christ was not intended by its Divine Author for a few learned or
wise men, but for "every creature," learned or unlearned, wise or foolish. That
which is intended for the people at large--the great mass of mankind--in the
nature of the case, must be simple, easy of comprehension, and applicable to the
people. It must be of such a nature that the people can lay hold of it without
long, deep, and profound research. This is evident from some scriptures now to
be introduced. Gal 1:8, Paul says, "Though we, or an angel from heaven, preach
to you any other Gospel than that which we have preached, let him be accursed.
As we said before, so even now I say again, if any one preaches to you any other
Gospel than that which you have received, let him be accursed." This is an
apostolic and divine anathema. It ought to be considered with great care. The
intention of it is to preserve the Gospel in its purity, as the Lord gave it,
without being mutilated or in any way perverted. It was intended for the eyes of
preachers of the Gospel, to make them feel the awful responsibility of handling
that Word which may not be mutilated, corrupted, or perverted by man or angel,
without incurring the curse of Heaven. In connection with this language of the
Apostle Paul, turn and read, near the close of the New Testament, "I testify to
every man that hears the words of the prophecy of this book, if any one add to
these things, God will add to him the plagues that are written in this book; and
if any one take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take
away his part from the tree of life, and from the holy city; which things are
written in this book." These utterances are full of meaning, and placed at the
close of the book to warn every one of the terrible doom of the man who shall
add anything to or take anything from this book. Is it claimed that this is
simply said of the Book of Revelation? That may be; but is it not equally true
of every part of the Book of God? May we add to the writings of Matthew, Mark,
Luke, Paul, Peter, James, and Jude, but not to the writings of John? By no
means. We may not add to anything the Lord has said, pervert it, corrupt it, or
preach any other Gospel. If we do, the curse of Heaven will fall on us. We
connect two more passages with these. The Lord says, "He who believes not shall
be condemned." Mark 16:16. Again: "He who believeth not the Son shall not see
life, but the wrath of God abides on him." John 3:36. Stop and think on the
awful import of these words. They need no explaining. Their clear and terrible
meaning is the first thing that strikes the attention of every one. He who
believes not the Gospel shall be condemned. He who preaches any other Gospel
shall be accursed. He who adds anything to it shall have the plagues recorded in
it added to him. He who shall take anything from it shall have his part taken
out of the book of life, and out of the holy city. The following conclusions
flow legitimately from these premises:

The Lord could not consistently condemn a preacher for preaching another Gospel,
perverting the true Gospel, adding to it or taking from it, if he had not made
it so easy of comprehension, clear and intelligible, that the preacher capable
of preaching at all can preach it as the Lord gave it, adding nothing to it,
taking nothing from it, neither perverting nor corrupting it. What he could not
do consistently, he could not do at all. It is, therefore, claimed that the
Gospel is thus plain, and that the curse of Heaven will fall on the man who
preaches any other Gospel, mutilates or corrupts the true one.

The Lord could not consistently condemn a man for not believing the Gospel, if
he had not made it sufficiently clear, intelligible, and credible, so that, by
treating the subject fairly, a man could believe it. It is claimed, therefore,
that the Gospel is thus clear, intelligible, and credible, and that the Lord
will condemn the man who does not believe it.

These deductions contain the theme for the balance of this discourse. Some man
objects and insists that the Gospel cannot be thus plain and intelligible, or we
would not have so many sorts of preachers, doctrines, and churches. These
different sorts of doctrines, preachers, and churches may present a difficulty
hard to explain, but furnish no refutation of the ground taken in reference to
the simplicity of the Gospel. It might turn out, on careful examination, that
these differences are not about the Gospel, or anything in it. No matter what
they are about, they do not prove that the Gospel is not clear and intelligible.
The prophet Isaiah considered the way plain, for he said, "The wayfaring men,
though fools, should not err therein." See Isa 35:8. Our Lord considered the way
to God plain, for he said, "They who seek shall find." See Mat 7:8. It is not
some man’s opinion that is here placed before you, nor some man’s comment. The
matter on which a man is to make up his mind is the clear and unequivocal
statements of Scripture. Are they true? Does he believe them? The prophet looks
down through seven hundred and fifty years, to the way to God, under the new
economy, and, in the most unequivocal manner, says, "The wayfaring men, though
fools, should not err therein." And the Lord, in emphatic terms, says, "They who
seek shall find." This ought to be an end of controversy, on all this protracted
seeking, to find the way to God, or how to become a Christian. "But," says a
man, "I have known many persons who have been seekers for years, and have not
found the Savior." Nothing of this kind can disprove the words of the prophet or
of Jesus. These words still stand true, and will till the day of judgment. The
Lord did not intend that men should find who would not regard his directions
where and how to find, but seek him where and in a way in which the Lord never
promised to be found. When a clear description is given, and full information
where and how anything may be found, and a man goes somewhere else and seeks it,
he ought not to be surprised if he does not find. But now the question comes up
for our consideration, whether it turned out as the prophet and the Lord said.
When the new and living way was opened up, and the door of the kingdom thrown
wide open, did sinners have protracted seeking and many of them fail to find the
way? Let us examine. At the opening of the kingdom, on the great Pentecost, the
people heard one discourse, and inquired, "What shall we do?" In one sentence
the apostle answered their question; told them what to do, so that they
understood him, did what he commanded, and the same day became Christians, and
entered into the kingdom. We find no account of a seeker going away seeking, or
a mourner going away mourning. Every man and woman who inquired the way, was
shown the way; told what to do to be accepted of the Lord, did it the same day,
and entered the new covenant. Thus the Gospel is easily understood and easily
obeyed. This fulfills the words of Jesus: "They who seek shall find." What a
wonderful contrast this case makes with much of the procedure in modern times!
They talk in some of these modern establishments, called churches, of
"Pentecostal occasions." But when did they ever have a vast number of
"mourners," "seekers," "inquirers," or "anxious persons" come to them,
inquiring, "What shall we do?" and proceed forthwith, in one single sentence, to
tell them what to do, so that they could do it the same day, and enter the
covenant and not a mourner left mourning, or a seeker go away seeking? They can
tell you how many anxious persons there were, how many "experienced a change,"
or how many were "hopefully converted," and, sometimes, how many were
"powerfully converted;" but a case where every one was shown the way to God,
what to do to obtain pardon, so that each one did it the same day, and entered
into the covenant with God, is what they cannot do. The plain truth is, they
have no plan of salvation; no definite, clear, and intelligible terms with which
a soul of the race can comply and become a Christian. It is as clear as sunbeams
that the apostles had definite, clear, and intelligible terms of salvation,
which they could place before men, with which they could forthwith comply and
come to the promise of pardon. Hence, when the three thousand inquired, "What
shall we do!" the apostle had an answer, which he could utter, in one single
sentence, definitely, clearly, and intelligibly informing them what to do, so
that they understood it, and did it the same day, and entered the kingdom of
God. Not a seeker went away seeking, nor a mourner went away mourning, nor a
single failure of any sort. If any man thinks this is making too much of a
single case, turn to the next case, in the apostolic practice--Acts 3:19 --and
find the directions there given, and see how many seekers went away seeking, and
he will find no account of a single case of the kind. In a single sentence, the
apostle told them what to do; they did it, and were immediately accepted. There
was not a single failure. There was no such thing as honest people, seriously
and earnestly trying to become Christians, and utterly failing. Turn to the
eighth chapter and follow the evangelist of Jesus Christ, and you find him
showing every man and woman that came to him what to do to come to the Lord, and
not a failure is made. Every sincere inquirer is told how to become a Christian,
shown how to enter into the covenant, on the first interview with the preacher.
Read on and examine the account of the preaching to the Ethiopian officer,
treasurer of Queen Candace, and, during the first interview, Philip points him
to the Lamb of God, shows him the way into the kingdom, receives him, and he
goes on his way rejoicing. This preacher had definite, clear, and intelligible
terms of pardon; presented them to the officer, who at once complied with them,
and was accepted of the Lord. The same was true in the case of young Saul, as
recorded in the ninth chapter of Acts. Ananias was sent to him to tell him what
he must do. As soon as he reached the room where he was, in the first sentence
he uttered he told him what he must do. It was definite, clear, and
intelligible. He rose forthwith, did what he was commanded, and was pardoned.
Though he was the chief of sinners, he did not have to wait a single day, but
rose at once and yielded himself to the divine commandment. Nor was there any
more delay when Peter, for the first time, appeared before the Gentiles. Though
they had never heard a Gospel sermon, the apostle laid the matter before them,
and showed them the way to God. They followed his instructions, turned to the
Lord and entered into the covenant at once, and rejoiced in the salvation of the
Lord. Not a seeker or mourner went away seeking or mourning, but every honest,
inquiring soul that desired it found the Lord. So it turned out in every
instance under the labors of the apostles and first evangelists. They never
failed, in any instance, to show the poor sinner the way to God, where he was
honestly inquiring. They never made a failure. Indeed, in that day, they did not
have any preachers who could not show a sinner the way to God. The Lord never
called or sent any man to preach who could not, or would not, set forth the
terms of pardon. In one round sentence, from the opening of the kingdom on
Pentecost, to the final amen of the Apocalypse, there is not an intimation of a
single instance in which any sincere person was sent away seeking, or in which
the preacher had to see the person the second time to show the way of salvation.
In every instance, a sincere person, honestly desiring to become a Christian,
was told what to do at once. The protracted seeking, and the numerous failures
to find, of our time, are wholly unknown to the Scriptures. In contrast with
this, how stands the matter in modern times? A protracted meeting commences, or,
more popularly, a revival. Preaching, praying, exhorting, and singing are all
brought to bear. The Lord created man with religious faculties. In such revivals
these religious faculties become roused, and persons rush forward as "seekers,"
"inquirers," or "mourners." They cry out, "What shall we do?" The apostolic
answer is entirely ignored. Not a word is said about it. The sinner is
encouraged, by telling him, "They that seek shall find," and "They that mourn
shall be comforted." He is exhorted to pray, to give up his whole heart, to keep
back nothing. In the prayers, the Lord is entreated to "come now," "come right
down," to "come with converting power," etc. The honest seeker, to the best of
his ability, unites in these prayers, and is expecting an immediate power from
God to perform a miraculous change in him, and make him a Christian. All the
preaching, exhorting, praying, and singing lead him to expect this. It may be
that some persons less sedate, thoughtful, and considerate, but more frivolous,
wild, and rollicking, rise and speak of having "experienced a change," and
"received a hope." The others, more solid, grave, and sober-minded, looked for
the Lord to come, but knew nothing of his coming; looked for a miraculous
change, but none came; tried to get a hope, but got none. They "experienced"
nothing but a sad disappointment. The preacher is now fully out at sea. He goes
not to his Bible, but proceeds to encourage them, by telling how long he, or
some one else, was a seeker; that the Lord has his own good time for doing his
work; that they are probably keeping back something; that they have not given up
the whole heart, or, in other words, that they have not been honest in the
matter. They know they are sincere in the matter, and willing to humble
themselves, or do anything to please God, and return again the next night.
Similar prayers are offered, and the exercises much the same as before. Thus
thousands of persons, as sincere as the world contains, have been kept going and
going, seeking and seeking, mourning and grieving, night after night, and week
after week, and, in some instances, year after year, and found nothing. They
have been disappointed and deceived in that which was dearer to them than all
things besides! Who is to blame for all this? Not the Gospel, for it has its
definite, clear, simple, and intelligible directions to the sinner, or
conditions on which the Lord promises pardon. No uncertain sound in it. Not
these sincere, inquiring persons, for they heard the preacher, and did every
thing he told them to do. Who, then, is to blame for this wonderful failure? The
preachers, who had the New Testament lying before them, and the apostolic
directions to sinners, and would not follow these directions. These are the men
who are responsible, and will be held responsible in the day of judgment. An
awful responsibility it will be, too. It is difficult to conceive how a man can
incur a greater responsibility than to misguide the sincere, the candid, and
honest; deceive them and utterly disappoint them in their efforts to find the
way to God. What a responsibility has been incurred in this matter. The whole
country abounds with men and women as sincere, candid, and honest as can be
found on earth, who have been seekers, mourners, done every thing the preachers
told them to do as faithfully as human beings could, and continued an
astonishing length of time, and found nothing; demonstrated this system to be a
failure. They know they have been disappointed, deceived, deluded. They have, in
many instances, turned away in utter disgust, became hardened and abandoned
sinners. Many of them have abandoned all churches, all preaching, and are out at
sea without chart or compass. This modern, dark, gloomy, and unintelligible
system of seeking without inquiring of the Lord, in his clear, definite, and
intelligible instructions, where he will be found, and where he has promised the
salvation of the soul from sin, is responsible for all this. There never was a
failure in the Lord’s plan. The failure is in men, who either do not know the
Lord’s plan, or will not practice it. There can be no excuse in the case. In the
nature of the case, the Lord would not make the way of salvation so dark,
mystical, and difficult that honest and sincere people could not find it, and
then condemn them for not finding it. The very idea of men and women entering an
institution, and then not knowing how to show other people the way in, is
utterly ridiculous. There is, probably, no institution into which men and women
have entered, in this world, and could not show others the way in, except some
of the dark, misty, and foggy systems of religion. Men and women get into these,
and cannot tell how they got in, or how another person can get in! This is
confusion worse confounded, darkness that may be felt. There is nothing clearer
to the man acquainted with the New Testament than that, in the time of the
apostles, any person who desired to be a Christian could forthwith turn to God
and enter the covenant. No such thing is known to the Scriptures as persons
desiring to become Christians, and seeking to do so, but could not. This is
implied by all the invitations of the Gospel. Whoever will, let him take of the
water of life freely, is the very spirit of the Gospel. Thousands of these
modern seekers die seeking, without even the imagination that they have found
pardon. This is not the way of the Lord, nor even a wise human device, but one
of the weakest, most mischievous deceptions and extensive failures ever known.
Thousands of people, in all directions, need go to no man to tell them, to no
preacher nor private person, for they have tried it, and know for themselves
that they have tried honestly, and found nothing. They know what sort of
promises were made to them, encouragements held out and advices were given, and
they know that they have received nothing; that they have been utterly
disappointed, misled, and deceived. This much is not a matter of opinion with
them, but of personal knowledge. They know it. The injury done to these is
incalculable. In numerous instances the injury can never be mended. Many will go
no farther, but put all religion and the Bible itself on the same footing, and
never again have any confidence in religious instruction. But some man is saying
by this time, If the Gospel is such a plain matter, or if you have anything
clearer, plainer, or more intelligible than what we have tried, let us have it.
To this, attention shall now be given. Beginning, then, at the starting point,
what must a man believe? "Many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of
his disciples, which are not written in this book; but these are written that
you might believe that Jesus is the Christ the Son of God, and that believing
you might have life through his name." See John 20:30-31. As Philip was
preaching Jesus to the Ethiopian officer, they came to a certain water, and the
officer said, "See, here is water; what hinders me from being immersed?" The
reply of the evangelist was, "If you believe with all your heart, you may." He
said, "I believe that Jesus is the Christ the Son of God." See Acts 8:37. Paul
says, "If you will confess with your mouth, that Jesus is Lord, and will believe
in your heart that God has raised him from the dead, you shall be saved." These
plain Scriptures show beyond controversy what a man must believe to become a
Christian. He is not required to believe this creed, that creed, or the other
creed; the thirty-nine articles of one, nor the twenty-five articles of another;
the Westminster, nor the Philadelphia Confession; this theory, that theory, or
the other theory; but the truth concerning the living, ascended, exalted, and
glorified Jesus, who has gone into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the
throne of the Majesty in the heavens, far above all principality, and power, and
might, and dominion, and every name in heaven and on earth. The faith of a
Christian does not center in a few articles of opinion, drawn up by a few
uninspired men, setting forth the difference between their opinions and the
opinions of some other uninspired men, but in the ever-living person of our Lord
Jesus the Christ. This explains how it was that so many heard the Gospel and
believed to the salvation of their souls in a single day. They believed on a
person, the glorious person of the Messiah. They could hear of him and believe
on him in a single day, and become ready to place themselves under him, ready to
be taught by him and follow him. But a man complains that he cannot tell what
repentance is; that the preachers refer to lexicons and learned authorities, and
he cannot tell what is right. There are but few men who have not already a
pretty good idea what repentance is. This can be easily demonstrated. Suppose a
man should be immersed and unite with a church, but, in a very short time, be
seen reeling from intoxication, using profane and obscene language; what would
men of the world say of him? They would, without hesitation, say he never
repented. How do they know, if they do not know what repentance is? The truth
is, they know what repentance is, or, at least, the fruits that ought to proceed
from it. They understand that it ought to be such a change, in some way, whether
they can describe it or not, as will result in a good life in time to come. This
is true; it is such a change of mind as will result in a good life. No matter
whether you know the learned definitions or not, nor whether you can explain
precisely how the change is; you know it must be such a change in a man as will
result in a good life. If the good life does not follow--no matter how much a
man tells of wonderful changes, feelings, and emotions within him; of great
heart-work, experience, and joys--nobody believes he has truly repented. No man
in our day will have much confidence in any great work of grace within a man,
while there is no change without. This shows that there is a pretty correct
understanding what repentance is; that it is a change in the mind sufficient to
change the life. If a man is traveling for some city, but on a wrong road, he
will not turn and take another road till he is convinced that he is going a
wrong road--till his mind is changed in regard to the road; nor will any
intelligent man believe there is much change in his mind so long as he persists
in traveling on the wrong road. But when he turns and earnestly pursues another
road, all admit that there is a change in his mind. So, when the sinner turns
from his sins and travels another road, there is no doubt about the change in
his mind. But it is objected that one preacher says immersion is baptism;
another, sprinkling; and another, pouring; and they resort to lexicons,
translations, historians, Greek, Latin, and Hebrew; and in the midst of all
this, says a man, "I cannot determine what is baptism." At first sight, this has
the appearance of a considerable perplexity; but there is an easy way of
righting all this, to which we will now resort. Dismiss from your mind all new
translations; trouble yourself no more about lexicons; turn your ear, for the
present, away from all histories, except the Bible; nor shall you be troubled
with one word from Greek, Latin, or Hebrew; you may throw aside the word
"immerse." Now, will you hear the common version of King James? "I will," says a
reader. All right. To the common version, then, we go. Where, then, in the
common version do we read of sprinkling for baptism? Do we not read that the
Holy Spirit was "shed forth?" We do; but "shed forth" is not sprinkled. And if
it were, it would be the Holy Spirit that was sprinkled, not water; nor is there
anything about baptism in it. There is no sprinkling for baptism in the common
version, nor any other. Where, then, do you find pouring for baptism in the
common version? We read that "the Holy Spirit was poured out." True, but
"poured" there does not mean baptized, or the Holy Spirit was baptized, for the
Holy Spirit was "poured out." This pouring was not baptizing. You can find both
sprinkling and pouring in the common version, but that is not baptizing, nor is
either word used in the sense of that institution, nor for baptism. Now, be
careful and note down what you do find in the common version. What was the
element used in baptizing? When the Lord was baptized, he "went up straightway
out of the water." See Mat 3:16. This points to water as the element. "John was
baptizing in Enon, near Salem, because there was much water there." John 3:23.
This also points to water as the element. Philip "came to a certain water." Acts
8:36. The officer said, "See, here is water," and "they both went down into the
water" (verse 38), and "came up out of the water" (verse 39). Peter said, "Can
any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized?" Acts 10:47. These all
point to the same element--water. This much is then settled. What is the next
thing to inquire about? The quantity of the element used. Is there anything
about this? Why was John baptizing in Enon, near Salem? "Because there was much
water there." See John 3:23. Is there anything in the common version about where
they found the water? Is there anything about bringing water to baptize?
Nothing. Is there anything said about having the water in a bowl or any similar
vessel? Not a word. Do we find anything about baptizing in a room, or in a
house? Not a word. They were baptized of John in Jordan, as we learn (John 3:6);
"in the river of Jordan" (Mark 1:6); in Enon (John 3:26). As Philip and the
officer went on their way, "they came unto a certain water." This shows where
they found the water. They found it in its native place. It was not brought to
them; they went to it. As all the surroundings throw some light on the subject,
it will be proper to inquire what they did just previous to baptizing. Philip
and the officer "came unto a certain water." See Acts 8:36. Where did that place
them? Certainly, at it. What next? "They both went down into the water" (verse
38). But our preacher explains "into" there to mean at or near by. You have
forgot that we are to stand by the common version. It says, "they came unto a
certain water;" that is, to it, or at it. They then "went down into the water,"
both Philip and the eunuch. Down into the water means more than at it. Down into
it gets the person in the right element and place, ready for baptizing; "and he
baptized him." How was that done? What did the evangelist do to the candidate?
Paul says, Col 2:12, "you are buried with him in baptism." That is a plain
transaction. Any man, learned or unlearned, can tell when that is done. Rom 6:4,
he says "we are buried with him by baptism." Any person can tell whether that is
done or not, if he is an eye-witness. What followed after baptizing? Philip and
the eunuch "came up out of the water." That was a plain affair. Any person will
readily see how that was done. What resulted from the baptizing? The body was
washed. See Heb 10:22. In sprinkling or pouring water on a candidate for
baptism, the following items are out of place:

They do not generally find the water in its native place.

They do not go where there is much water.

They do not generally "come unto a certain," but have a little water brought
unto them.

They do not generally go down into the water.

They do not bury in baptism.

They do not come up out of the water.

The body is not washed with water.

Those who immerse go unto the water, where there is muchwater, down into the
water, bury in baptism, come up out of the water, and the body is washed with
water. When this is done, the controversy about the action of baptism in the
mind and conduct of the candidate is at an end. The conscience is at rest, and
no further doubt remains in regard to it. This is not the case when sprinkling
or pouring is used as baptism. Here the mind is continually unsettled, specially
if the party reads or hears anything on immersion. The plainness of the New
Testament on this subject is such that, if any person follows its simple
teaching, taking the obvious sense, there will never be any doubt left to harass
and make the conscientious person unhappy. This is sufficient for any one
honestly striving to do the will of God. If the heart is right in the sight of
God, under the power of the faith of Christ, the belief with all the heart that
Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God, and the repentance strong enough
to result in a future good life, when the subject is "buried in baptism," there
will be no further fears, doubts, or scruples about the action of baptism. Some
one responds, "Even admitting that the action is plain, the preachers differ
about the design, and I know not how to settle the point." That is also settled
in the New Testament as clearly as any other thing can be or ever has been. All
we have to do is honestly to give up to, and be instructed wholly by the
inspired Scriptures. Start anew, as if you had never heard one word on the
subject, and inquire what the will of the Lord is. Consider the following:

Rom 6:3, we read of being "immersed into Christ Jesus." Gal 3:27, we read of
being "immersed into Christ." What is immersion into Christ equivalent to?
Though nothing but immersion is mentioned here as the act in which persons are
transferred into Christ, it is not immersion alone, or immersion without its
proper antecedents, viz., faith and repentance. Without faith and repentance, no
person is a proper subject for baptism or at all fit for the sacred rite. This
is what is here meant by "the proper antecedents." What is meant by the words
"into Christ?" The meaning is, into the Church; into union, communion, and
fellowship with Christ; into the kingdom; into the possession and enjoyment of
all its rights, privileges, hopes, and enjoyments. In amount, it is the same as
into remission of sins; into justification or reconciliation; for the man "in
Christ" is pardoned, justified, and reconciled. He is adopted into the heavenly
family. Baptism is, then, the last step, or the consummating act, in entering
the kingdom.

Take another passage: "Unless a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he
cannot enter into the kingdom of God." John 3:5. That "born of water" is a
figurative expression for baptism, is admitted by all the authorities of note,
and known to every man who has even a tolerable knowledge of religious
literature. That Luther, Calvin, and Wesley so understood it and so commented on
it, is an undeniable matter of fact. That this passage is quoted and applied to
baptism in the Episcopalian Prayer Book, the Presbyterian Confession of Faith,
and Methodist Discipline, any one can see by referring to those books. What is
the amount of entering into the kingdom of God? It is the same as entering into
the Church of Christ, or into remission of sins or state of justification; for
every one in the kingdom is in the Church, in Christ, pardoned, justified. Here
the Lord then connects it with the work of the Spirit; for "born of the Spirit"
is simply made a believer; or "begotten by the word of truth," or "through the
Gospel," the words of the Spirit. "Born of the Spirit" is made a believer, and
"born of water" is baptism. The Lord, therefore, connects the work of the
Spirit, in making a believer, and baptism together, and thus declares that,
"unless a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the
kingdom of God." So it stood then, and so it ought to be now.

This is the same in substance as the commission--Mark 16:16 --"He that believes
and is immersed shall be saved." Here we have the literal words, "believe" and
"immerse," instead of the figurative words, "born of water and of the Spirit,"
and connecting the same two things, belief and immersion, together in order to
the same end. Find out what the faith is for, in this sentence, or what it is in
order to, and you find out what the immersion is for, or is in order to. The
same connection that shows what one is in order to, shows what the other is in
order to. They are both in order to salvation. Let us discriminate, the
salvation here spoken of is not the eternal salvation; for many men believe, and
are immersed, who go away into sin and never obtain the eternal salvation. It is
pardon--an immediate salvation from sin. He that believes and is immersed shall
be pardoned. This is the same in substance as the other passages consulted; for
saved or pardoned implies "in Christ," or "in the Church," or kingdom; for all
who are saved are in Christ, in the Church, in the kingdom.

Acts 2:38 is the same in substance: "Repent and be immersed every one of you, in
the name of Jesus Christ, in order to the remission of sins, and you shall
receive the gift of the Holy Spirit." "In order to the remission of sins," or
"into the remission of sins," is the same in amount as into justification, into
reconciliation, or into Christ; for all who have remission of sins are
justified, are in Christ, in the Church, in the kingdom, having been immersed
into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. This is the
reason why we have the words in the commission: "Immersing them into the name of
the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit." It is into the new state or
relation, union with the Father, union with the Son, and union with the Holy
Spirit, which, in substance, is the same as in Christ, in the Church, in the
kingdom; for all who are immersed into the name of the Father, and of the Son,
and of the Holy Spirit, are in Christ, in the Church, in the kingdom, or they
are pardoned and adopted.

"Immersed into one body"--1Co 12:13 --is the same in substance, for all in the
"one body" are in the kingdom, pardoned, justified. All these passages show that
immersion is the initiatory rite, the act in which the transfer is made "into
Christ," "into one body," "into the kingdom of God," "into remission of sins,"
"into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit," amounting
to the same as into a state of justification. In the act of believing, the
sinner is only prepared in his heart for the transfer into the one body, or into
the kingdom, but not actually transferred. In the act of repenting, the sinner
is prepared only in his life or character for the transfer into one body, into
the kingdom, or into remission of sins, but not actually transferred. But in the
act of immersion the penitent, whose heart has been prepared for the transfer
into the new state by faith, and whose life has been prepared for the transfer
by repentance, is, in truth and in fact, transferred "into Christ," "into one
body," "into the kingdom of God," "into the remission of sins," "into the name
of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost."

You, therefore, never read of believing into one body, repenting into one body,
or praying into one body. The reason is that, by the acts of believing,
repenting, praying or communion, no one is transferred into the one body.
Believing, repenting, praying, communion, etc., are all right, and must be in
their place; but no one of them is the initiatory rite, or the act in which the
transfer into the new state or relation is made. Believing goes before the
transfer, and prepares the sinner, in heart, for the transfer. Repentance goes
before the transfer, and prepares the sinner, in life, for the transfer. Praying
and communion, singing and rejoicing, are acts of devotion for those already
transferred, or those in the one body--in the kingdom. Immersion is the act in
which the transfer is made. Hence, persons are "immersed into one body," "into
the remission of sins," "into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the
Holy Spirit;" but they are never said to "believe into one body," "into the
remission of sins," or "into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the
Holy Spirit." This accounts for another thing, viz.: that we are to be immersed
but once. If immersion were in the Church, if it were a "religious duty," a
"Church ordinance," a "Christian duty," there would be set times when it should
be performed, as the communion, again and again. But this is not the case. By
common consent, all agree that it is never to be repeated. The reason of this
is, we enter into the one body, or kingdom, but once. The act or rite in which
we are transferred into the new state is never repeated, because we never enter
into Christ, into the body or name, but once. The rite or act in which we enter
is, therefore, never needed but once. If any one of our readers is still
troubled about the design of immersion, please turn to the words, "Repent and be
immersed," and leave the word immerse out for the time being, and read the
passage without it, and see if you can determine what repentance is for or in
order to. No doubt, you will find the design of it in an instant. Thus read it
now and look at it: "Repent every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ, in
order to the remission of sins." What is the repentance in order to? You answer,
"In order to the remission of sins." Now, leave out the word "repent," and read
again. The same words that told what repentance was in order to, will now tell
what immersion is in order to. It will then read, "Be immersed, every one of
you, in the name of Jesus Christ, in order to the remission of sins." Then,
certainly, when you have both repentance and immersion, the same connecting
words tell what they both stand for or in order to. If you desire to examine the
matter in the simplest form possible, turn to the commission--Mark 16:16 --and
try it in the same manner. Let us see if we can learn what faith or believing is
in order to or for. To this end we will read the passage without the words "and
be immersed," so as to keep the eye on believing and find out precisely the
design of it. It will then read, "He that believeth shall be saved." What is the
believing for or in order to? To being saved. Now let us read the passage
without the word "believeth," and inserting the words omitted before, and the
same words that told what believing is for will tell what immersion is for. It
will then read, "He that is immersed shall be saved." What is the immersion in
order to or for? To being saved. When believing and being immersed are both
inserted, as the Lord arranged them, the words that tell what each is for,
separately, tell with as much accuracy what both are for when used together. In
the same sentence, in the same words, the Lord tells what both believing and
being immersed are in order to or for. They are both in order to salvation. In
the same way, the apostle--Acts 2:38 --in the same sentence, in precisely the
same words, tells us what repentance and immersion are in order to. They are two
steps in the same divine process, in order to the same end--pardon or
justification. "I should not know," says a man, "what church to join, if I
should concede that all is plain thus far." There need be no trouble about that.
Follow out the Scriptures that have been brought to your view, obey the Gospel,
and thus enter the Church of Christ, and then unite with the most convenient
congregation of the members you can find, and remain with them till you die. You
ought not to belong to any other body, or kingdom, than the body of Christ. "But
how would I decide what creed to adopt?" There need be no trouble about this.
All parties agree that the creed the nearest like the Bible is the nearest
right. The reason of this is, that the Bible is right. Then, if the creed the
nearest like the Bible is the nearest right, and will do at all, because it is
so near right, the Bible itself, which is precisely right, will do! If it is
safe to adopt a creed nearly like the Bible, and consequently nearly right, it
is infallibly safe to adopt the Bible, which is precisely right. "But I cannot
understand the whole Bible." No matter if you cannot understand half of it.
There is not one ray of light from heaven for the children of men, except what
comes from the Bible. What understanding you have of the Bible, or what light
you have received from it, directly and indirectly, is all the light you have
shining along your pathway to the skies; and what light you shall, directly and
indirectly, derive from the same divine source, is all the light you will ever
have to guide you to the everlasting city. "But why did not somebody among the
great men, good and true, who have lived in the last three hundred years, find
out these things and adopt the Bible as their only guide," says one, "before our
time?" It would be hard to tell why. It is hard to tell why the art of printing
was not discovered till a modern date; why they did not make gunpowder at an
earlier day, or in some other country; why the wisdom of the world failed to
apply steam-power before the year 1800; and why railroads and telegraphs were
never brought into use till our day. It would be equally hard to give the reason
why a thousand other things were not discovered sooner. Why did not some mighty
reformer rise before Luther, in Germany; before Calvin, in France; or Wesley, in
England? The human mind is so constituted that it cannot bound from the depths
of Romish darkness and, at one single leap, reach the full-orbed light of
apostolic times in religious matters. It required many efforts, in different
parts of the world, to reach the grand consummation. The truth is, at times, men
did appear to see the ground, but they did not find strength to stand up to it
and maintain it. Chillingworth is probably the author of the sublime
declaration: "The Bible, and the Bible alone, is the religion of Protestants."
But neither he, nor his friends who admired his statement, appeared to
appreciate what was contained in it. John Wesley said, commending his General
Rules for his "societies," as he styled the little parties with which he first
commenced holding meetings for prayers, for a deeper work of grace, "most of
which we are taught of God to observe, even in his written word, which is the
sufficient rule and the infallible rule both for our faith and practice." In the
Methodist Discipline, the Presbyterian Confession of Faith, and the Episcopalian
Prayer Book, we have the following: "The Holy Scriptures contain all things
necessary for salvation, so that whatever is not read therein, or may not be
proved thereby, is not to be required of any man that it should be believed as
an article of faith or thought necessary to salvation." On the fifth page of
Wesley’s Notes to his new translation of the New Testament, he says: "Would to
God that all party names were forgot, and that we, as humble, loving disciples,
might sit down together at the Master’s feet, read his Holy Word, imbibe his
Spirit, and transcribe his life in our own." Numerous utterances of this
description are found in the writings of the most distinguished men who lived
from one to two hundred and fifty years ago. The quotations just made are from
memory, and may not be precisely word for word, but are, in substance, correct.
Will you please hear Paul on the same subject? "All Scripture is given by
inspiration of God, and is profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction,
for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly
furnished for every good work."--2Ti 3:16. What more can the man of God need
than the teaching, reproof, correction, and instruction in righteousness, thus
being thoroughly furnished for every good work. Thus has our kind heavenly
Father fitted his children to serve him and prepare themselves for glory and
honor. What an act of rebellion it is, on the part of any man or set of men, to
assume that the law of God is not sufficient for the government of the saints,
and to guide them to peace and happiness, and assume that uninspired men can
make a law sufficient for this purpose, and undertake to do it! Yet, this is
done in every instance where a human creed is imposed on men for their
government or guide. In this great matter of man’s salvation, there should be no
risks taken, no experiments made, no trifling. Each person has but the one life
to live in this state, but one soul to be saved or lost, but one heaven to be
gained or missed, and there should be no uncertainty in the matter. Our heavenly
Father has made a will; and if he has not set out the matter in his will, told
us how to gain the inheritance, then no one can tell us how. If he has not given
us instructions to guide us to glory and honor, no man can give us instructions.
When his Son, our Lord, Emanuel, God with us, was transfigured in the presence
of three of his disciples as witnesses, the Jehovah said, "This is my Son, the
Beloved, in whom I am well pleased; hear you him." This commandment, to "hear
him," can be carried out in no way but by adhering to what he has authorized to
be said, as we find it recorded in Scripture. He says himself, "I am the way,
the truth and the life; no man comes to the Father but by me." Again he says, "I
if I be lifted up, will draw all men to me." The time has now come, in the good
providence of God, when the teaching of our Lord and his apostles is to be
separated from the teachings and commandments of men, and when our Lord Jesus
the Christ is to be held up and an effort made to draw all men to him. Those for
him, his Gospel, his teaching, and that of his apostles, are now calling for his
friends to come out, stand by him, and rally to his standard, maintain his
Gospel and teaching, take on them his name, and stand up for every thing as it
came from him and his inspired apostles. If he is not an infallible guide, there
is no infallible guide. If the teaching of Jesus and his apostles is not
infallibly safe, then there is no safe teaching. If it will not guide us to
heaven and eternal felicity, then there is no teaching that will guide us there.
Take, then, the teaching, the divine and infallible teaching of Jesus and the
apostles, read it, fill your memory with it, cherish it in your heart, meditate
on it, delight in it, love it, and follow it with your whole mind and strength,
and it will guide you peacefully, joyfully, and happily home to the haven of
everlasting rest. Commend this teaching to your children, and children’s
children, that they may love and follow it when you are gone to rest. Commend it
to the world around you, and exhort them to transmit it from generation to
generation till it shall reach the last child that shall be born of our race. It
is our only source of instruction in the way of life. Directly and indirectly,
all our light must come from it. Thus we have shown, by many infallible proofs,
that the way to God is plain--so plain, so simple, so easily understood, that no
one need err. All truth in religion lies within the Bible. When it is our guide
in religious matters, we are sure of being right, and need not err. It is our
creed to be believed, our chart to guide our lives. It contains the assurance of
pardon, justification, sanctification, and redemption. In the end, the promise
of a glorious resurrection and life eternal beyond the grave. To him that loved
us and washed us from our sins in his own blood, and made us priests to our God,
be honor and power everlasting.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 10: GP1 - 09-THE TWO COVENANTS
========================================================================

SERMON, No. IX.

THEME.--THE TWO COVENANTS.

TEXT.--"Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant
with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah."--Jer 31:31.

ALL who talk on the matters of the Bible at all use such terms as "first
covenant" and "second covenant," "new covenant" and "old covenant," "new
testament" and "old testament, "new institution" and "old institution," a
"better covenant;" which last implies one not so good. In the use of those
terms, we have Moses on one side and Jesus on the other; the law on the one hand
and the Gospel on the other; the letter on the one hand and the spirit on the
other. We cannot talk on the matters of the Bible without the use of these
terms. The ideas contained in these terms run through the entire revelation from
God to man, and, whether men understand them or not, they are continually using
the terms. Why the King James translators have given us the word "covenant" in
the eighth chapter of Hebrews, and "testament" in the ninth chapter, is
difficult to conceive, unless it was to darken counsel; for, in the original, we
have the same word (diatheke) in both chapters, to express precisely the same
thing, or used in the same sense. The mere English reader must see, as soon as
the suggestion is made, the "covenant" of the eighth chapter is the same as the
"testament" of the ninth. It is not a matter of serious consequence whether you
translate the original Greek word diatheke covenant or testament, but certainly
it should be translated by the same word in both chapters, as the same thing is
meant in both. By these terms, we have two institutions constantly brought to
view--the old and new. The old was by Moses and the new is by Jesus; hence,
Moses represents the one and Jesus the other. The law sometimes stands for the
one and the Gospel for the other; the letter, in some cases, stands for the one
and the spirit for the other; the old covenant, in some cases, stands for the
one and the new covenant for the other; the old testament, in some instances,
stands for the one and the new testament for the other. No matter which of these
representative terms is used, on either side, the same thing is meant. One is
the old dispensation and the other the new; the old institution and the new--the
former by Moses and the latter by Jesus. It then becomes a matter of
transcendent importance to determine distinctly, all the time, what belongs to
the old institution and what to the new; what belongs to the better covenant and
what belongs to the best--to determine where the one terminates and the other
begins. It is hoped that some of these things will be settled clearly and
thoroughly in this discourse. During the past hundred years the world has been
furnished with some speculations touching! the matters here introduced. It would
be uncourteous to pass all these speculations in silence, therefore a respectful
attention shall be given some of them. One of them starts out as follows: "God
made a covenant with Abraham, and that covenant has been perpetuated to the
present time, and is the Gospel covenant." The arguments to sustain this theory
are styled "arguments to prove the identity of the covenant." What is meant by
"identity of the covenant?" "Identity" is not similarity. Two things may be
similar, but cannot be identical. To be identical, it must be the same thing,
not two things. It is, therefore, nonsense, to talk of the identity of the
covenants, or the two covenants. There must be no two in the case, but the one
identical same covenant, made with Abraham, perpetuated through the Mosaic and
Christian institutions. But it would be well, before going farther, to inquire
into the importance of sustaining this theory of the identity of the covenant.
What is to be gained by it? One replies that "there were infants in the
Abrahamic covenant, and, if proved that the same covenant has been perpetuated
to the present time, and is the Gospel covenant, infant church-membership is
sustained." If that is the purpose, it would be well enough to look into the
matter a little closely and see if it is right.

If the covenant made with Abraham is the Gospel covenant, then neither we nor
our children are in it; and that is not the worst--we cannot get into it.Gen
17:13, the Lord describes the only classes in that covenant.

"He that is born in thy house."

"He that is bought with thy money."

We cannot come in under either of those heads. We were not born in Abraham’s
house or family, and cannot be, neither ourselves nor our children. We were not,
neither we nor our children, bought with Abraham’s money, and cannot be. We can
come in under neither of these heads. If this is the Gospel covenant, both
ourselves and children are forever excluded from it. Do you reply that there
were two covenants made with Abraham, and that the reference has been made to
the wrong covenant. The covenant referred to is the one having infants in it,
and, if you abandon that, you find no infants. It is the one to which you must
go to find both infants and circumcision. Your dilemma is this: If you go to
that covenant, you find that we are excluded by the description of the only two
classes in it; that we were not, and our children were not born in Abraham’s
family, nor purchased with his money. If you abandon that covenant, you find no
infants nor circumcision. In either case, you are completely defeated and your
argument ruined.

Jeremiah, standing thirteen hundred and fifty-one years this side of the time
when the Lord made that covenant with Abraham, and, looking forward, says,
"Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the
house of Israel and with the house of Judah." Now, it is no matter how many
covenants men talk of; nor what they call them--whether Adamic, Abrahamic, or
Mosaic--before Jeremiah spoke, for he points forward to a covenant which the
Lord says "I will make," and not to one which I have made, with Adam, Abraham,
Moses, or any body else. But how do you know the prophet was speaking of the
Gospel covenant? Because Paul quotes his language--Heb 8:8-13 --and applies it
to the Gospel, showing that the Gospel itself is that new covenant that the Lord
said "I will make." Instead of this new covenant, the Gospel, which the Lord
said "I will make," the old covenant of circumcision, which he had made, the
Lord most explicitly states that "it shall not be according to that old
covenant." After a few minutes, it will be necessary to return to the language
of Jeremiah again.

Another beautiful theory starts out as follows: "The Lord established a church
in the time of Abraham, and that church has been perpetuated down through all
the generations and dispensations to the present time, and is now the Gospel
Church, or Church of Christ." You inquire: Suppose all that is so; what of it?
He replies: "There were infants in that church that God established in the time
of Abraham, and if I can show that the same church has been perpetuated to the
present time, and is now the Gospel Church, then there are infants in it now."
Arguments to prove this are styled arguments on the identity of the Church. What
do you intend to do with this argument? says one. It must be shown that it is
without the shadow of foundation. How can that be done? As follows:

There was no church established in the time of Abraham, nor was there any church
in existence at that time. There was no church in the world at the time of
Abraham, and there had been none from the beginning of time. There need be no
angry feeling nor disputing about what is here said. The statements just made
are in regard to a plain matter of fact. It depends on no speculation. If there
was any church--Adamic, Abrahamic, Mosaic, or any other--in the time of Abraham,
turn to the account of it and read it. There is not one word about any church in
the world during the first twenty-five hundred years. The only worship in the
world was family worship. The head of the family was the prophet, priest, and
ruler. It is outside of the range of all reason and argument to permit men to
assume that there was a church in the time of Abraham, and then assume that
there were infants in it, and then assume that the Church then and now is the
same Church, and, on those three assumptions to found a positive divine
institution. You may then dismiss from your mind all idea of any Abrahamic
church, with or without infants in it, and give yourself no more trouble about
its identity with the Church of God now. Find an account of any church at all in
the time of Abraham before you trouble yourself about its identity or similarity
with anything. The nation of Israel in the wilderness--Acts 7:38 --is called
"the church in the. wilderness," in the common version, but by the Bible union,
"the congregation in the wilderness." This congregation in the wilderness
certainly is not identical with the Church now, nor similar.

The Lord said, after he had entered on his public ministry--Mat 16:18 --"On this
rock I will build my church." Notice, he does not say have built, but will
build. This does not refer to an event past, but future. It does not refer to a
church built in the time of Adam, Abraham, or Moses, or to one built any time
before the Lord came into the world, but to one which the Lord said "I will
build." As certain as this language is true, the church, or community,
established by the Savior was not built or established when the Lord uttered the
words "I will build my church."

Paul says--Eph 2:14-18 --"For he is our peace, who made both one, and broke down
the middle wall of partition; having abolished in his flesh the enmity, the law
of commandments contained in ordinances, that he might make the two one new man
in himself, making peace; and might reconcile both to God in one body by the
cross, having slain the enmity thereby." What is the Lord represented as doing
here? As making one--making one new man. The word "man" here is used
figuratively. What does it stand for? For the body, community, or church which
Christ established. Then, it will make sense to insert the word church instead
of the word "man." What did the Lord then make of the two?--"one new church." It
was not, then, the continuation of one old church, but the making of one new
church. This ought to end all idea of the perpetuation of an old church, and
turn our attention to the one new church, which the Lord said "I will build,"
and which he did build.

To whom did Peter preach his first discourse after the Holy Spirit came on him
and his fellow-apostles, to guide them into all truth? Certainly, to members of
the old church, or Jews. They were all in the old, or the Jewish church, before
he preached a word. What became of them after they heard Peter and gave
themselves to Christ? The history says, "There were, the same day, about three
thousand added to them." Added to whom? To the same old church to which they
already belonged? By no means; but to the apostles and the one hundred and
twenty brethren--the "one new man," or church, which the Lord said "I will
build," and which he founded on the day of Pentecost. These were in the old
church before they heard one word from Peter; were taken out of it and added to
them--the apostles and brethren, or the new church.

But now attention must be given more minutely to the language of the prophet,
Jer 31:31. He not only says, for the Lord, "I will make a new covenant with the
house of Israel and with the house of Judah," but adds, "It shall not be
according to the covenant that I made with their fathers." If it shall not be
according to the covenant made with their fathers, wherein shall it differ from
it? He proceeds, "They shall not," under the new covenant, "teach every man his
neighbor, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord." You inquire, why
they shall not teach, saying, Know the Lord? The reason is, that under the new
covenant, they shall all know the Lord. He will write his law on their hearts,
in their inward parts, or in their minds, and they shall all know him from the
least to the greatest. It is a condition on which they shall enter the new
covenant, that they shall know the Lord. They cannot enter the new covenant
without knowing the Lord. In Christ, they "are all the children of God by
faith." There cannot be one in the new covenant without faith. This brings us to
the grand and distinguishing difference between the old covenant and the new.
The basis of admission is different. Under the old covenant, the ground of
membership was in a birth of flesh, or a purchase with money. The covenant
included the two classes: 1. "He that is born in thy house." 2. "He that is
bought with thy money." This included unconscious infants, who did not know the
Lord, and who had to be taught, saying, "Know the Lord." The ignorant heathen
servant, bought with money, was in the covenant by virtue of a purchase with
money without knowing the Lord, and they were required to teach him to know the
Lord. Under this covenant there were these two grounds of membership, or grounds
of which they were in the covenant, without knowing the Lord. In the one case,
they were in the covenant on the fleshly basis, or the ground of a blood
relation, or a fleshly birthright, the same as gives a man an interest in his
father’s estate in our country. In the other, the money basis, or a purchase
with money. In neither of these cases did faith have anything to do in the
matter. They were not in the covenant on the ground of faith, any change in
heart or life, of being "a new creature," or "born again." Under the new
covenant, the best covenant, founded on better promises, they are not in it by
virtue of the first, or natural birth, but being born again; not on the ground
of being born of parents in the Church, but born of God; not on the ground of a
fleshly or blood relation to man, but a spiritual relation to God; not in the
covenant in ignorance of God, so as to have to be taught to know the Lord, but
by faith in our Lord Jesus Christ. They do not have to be taught, in the new
covenant, to know the Lord, because they cannot enter it without knowing him. No
man comes into this new covenant by being born in Abraham’s family, nor by being
purchased with his money, nor by being born in any other man’s family, or
purchased with his money; but by being born again, not of the will of the flesh,
nor of the will of man, but by the will of God; not of corruptible seed, but the
incorruptible seed, the Word of God, that lives and abides forever. No matter,
under the new covenant, what blood a man has in his veins, nor to what nation he
belongs. That is all nothing. The warning now is, "Say not we have Abraham for
our father." "We have no confidence in the flesh." "If any man is in Christ, he
is a new creature." Circumcision avails nothing, nor uncircumcision, but a new
creature. This introduces us to the most degrading, corrupting, and damaging
error that ever tool: effect on the interests of the kingdom of God--the error
of retrograding to the old fleshly basis of membership, and making flesh and not
spirit the ground of membership in the Church. This was the precise thing that
came up in the conversation between the Savior and Nicodemus. The Savior knew
that Nicodemus was standing on fleshly birth, his blood relation to Abraham, and
swept all that away by informing him, that "Except a man be born again he cannot
see the kingdom of God." This astonished the rabbi, and he instantly inquired,
"How can these things be?" The Lord explained to him, that "Except a man be born
of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God," and
further on, "That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of
the Spirit is spirit." "Wonder not," said he, "that I said you must be born
again." If this teaching of our Lord were fully unfolded, how many thousands of
honest souls, who have been misled and made to believe they were in the
covenant, or in the Church, who are not, would never rest till they would, by
faith, enter into Christ, or, which is the same, into his body, the Church?
Nine-tenths of all the Church members in the world, if the language of the
Savior with Nicodemus were carried out, in the true meaning and spirit of it,
would find that they are not in the body of Christ, the Church. They would find
that they have been misled--deceived--and that they are not in Christ. Lift up
your eyes and survey the field. The Pope claims two hundred millions of human
beings under his dominion, or about one-sixth of the population of the globe.
There are now about three millions and a half of these, or something near one
person in eleven of the whole population, in the United States, all claimed as
members of the Church. On what grounds are all these claimed as members of the
Church? On the ground of faith? of any divine change in heart or life? any
personal holiness or piety? No; nothing of this kind. Any knowledge of God? By
no means, for they were, at least nine-tenths of them, in the Church before they
knew there was a God or Savior. Suppose Archbishop Purcell were to step up
before us, and you would inquire of him, Are you a member of the Church?
Certainly, he would reply, and not simply a member, but a member of the only
true Church. How do you suppose he became a member? A gentleman probably would
respond: "I suppose, sir, that he read the doctrines of Holy Mother Church, and
became convinced that she was the true Church, and joined." At first thought, it
appears very reasonable that such should have been the case, but the truth is
far otherwise. He never joined "Holy Mother Church," as you call it, nor any
other church. He was in the Romish Church before he knew his right hand from his
left; before he knew there was a God, a Savior, or a Church; not by "being born
again," but by his birth of the flesh, or by virtue of his mother being in the
Church when he was born. Some one thinks this is true of Romanists, but not of
others. But let us look; the Greek Church is put down in the Cyclopedia
Americana at sixty-six millions. On what basis is the membership of all these?
The same as the Romanists. Their membership is founded in a blood relation, and
they are in the Church before they have any faith or knowledge of God.
Regeneration is not known among them. There are about seven millions of Jews in
the world, all members on the fleshly basis, and in the Church by virtue of a
blood relation. What shall be said more? Look at that civil, moral, quiet, and
peaceable Friend, or Quaker, with his broad-brimmed hat, his round-breasted and
drab-colored coat, as he sedately walks in, and inquire of him, whether he is a
member of the Church. He answers, Certainly. You inquire when and where he
joined the Church. He explains to you that he never joined the Church at all! A
member of the Church, and never joined! How can that be? How would he show that
he is a member of the Church if he never joined? Show it from the Bible! Do you
inquire, what part of the Bible? The answer is, from the leaves containing the
family record, showing that his mother was a member when he was born, and
consequently he has a birthright. His membership has nothing to do with faith,
the influence of the Spirit, the knowledge of God, his own volition or action,
but was secured by a birth of the flesh. Yet he talks about "the light within"
and the "teaching of the Spirit," but nothing of this kind had anything to do
with making him a member of the Church. No doubt many professional and
scientific men have looked on preachers as a very stupid class, disputing about
sprinkling a little water on the face of an infant, and they have turned to
their pursuits, thinking the question one of no consequence. But they
misapprehend the question. It is not one about sprinkling water on the face of
an infant or any body else, much water, or little water, that we are discussing.
The inquiry is about making a member of the Church without faith, without the
knowledge of God, a single divine impression on the heart, any influence of the
Spirit of God, the person’s own heart or conscience having anything to do with
it. Here is where the controversy lies. The ground here maintained is, that no
human being can be a member of the body of Christ without faith, a change in
heart and life--the heart, conscience, and volition being involved in the
matter. An English lady, once a school teacher, heard a discourse that roused
her considerably, and, in the private circle, introduced the subject of "infant
baptism," as she styled it. The preacher told her that there was a matter lying
back of that of much more importance to her. She inquired what it was. He told
her that some people insisted that no religious rite, ordinance, or act, could
be of any value unless the heart was in it, and inquired how she looked on that
matter. She said she insisted the same herself. He inquired what was meant by
the terms professors and non-professors of religion. She replied, illustrating
by the profession of law, medicine, and teaching. He then said: "Madam, did you
ever, for yourself; from your own heart and with your own lips, make a
profession of the religion of Christ?" She replied: "My dear mother consecrated
me to the Lord when I was a little child." The preacher continued: "I presume
your mother was a good woman and did many good things; but I am inquiring into
what you have done yourself. The apostle says: ’To whom you yield yourselves
servants to obey, his servants you are.’ Did you ever from your own heart make a
profession yourself, or yield yourself to God?" Under much excitement she rose
and left the room. After hearing a few more discourses, she came forward, stood
up before her God and Savior, and from her own heart and with her own mouth,
confessed the Savior of the world, and yielded herself to be a servant of God.
After all the ado we have had about heart-work, heart-religion, doing from the
heart, etc., the strongest charge lying against the popular religion of our
times is that there is not enough heart and faith in it. The heart-work is the
very thing that is lacking. The idea of making a member of the Church, not only
without the "heart-work," so called, but without faith, a single spiritual
impression, religious idea, or even knowledge of the existence of God, or even
the exercise of human is one of the most preposterous and absurd things in the
records of history. Take another illustration of the principle involved. A
preacher was once on a train of cars and soon saw that the two gentlemen sitting
just in front of him were both preachers; that they resided in the same city and
were rather intimate acquaintances with each other; that one was a Methodist and
the other a Presbyterian. As the train glided on, they engaged in conversation,
sometimes bordering on argument, touching the comparative merits of their
respective churches. After many pleasant hints had been made, the Methodist
preacher said to the Presbyterian, "We have the advantage of you in our church."
"In what?" inquired the other. "We give all their choice in baptism; if they
require immersion, we immerse; if they prefer sprinkling, we sprinkle, or
pouring, we pour." The other appeared perplexed with this. There was a show of
liberality in it that the other did not know how to offset. The Methodist
preacher seemed to triumph, in this liberty in his church, of all having their
"choice of modes." After talking loud and in a somewhat exultant manner for some
moments, he turned to the preacher sitting back of him, knowing nothing as to
who he was, and, seeing that he was listening to the conversation, said,
"Stranger, do you not think I have the better of the argument?" "What church do
you represent?" said the strange preacher. "The Methodist Episcopal Church,"
said he. "Did you say you give all their choice between sprinkling, pouring, and
immersion?" "I did," said he. "I believe you baptize infants sometimes," said
the stranger. "I do," said he. " What becomes of the choice of an infant when
you baptize it?" inquired the stranger. He did not tell. It has no choice, not
only between sprinkling, pouring’ and immersion, but it has no choice between
Romanists and Protestants, any more than the types that shall print these words
have, whether they will print these or some other words; no more choice than the
brick in your house, whether they would go into it, or into some other house.
Some years since, when that mysterious political organization, styled
"Know-Nothings," was in full blast in this country, they stated in their
publications, that Romish girls, hired as servants in Protestant families, would
fall in love with the good lady’s little infant, and when the mother would be
out, steal off with it to a priest, to sprinkle water on it, in the name of the
Trinity, and thus make a Roman Catholic of it. This was rung in the ears of the
archbishop in Cincinnati for weeks. By Protestants it was regarded as a most
cruel thing, to take a little infant child and allow a priest to bind its soul
down in a system of religion before it could have any choice or knowledge in the
matter, or even know good or evil. Nor did any one ever think the thing any
worse than it was. The transaction, on the part of the priest, was the most
insidious, unmanly, and covert of all transactions. The idea of a priest, who
can’t prove his doctrine, and is afraid to try it, through the assistance of an
innocent, but deluded girl, as he goes through society, seeking and obtaining
the opportunity to bind down the soul of an unconscious infant and performing
the act, is certainly disgusting to an American citizen of intelligence! What
wonderful learning and talent it must require to proselyte an infant child,
without a spiritual impulse or idea of the will of God to man. But how much
worse is it for a Romish girl, who believes it will be lost if it is not in the
Romish Church, to do this, than for the Protestant mother to take it to her
preacher and have him bind its soul down in a system before she knows whether it
will believe in that system, in God or the Savior? What becomes of all freedom,
on the part of the child, volition, private judgment, and even conscience? What
becomes of faith, repentance, confession, volition? All these are swept away,
and a scheme of making members of infants, without faith, a change of heart, any
knowledge of God or the Savior is adopted! This is a grand scheme for a class of
men not able to advocate their religious system, by argument, reason, and
Scripture before intelligent men and women. These little folks can make no
resistance. They can be made Mohammedans as easily as anything, if the mother is
so disposed. How different all this from the Gospel, preached by the holy
apostles, which appeals to the judgment, the heart, and consciences of men and
women, convincing them that Jesus is the Lord, and teaches them that to
whomsoever they yield themselves servants to obey, his servants they are. The
infant yields not itself, but is bound down by the consent of the mother and the
act of the priest before it can yield itself to anything. "Then," says a man,
"you have no salvation for infants." Is that so? Do you believe they will be
lost, if they are not in the Church? "No," you say. Then, if you can find infant
salvation without their being in the Church, why may not others find the same
salvation for them? But what do you give them more than those who do not take
them into the Church? You give them no Gospel, knowing that they cannot
understand or receive it. They give them none. So far you and they are even. You
give them no faith and they give them none. Here you and they are even again.
You give them no repentance and they give them none. This brings you out even
again. You do not believe the infant will be lost if it is not in the Church,
and they do not. Here you agree again. What, then, do you give the infant which
they do not? Nothing under the sun, only a few drops of water on its face. If
you, then, have salvation for it and we have not, it is water salvation and
precious little of the water at that. "What, then, will you do with infants?"
says a man. Nothing, till they can know the Lord. Till they can believe, nothing
can be done for them, nor do they need anything. Till they can know the Lord and
believe, they are not subjects of religion, not accountable. They need no faith,
repentance, confession, nor membership in the Church. They need no Church. They
have no personal or actual sin. Hence Jesus said of them, "Of such is the
kingdom of God," and to persons of the years of accountability, he said, "Except
you repent and become as little children, you cannot enter into the kingdom of
God." This shows that he did not style them little sinners, needing baptism or
church-membership to save them, but as needing nothing, only what any saint
needs, a resurrection from the dead and glorification to prepare them for
heaven. No one need begin now to think or talk of children growing up in
heathenism. Nothing of that sort is here encouraged, but the farthest possible
from it. All here said is in reference to children in infancy, or before they
can be taught anything. As soon as possible, teach them to know the Lord, to
confide in him, or believe on him and love him. As soon as they are capable,
teach them to yield themselves to his divine and glorious authority. Teach them
the whole will of God as soon as you possibly can. This is not only right, but
you are required to do it. This is a very different thing from binding them down
by a vow placed on them before they can know anything. It is now seen that to
hear, believe, repent, turn to God, and become a member of the Church, is a
personal thing. It is a personal act, and personal responsibility is involved in
it. This perfectly corresponds with the whole new institution. But now one
starts up from a new point, admitting all that has gone before, and says, "I
plant myself here: John the Immerser immersed the Savior in Jordan and, as he
stood on the bank of the Jordan, the Holy Spirit came on him and consecrated him
High Priest of the Christian profession. I, therefore, maintain, that he entered
his priestly office immediately after his immersion." Are you sure of that?
There are several things that you should settle before you thus decide:

Where have we an account of his acting as priest while on earth? Certainly, if
he entered his priestly office during his personal ministry, his biographers
have wholly omitted to mention it. Not one word have we in the book, either
about his being consecrated priest immediately after his immersion, or even
officiating as priest while on earth. This idea is without one scrap of
authority in the book of God.

Paul says, Heb 8:4, "For if he were on earth he could not be a priest, seeing
that there are already priests who offer gifts according to the law." He
"entered not into the holy places made with hands, figures of the true; but into
heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us." See Heb 9:24. He
never officiated on earth, as a priest, nor in the holy place on earth, but in
the true holy place. When he was bleeding, suffering, and dying on the cross, he
was not in the capacity nor performing the functions of a priest. He was then
the bleeding, suffering, and dying victim. He was not after the order of Aaron,
nor Levi; belonged not to the Aaronic nor the Levitical priesthood, but was a
priest forever after the order of Melchisedec, who was without descent--that is,
lineal descent, belonging to neither of the priestly lines in the old
institution. He could not be a priest while these old priests were in authority.
Their authority closed when Jesus died and nailed the handwriting of ordinances
to the cross. This was the end of the law for righteousness. When the law of
carnal commandments was abolished, taken out of the way, and Jesus had ascended
to heaven, the true holy place, and not with the blood of bulls and of goats,
but with his own blood, as the Great High Priest of the Christian profession, he
appeared in the presence of God for us, to purge us forever from our sins.

Under the law the high priests had to enter the holy places on earth with the
blood of bulls and of goats, to offer for their own sins and also for the sins
of the people. But these offerings could not take away sins, but only laid them
over another year, when they were in the same manner brought up in remembrance.
Thus all the sins, even of the saints, still remained and were brought into
remembrance every year. But when Christ, with the better sacrifice the sacrifice
of himself and his own blood--appeared in heaven, the true holy place, once for
all, he purged us forever from our sins. There will be no more animal
remembrance of sins and no more sin-offerings. He is the end of sin-offering.
Our sins and iniquities will be brought into remembrance, in the holy places on
earth, by the high priests, no more forever. Jesus, with his one offering, has
purged us forever from our old sins. As our high priest, he can now be touched
with the feeling of our infirmity, and we can therefore come boldly to the
throne of grace and obtain help in every time of need. In this better covenant,
on better promises, we have none, who entered in infancy, without knowing the
the Lord, nor any who were brought into the covenant by a purchase with money,
without knowing the Lord, who have to be taught saying, "Know the Lord," but all
in the covenant are these by faith, by knowing the Lord, and their own voluntary
act. By their own sin-offering their sins have been purged forever, and there is
no more remembrance of their sins. They can now offer the daily sacrifice, the
fruit of their lips, as the true worshipers, who worship in spirit and in truth.
Their religion is not founded in flesh and blood. It is no matter what nation,
kindred, or tongue they are of The matter now is a new creature--not to be born
of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of the will of God. This
new covenant, or testament, was to be written on the heart, in the mind, in
their inward parts, and, of course, they would all know him from the least to
the greatest. How was this writing to be made? How was the law to be written on
their hearts or in their minds? There are two ways of ascertaining how this was
to be done: 1. By ascertaining the meaning of this figurative language, and
applying it. 2. By going to where the Lord actually put his law into their
minds, and learning how he did it. What, then, is the meaning of this figurative
language? Literally, there is no writing on the heart or in the mind. The real
import is, that it should be put into their minds or understandings. This is
represented by the figure of writing. In this figure, the Lord is the writer. He
says "I will write." The heart answers to the paper, or it is that on which the
writing is made. "I will write it on their hearts." The apostles had an
instrumentality in it, for Paul says, speaking of this writing, "It was
ministered by us"--the apostles. They occupied the place of the pen. But this
writing was not with ink, but by "the Spirit of the living God." The Spirit,
then, answers to the ink in this figure. When the appointed time had come, for
the law of "the Lord to go forth from Jerusalem," and all things were ready for
the Lord to commence writing, as in all cases of writing, the first thing was to
fill the pen with ink. The apostles answered to the pen, and he filled them with
the Holy Spirit, which answered to the ink. Through the apostles, filled with
the Holy Spirit, God spoke the law. When the people heard it "they were cut to
the heart." But, laying aside all figures, how did the Lord put his law, the new
covenant, into the minds of the people? The answer is, that the Gospel was
preached by the Holy Spirit sent down from heaven, which things the angels
desired to look into. This was in accordance with the divine arrangement, for
the Lord commissioned the apostles to "Go, disciple all nations"--to "Go into
all the world, and preach the Gospel to every creature." Paul was sent to the
people, and to the Gentiles, to "turn them from darkness to light, and from the
power of Satan to God." "To me," says Paul, "is this grace given, that I should
preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ, and to make all men
see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which in other ages was hid in God,
who created all things by Jesus Christ." See Eph 1:10. The Lord says, in his
last public address to his Father, "The words which thou gavest me I have given
them, and they have kept thy word." These words contained the law of the Lord.
The Father gave them to our Lord, the Messiah, and he gave them to the apostles.
The Lord then prays for them who should believe on him, through their word. How,
then, did he put his law into the minds of the people? He gave it to his Son,
the Mediator of the new covenant. He gave it to the holy apostles, whom he had
chosen as his embassadors. They were then filled with the Holy Spirit to bring
all things to their remembrance, and preached this law of the Lord. The people
heard it, and were cut to the heart, and cried out, "What shall we do?" This is
the manner in which he put his law into their minds--wrote it on their hearts.
Here, now, are persons inquiring at the door of the kingdom for admission. They
want the door opened to them. Here is the man with the keys of the kingdom,
ready to open the door, indorsed by the statement of the King: "Whatever you
shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you shall loose on
earth shall be loosed in heaven." Whatever terms of admittance into the kingdom,
or of remission of sins, he shall make known in opening the door or answering
the question, "What shall we do?" will be ratified or bound in heaven. The terms
of entrance into the kingdom, or of pardon, set forth by Peter, on Pentecost,
were bound or ratified in heaven, and the persons released from their sins, in
accordance with these terms, are really released, and those not released in
accordance with these terms are really not released at all. The setting forth of
these terms of pardon, or admittance into the kingdom of God, and thus opening
the way to inquiring persons, was using the keys of the kingdom--unlocking the
door. These terms are now incorporated in the new covenant, or the law of the
Lord, and written on the hearts of all in the covenant. No man has anything to
do now, in displaying his charity, by any modification of terms of the covenant.
The true man of God does not tamper with the terms of induction. He is neither
charitable nor uncharitable in the case. He is in no way responsible for the
terms of the covenant. His work is honestly to present them as he finds them,
giving assurance that the new covenant, with the terms of induction into the
kingdom, or, which is the same, the terms of pardon, and every thing else in it,
is sanctioned by the "two immutable things"--the promise and the oath of God.
This covenant, or the law of the Lord, is the immutable counsel of his will. Men
may rely on its terms of pardon for the alien who would turn to God, and for the
disciple of Jesus who is overtaken in a fault, with the fullest and most
unshaken confidence. This covenant is the last will and testament--the last, the
final effort, so to speak--of our most gracious and merciful God, to reclaim and
bring back an apostate and sinful race. It contains the infinite goodness and
love. It is confirmed by the predictions of all the holy prophets, the testimony
of all the apostles, and the Lord himself, surrounded by the most sublime
displays of supernatural power, backed up by the greatest purity of both
teaching and practice. It comes clothed with all authority in heaven and earth,
backed up by the oath of God, the crown and the throne in heaven. This covenant
is sealed by the blood of Jesus and signed by the great name of Jehovah. It
offers a free and plenary pardon to all offenders on simple and easy terms. It
offers the richest rewards to all its subjects--the grandest inheritance ever
proposed to erring mortals--a house not made with hands eternal in the
heavens--a home in the eternal city, the New Jerusalem--eternal bliss and
happiness. This is his last offer, his last invitation to man. The time will
soon be out. The door will soon be closed. The language will soon be applicable,
"He that is holy, let him be holy still," "he that is filthy, let him be filthy
still." This will be the end of all invitation, of all turning to God, of all
reformation. On the other hand, the threatenings against the persistently
impenitent are of the most fearful, terrible, and awful character. Human speech
can utter nothing more fearful than "the fire that shall never be quenched,"
where "their worm dies not," "the lake of fire," "tormented day and night
forever and ever," "everlasting punishment," "weeping, and wailing, and gnashing
of teeth." The punishment represented by such terms as these is the last resort
with the incorrigible, the determined, and obstinate opponents of God and
righteousness. In reference to them, God has sworn that to Jesus every knee
shall bow and every tongue shall confess, for he must reign till he puts all
enemies under his feet. It is now an "acceptable time and a day of salvation."
"To-day, if you will hear his voice, harden not your hearts as in the bitter
provocation." The Lord "is not willing that any should perish, but that all
should come to repentance." Do you reply, sinner, that you "belong to the big
church"--that "if you are lost, you will have plenty of company?" So did the
masses, in the time of Noah, belong to the "big church." Noah did not belong to
the "big church." The "big church" was destroyed. Noah and his family were
saved. Lot did not belong to the "big church." He was saved and the "big church"
was destroyed. "If your doctrine is true, there will be but few saved." That may
be. You might have said that to Noah and to Lot, and your words would have
proved true. There were but few saved. In human governments, if a large number
are condemned, the heart of man would fail to execute them. In the divine
government the condemned will be punished, no matter whether many or few. The
Lord is able to bring the guilty to punishment, and justice demands it. If all
are found guilty, then all will be punished. "But there is time enough yet."
Where have you obtained any revelation in reference to the time you have got?
You have no revelation in reference to it at all. You may be in the very last
day of your time, now giving attention to the last exhortation, in the last
sermon, concerning the last will of God to man, you will ever hear. Every one
either has heard, or will hear, the last discourse some time. You know not,
then, that this is not the last discourse, and this the last exhortation you
will ever hear. Tamper not, trifle not, and be not indifferent, but hear the
entreaties of those who love you, and the Lord who died for you. Turn away from
the world, from your sins and follies, and come to him who is "the way, the
truth, and the life," and be made unspeakably happy now and prepared for eternal
happiness in the world to come.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 11: GP1 - 10-THE INAGURATION OF THE NEW INSTITUTION
========================================================================

SERMON, No. X.

THEME.--THE INAUGURATION OF THE NEW INSTITUTION.

TEXT.--"Thus it is written, and thus it behooved Christ to suffer, and to rise
from the dead the third day: and that repentance and remission of sins should be
preached in his name among all nations, beginning in Jerusalem."--Luk 24:46-47.

THIS Scripture is selected with the intention of discoursing on the beginning of
repentance and remission of sins in the name of Christ among all nations, or
what is the same, the beginning of the reign of Christ, or the inauguration of
the new institution. There was a grand change when the law ended and the Gospel
commenced; when the Mosaic dispensation terminated and the Christian was
introduced; when the work of the mediator of the first covenant closed, and the
work of the mediator of the second covenant had culminated in an established
institution, fully and completely set in operation. Some have become weary of
discussing such themes, call them "first principles," and say "we must go on to
perfection." But there is reason to question the soundness of any man who talks
of "leaving the first principles." The child may learn the English alphabet by
the time it is four years of age, but it will never advance so far in literature
as to have no use for that alphabet; or it may learn figures by the same period
in life, but will never go on to such perfection as not to have use for these
numerals. So the faith that first moved the heart of the sinner to turn to the
Lord, then comforted the heart of the saint, will be his support when dying. He
will never leave faith, unless he apostatizes from the Lord. In the same way, we
can never leave anything that is truly a principle of the Gospel, but must hold
on to the first, middle, and last principles till we die. Not only so, but there
is a rising generation constantly coming on, that have never heard nor
understood the first principles of the Gospel, who must be taught from the
starting-point, and the principles shown up to-them. For the want of this, in
many instances, where churches have stood for a long time, and people have grown
up without much religious instruction, they have, by personal influence and some
warm and affectionate appeals, been brought into the Church not knowing the
first principles or any other principles of the Gospel, and without having any
love of the truth, or even knowing what it is. There are but few who understand
the first principles who do not know all the principles; but it is hard to find
one who, knowing the first principles well, does not love them; who knows or
loves any of the principles of the Gospel, or respects, adores, or honors him
who gave them. But to the subject in hand. He who devotes himself to the
disastrous work of perverting men, delights in obscuring that which should be
clear, in darkening counsel where there should be light, in throwing that into
doubt where there should be the full assurance of faith. Hence the efforts to
hide from the understandings of men the beginning of the reign of Christ. Such
desire no man to have the clear light of the beginning and setting in operation
the new Church, with the development of the clear and easy terms of
reconciliation. This knowledge is fatal to his work of delusion and deception.
One man perverts till he denies that there is any kingdom even yet in existence,
and induces him to believe that the kingdom has not yet come. Another is busily
engaged in maintaining that the kingdom was established in the time of John the
Immerser. In one word, in all his machinations, he is satisfied with any way,
not only in this matter, but every other, except the right way. The right way
never suits him. Attention must now be given to these perversions. 1. Is the
kingdom now in existence? Is Jesus now King? The main burden of the mission of
John the Immerser was to announce that "the kingdom of heaven is at hand." This,
too, was a main item in the preaching of the apostles under the first
commission, as also of the seventy. Could it have been proper for them to have
preached that the kingdom is at hand, when its establishment was eighteen
hundred years off? During this same period he taught them to pray, "Thy kingdom
come." The Lord said to them, "Fear not, little Flock; it is the Father’s good
pleasure to give you the kingdom." "There be some of them standing here who
shall not taste of death, till they have seen the kingdom of God come with
power." See Mark 9:1, and Luk 9:27. Some seek a fulfillment of this in the
transfiguration, but the kingdom of heaven did not there "come with power," nor
in any other way. To say the most of it, that was no more than a representation
of the king in his state of glory, as he now appears in heaven, and not even a
representation of the kingdom. He unquestionably intended them to understand
that, while some of them were yet living, they should see the kingdom come with
power. They preached, then, that the kingdom was at hand, prayed for it to come,
and had the promise that some of them should see it come with power before they
should taste death. This all points to the establishment of the kingdom at an
early period. After the ascension of the Savior, we find not an intimation of
any man praying "Thy kingdom come," nor any divine teacher enjoining any such
prayer. They continued to preach that "the kingdom is at hand," and to pray for
it to come till it did come--till they saw it come with power, but never
preached or prayed so from that time forward. That the Church and kingdom mean
the same, see the following: "Thou art Peter, and on this rock I will build my
Church; and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it. And I will give to
thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatever thou shalt bind on earth,
shall be bound in heaven; and whatever thou shalt loose on earth, shall be
loosed in heaven." See Mat 16:18-19. What is the Lord’s theme here? Certainly
the foundation of the Church, the rock on which Christ will build his Church.
"You are Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church," and to you "will I
give the keys of the kingdom." Has he changed to another theme? or is not what
he calls "my Church" the same as "the kingdom of heaven?" The Church here is
unquestionably the same as the kingdom. "Keys," here, symbolize the power to
open the Church or kingdom, or, which is the same thing, the terms of pardon;
the terms of pardon being the same as the terms of induction into the kingdom.
Where was Peter to use these keys? "Whatever you shall bind on earth, shall be
bound in heaven; and whatever you shall loose on earth, shall be loosed in
heaven." Where is he who has the keys of the kingdom of heaven to do this
binding and loosing? "Whatever you shall bind on earth"--"whatever you shall
loose on earth." It is to be done on earth. How is Peter to use the keys of the
kingdom, in binding and loosing, or opening and shutting, on earth, if the
kingdom itself, the door of which he is to open, is not on earth? No man who
denies the existence of the kingdom "on earth," in the time of Peter, can tell
how this could have been done. But the truth is, the kingdom is the Church, and
the keys, the power conferred on Peter by the great Head of the Church, to open
the way into the Church, or kingdom, which he did by laying down the terms of
salvation. These things being so, we have the following clear statements in
reference to an existing kingdom after Peter had used the keys. Col 1:13, Paul
says of the disciples, that they "had been delivered from the power of darkness,
and translated into the kingdom of God’s dear Son." Could they have been
translated into a kingdom that was not in existence? The kingdom had come, as
the Lord promised, and in answer to the prayer "Thy kingdom come; thy will be
done on earth," and was in existence, and the saints at Colosse were in the
kingdom of God’s dear Son. In Paul’s letter to the Heb 12:22-28, he speaks of
"the church of the first-born" and the "kingdom" as the same, not as something
in the future; but says, "You have come to Mount Zion, the city of the living
God, the heavenly Jerusalem, to the general assembly and church of the
first-born, who are enrolled in heaven;" and further on, he adds: "Wherefore, we
receiving a kingdom which cannot be moved, let us have grace whereby we may
serve God acceptably." 1Th 2:13, Paul said to the saints, "God has called you
into his kingdom and glory." Rev 1:9, John speaks of the seven churches in Asia
as "his companions in the kingdom and patience of Jesus Christ." This is enough
to show that the kingdom was in existence in the time of the apostles, and the
saints had been "called into it," "received it," been "translated into it," and
were actually "in the kingdom and patience of Jesus Christ." This must suffice
for those who deny the existence of any kingdom on earth at the present. 2. Did
the kingdom come in the life-time of the Savior? Was the Gospel fully preached
and were any introduced into the kingdom during that period? In these questions
will be found the main theme for the present discourse. Several things must be
clearly observed here:

When the kingdom was founded, the keys of the kingdom were used, the door
opened, the Gospel fully preached, and persons introduced into the kingdom.

No person can learn the way into the kingdom without hearing the Gospel
preached, not in promise, nor in prophecy, but in its completeness as a full
revelation.

What, then, is the Gospel? "All the preachers claim to preach the Gospel, and
how am I to tell which is the Gospel?"

There must, then, be some method by which we may identify the Gospel, or, at
least, we must have some marks without which we cannot have the Gospel fully
preached. The Bible is not a book of definitions, but it defines some things,
and among these the Gospel. 1Co 15:3-4, Paul says, "For I delivered to you first
of all, that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according
to the Scriptures; and that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day
according to the Scriptures." This passage develops three things, without which
we cannot have the the Gospel in its full development. 1. It must be preached
that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures. 2. That he was
buried. 3. That he rose from the dead according to the Scriptures. Whatever may
be required more, these central and fundamental items must exist in the Gospel.
Any thing claiming to be the Gospel without these items, would be utterly empty.
To these items, two more must be added. That Jesus shed his blood for many for
the remission of sins, must as certainly be found in it as that the Lord Jesus
is divine. The office and work of the Holy Spirit must also be set forth in the
Gospel. Any system without the death of Christ, his burial, resurrection, his
blood, with the office and work of the Holy Spirit, would not be received by any
intelligent people. To this, all worthy of any note will agree. The way is now
clear to look for the Gospel and see if we can find where it was fully preached
first. It will be simpler and easier to divide off into periods. Take, then, the
entire period from Adam to John the Immerser, and inquire which one of the holy
men, the ancient seers, or men whom God authorized to speak to man, ever
preached that Jesus died for our sins according to the Scriptures? The answer
certainly is, none of them. Which one of these holy men preached that the Lord
was buried? Not a man of them. Which one of them ever preached that he rose from
the dead according to the Scriptures? Not a single man of them. Which one of
them ever preached that the Lord shed his blood for many for the remission of
sins? Not a man during the entire period to which reference is here made. Which
one of them ever set forth the office and work of the Holy Spirit? None of them.
No matter how good the men, how strong their faith, nor how pious, these were
not their themes. These great fundamental and central matters of the kingdom,
filling such a large space in the apostles’ preaching, had no place in their
teaching. These were matters but dimly shadowed forth in their predictions and
not understood by any man of that entire period. How, then, let it be inquired,
did they preach the Gospel without preaching that Jesus died, was buried, rose
again, shed his blood, or even setting forth the office and work of the Holy
Spirit? The answer is simply that they never preached the Gospel of Christ in
all its fullness or completeness. Some one says, "I grant that the Gospel was
not preached in its completeness and fullness during the period just specified.
But my ground is this: John the Immerser was the first great Gospel preacher. He
founded the Church, opened the door, preached the Gospel in all its fullness,
and introduced the first persons into the kingdom." Are you sure of that? In
what part of John’s preaching did he preach that the Lord died for our sins
according to the Scriptures? Most assuredly he never preached it at all, for he
preached his last sermon and died himself before the Lord died. He certainly
never preached that Jesus died before he did die. Nor did he ever preach that
the Lord was buried before he was buried. The preaching of John was all over
before the Lord was buried. His preaching was all done before the Lord was
risen, and he unquestionably never preached that the Lord was risen before he
was risen. The same is true in regard to the shedding of his blood. John had
preached the last sermon, and his own blood was shed before the Lord shed his
blood. He certainly did not preach that Jesus shed his blood before he did shed
it. These were not the themes on which John dwelt, nor the themes which the Lord
put into his mouth. The Lord was not ready for these themes yet. The inquiry now
comes up touching the meaning of preaching the Gospel "in its fullness or
completeness." This must now be explained. "The Gospel was preached to Abraham;"
and, again, "the Gospel was preached to them as well as to us." "What is the
meaning of all this," says a man, "if the Gospel was not preached before John
the Immerser, nor by him?" The Gospel was preached before John, and "the Gospel
of the kingdom" by him, but not in a complete revelation, or it was only in a
mystery. This must now be explained.

There is something in the Scriptures called "the eternal purpose" of God. This
"eternal purpose" was in the fullness of time to send the Savior, publish the
Gospel, establish the Church, and unite the Jews and Gentiles in "one body."
This purpose contained Christ, the Gospel, and all things pertaining to the new
institution, in a mystery, or a secret. It contained the Gospel, "hid in God who
created all things by Jesus Christ." No human being knew anything about it.

We then have something called "the promise." What promise? The promise that God
made to Abraham. See Gen 2:1-25 : also, Gal 3:8. That which was contained in the
purpose of God is now embodied in a promise--the promise of God to Abraham. This
promise contains Christ, the Gospel, the Church--the entire new institution. It
is all couched in the few brief words: "In thee shall all the families of the
earth be blessed." Still no man understood what was contained in this promise.
It was the Gospel in promise.

Then comes the prophecies. The same that existed in the purpose of God, and then
in the promise, is next found embodied in prophecy--it is the Gospel in
prophecy.

Then came John the Immerser, the twelve apostles, the Savior, and seventy
others, preaching the good news of the kingdom--that the kingdom is at hand--the
kingdom approaches. This was the Gospel and the kingdom in a preparatory or an
incipient state, or not fully developed and unfolded.

When Jesus had died, been buried, shed his blood, risen, and ascended into
heaven; when he sent the Holy Spirit to guide the apostles into all truth, under
the last commission, they made a full revelation of that which had previously
existed in a mystery in the different forms just described.

To illustrate what is here meant, suppose some man in your community conceives
the idea of building a great factory, and, after maturing it for a time purposes
to do it. There is now a factory in purpose, but not in fact, neither running
nor doing work. Nor does any man know anything of it except the man who has it
in his purpose, nor has it any existence anywhere except in his purpose. It is
all a secret. After a time, in a conversation with some prominent men in the
community, he embodies his purpose in a promise to build a factory. There is yet
no factory in existence, except in purpose and promise. The promise being known
in the community, excites some interest and sets inquiry in motion. He now
advances another step and makes sundry predictions in reference to the factory,
touching the time when it will be completed, the amount of work it will do, the
advantage it will be to the community, unity, etc. The factory still has no
existence only in purpose, promise, and prophecy. The next thing you hear is
that the ground has been broken, the foundation laid, materials brought
together, machinery purchased, etc. It is now a factory in a preparatory or an
incipient state, but not complete nor doing any work. But finally it is finished
and set in motion; the looms clatter, the spindles hum; it is now complete and
doing work. It was a factory first in purpose, then in promise, then in
prophecy, then in a preparatory or incipient state, then in fact, in actual
existence, complete in all its parts, doing work. So the Gospel and kingdom of
God first existed only in the purpose of God, then in the promise to Abraham,
then in the prophecies of the Old Testament, then in the preparatory or
incipient state, and finally in a state of completeness and perfection, in full
operation an Pentecost. But now one more period must be considered. Some man
will say, "I will go to the apostles during the life-time of the Savior, while
they were bosom companions with him and receiving daily lessons of instruction
from his lips. They then understood all about the Gospel and kingdom, and set
out these matters rightly." A very brief consideration of the matter will show
that you are greatly mistaken in that. During the Lord’s personal ministry the
apostles neither understood the Gospel nor the kingdom. There is nothing clearer
than that they did not understand their Master and Leader during this period.
They had their minds in one direction and the Lord had his in another. The
matter worked according to his mind and not according to theirs. They found
their views full of mistakes and blunders, and his without a single mistake. You
never find him disappointed. But take a few examples: If any one thinks the
apostles preached the Gospel fully, during the life-time of the Savior, such an
one should consult Mat 16:20, "Then charged he his disciples that they should
tell no man that he was Jesus the Christ." How could they preach the Gospel
fully without telling any man that "Jesus is the Christ?" This is the very first
thing to tell in preaching the Gospel fully, and the very first thing they did
tell after commencing under the last commission. This restriction had to be
taken off before they could preach the Gospel fully. Again, Mat 16:21, the Lord
said to the disciples, "That he must go to Jerusalem, and suffer manythings of
the elders, and chief priests, and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again
the third day." How did Peter take this? "Then Peter took him, and began to
rebuke him’ saying, Be it far from thee, Lord, this shall not be to thee." Was
Peter all right in this? Certainly not; hence, the Lord said, "Get thee behind
me, Satan; thou art an offense to me, for thou savorest not the things that be
of God, but those that be of men." What did Peter mean? He had his heart on an
earthly kingdom and an earthly king, and he did not believe that his king would
be put to death, nor intend to permit it. He intended to encourage his Master
with assurances that he would stand by him. If a man doubts the correctness of
this, he can turn to Mat 26:1-75, and read the account of the matter. True to
his purpose, he "drew a sword and struck a servant of the high priest, and cut
off his ear." This little comment shows what he meant. He did not believe at
this time that Jesus would die, and intended to fight to defend him, still
believing that he would be an earthly king. The Lord told him to "put up the
sword again, for all those who take the sword shall perish with the sword."
Again, "Peter said to him, though all men shall be offended because of thee, I
never will be offended." The Lord replied, "Verily, I say to thee, that this
night, before the cock crow, thou shalt deny me thrice. Peter said to him,
though I should die with thee, yet will I not deny thee. Likewise said also all
the disciples." See Mat 26:1-75. How did the matter turn out? While the Lord was
on trial, and needed a friend more than he had ever done before, Peter sat
"without the palace, and a damsel came to him, saying, Thou also was with Jesus
of Galilee. But he denied before them all, saying, I know not what thou sayest."
Presently, the matter was pressed on him, one saying, "This fellow was also with
Jesus of Nazareth." This "he denied with an oath," declaring, "I do not know the
man." The third time the matter was pressed on him, saying, "Surely thou art
also one of them, for thy speech betrayeth thee. Then he began to curse and
swear, saying, I know not the man." See Mat 26:69-75. Surely no man’s
attainments in divine things are to be envied who cannot see that this was a
preparatory period; that things were not ready yet; that the apostles were not
yet qualified nor able to preach the Gospel in all its fullness. It was in view
of this the Lord said, "Peter, when thou art converted, strengthen thy
brethren." The mind of Peter and all the apostles, to say nothing of the
disciples and the balance of the people, needed turning from their expectation
of an earthly kingdom to a kingdom not of this world. When he saw the Lord on
trial, he did not desire to be identified with him, as he was on trial for his
life. He did not know what his fate might be. Some one might conclude that some
of those good women that followed him had a better understanding than these men.
What, then, was the purpose of those who went to the sepulcher early on the
morning of the third day? They were probably as intelligent as any of their
time. Were they expecting him to rise? Not a word of it. But they were making
preparation to embalm his body, to preserve it. When they came to the sepulcher,
saw the stone rolled away, an angel sitting on it, looked in, saw the clean
linen and napkin laid aside in order, but the body was missing, they were
overwhelmed, and asked the angel, thinking he was a man, "Sir, have you removed
the body of Jesus?" The angel said, "He is not here, but has risen as he told
you he would, and goes before you into Galilee. Hasten and tell his disciples."
They hastened away, with the grand theme burning in their hearts, and told it to
the disciples, "and their words seemed to them as idle tales, and they believed
them not." See Luk 24:11. Thomas said, "Except I shall see in his hands the
print of the nails, and put my finger in the print of the nails, and thrust my
hand into his side, I will not believe." See John 20:25. From considerations
like these, any person of ordinary intelligence can see that the apostles did
not understand that the kingdom would be spiritual, but supposed it would be a
worldly, civil government till Jesus died; and, even after he rose from the dead
and appeared to them, they said, "Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the
kingdom to Israel?" See Acts 1:6. This puts it out of the question about their
preaching the Gospel in its fullness, or the kingdom being fully established and
the reign of Christ in operation while he was in this world. The time was now
come to open a brighter chapter than any in the past, and see whether we have no
better light than can be obtained from the apostles while they were unbelievers
themselves in the main matters to be preached. Now turn attention to where the
Lord appears in the midst of the disciples, as you read John 20:26-28, and hear
him address Thomas: "Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach
hither thy hand and thrust it into my side; and be not faithless, but believing.
And Thomas answered and said to him, My Lord and my God." There is no account of
Thomas waiting to examine the nail-prints or the scar in his side. He is utterly
overwhelmed when he sees the Lord standing before him alive. The Lord now
proceeds: "All authority in heaven and earth is given to me. Go, therefore, and
teach all nations, immersing them into the name of the Father, and of the Son,
and of the Holy Spirit"--"Go into all the world and preach the Gospel to every
creature. He who believes and is immersed shall be saved, but he who believes
not shall be condemned." This was entirely new, and the first time they were
ever commanded to go into "all the world" and "preach the Gospel to every
creature." Their former commission was to the "lost sheep of the house of
Israel," but "not in the way of the Gentiles." This limitation is now taken off,
and they have the divine authority to "go into all the world and preach the
Gospel to every creature"--to "disciple all nations." This new commission not
only differs from the first one in the extent of the territory, or the
population to which they were to go, but also in the substance of it. It
contains different matter. Under the first commission, they were to preach that
"the kingdom is at hand;" under the second, to "preach repentance and remission
of sins in my name." The first commission was preparatory to the coming kingdom;
the second was the administration of the Gospel under the new reign or
institution. But the Lord commanded them to "wait for the promise;" to "tarry in
Jerusalem till you shall be endued with power from on high;" for the "Comforter
shall come, and when he is come, he shall guide you into all truth." He was
still not ready for them to proceed, but continued to appear to them at
intervals, giving abundant opportunity to see him, hear him, handle him, eat
with him, and drink with him, thus making themselves competent witnesses of his
resurrection. When about forty days had expired, and the preparatory work was
all done, the time came for his departure. He loved the disciples and made a
special request for them that they might be with him, and behold his glory which
the Father gave him. See John 17:24. He took them out to Mount Olive, imparted
to them his last benediction while on earth, bade them adieu, rose up in their
presence and started away toward heaven. A heavy cloud was thrown in the
background--it might be to give grandeur and splendor to the scene. As they
stood gazing after him as he ascended up into heaven, a convoy of angels
appeared and shouted, "Galileans, why stand you gazing up into heaven? That same
Jesus that you see going up into heaven, shall so come in like manner as you
have seen him going up into heaven." As he approaches the everlasting city, the
mandate is heard, "Lift up your heads, O you gates; and be you lift up, you
everlasting doors; and the King of glory shall come in." Then a response is
heard, "Who is this King of glory?" The answer is, "The Lord strong and mighty,
the Lord mighty in battle." Then the shout is raised again, "Lift up your heads,
O you gates; even lift them up, you everlasting doors; and the King of glory
shall come in." Again the question is heard, "Who is this King of glory?" Then
follows the final reply. "The Lord of hosts, he is the King of glory." He
entered heaven with all our names engraven on his breast, amidst the shouts of
joy of all the hierarchs of the upper world, and the Almighty commanded all the
angels to bow down and worship the Christian’s Lord, the Messiah, Immanuel, God
with us. Gabriel, Michael, Raphael, and Uriel, with all the shining and burning
hosts before the throne, bowed in profound awe, and worshiped the glorified
Redeemer. The Infinite One, the I Am, the Jehovah, rose up and invited him to a
seat in his throne. While all the celestial grandees of the spiritual world
looked on our King, "the only Potentate, the King of kings and Lord of lords"
ascended the throne; "sat down at the right hand of the throne of the majesty in
the heavens." With his own hands the Almighty Father crowned him Lord of all;
and as he could swear by no greater, he took an oath by his own great name, that
he should reign till all his enemies should be put under his feet; till every
knee shall bow, and every tongue confess that Jesus is the Lord, to the glory of
God. The coronation ceremonies lasted about a week. During this period all was
quiet on earth. Indeed, from the death of Jesus till this period there was not a
preacher in the world authorized to utter a word in the form of preaching. All
was silence and waiting. But when the King had ascended the throne and was
crowned Lord of all--when all things were ready--the preparatory work was all
done, the King proceeded, as he had promised, to send the Comforter, the Holy
Spirit, to guide the apostles into all truth. The apostles, with about one
hundred and twenty brethren, were all together in one place, waiting for the
promise. The day of Pentecost had "fully come," and "suddenly there was a sound
from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they
were sitting." See Acts 2:2. "And there appeared to them cloven tongues like as
of fire, and it sat on each of them. And they were all filled with the Holy
Spirit, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them
utterance." This brings us up to the place of beginning. The Lord said that
"repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all
nations, beginning at Jerusalem." Jerusalem is, then, the place of beginning.
Peter, after his first sermon to the Gentiles, in his vindication before his
Jewish brethren, in view of receiving the first Gentile converts, said, "As I
began to speak, the Holy Spirit fell on them (the Gentiles, at the house of
Cornelius) as on us (the Jews, on Pentecost) at the beginning." That which was
done on Pentecost was in the right place (in Jerusalem) and at the right time
("at the beginning"). Here, in Jerusalem, is the beginning place, and on the day
of Pentecost the beginning time. The beginning time and place of what? The
beginning of the reign of Christ; of preaching under the new, and, as may be
justly said, the last commission; of repentance and remission of sins in the
name of Jesus Christ. But some man inquires, what have you gained by preaching
so long to find the place and time of beginning? Much is gained by it. Without
finding this beginning there can be no clear and intelligible understanding nor
preaching of the Gospel. The preacher without this beginning distinctly fixed in
his mind, can no more preach intelligently than a pilot can run his ship to a
given point placed out at sea without knowing what sea he is in, or without
knowing where his starting-point is. He could run toward any point of the
compass called for, but he could not tell you where nor when you would land,
unless you would give him the place of beginning. In like manner, not a surveyor
in the world can run a line till you give him the "place of beginning." You
cannot even make a deed to a lot of land till you find what is called "the place
of beginning." Since surveying has come up, as an illustration, it may be used
still further to good advantage. Suppose A and B join lands. They purchased
their lands many years ago when lands were cheap, and they were not particular
about the lines. But now the lands are worth one hundred dollars per acre. Mr. A
is looking at a fine spring near where the line is supposed to be, and noticing
the crystal water as it ripples over the pebbles below. He also views a
magnificent row of apple-trees and valuable fence, and thinks if the line were
run out correctly the spring, trees, and fence would be on his land. He talks
about it to his neighbors, and those who agree with him he regards as very
intelligent people, much better and more desirable associates than those who
differ from him. Indeed, those who differ from him he considers not very good
people, and does not seek their company. Mr. B esteems those who think the
spring, the trees, and fence are on his land, and seeks them for his associates.
Thus the controversy continues for a time; but, finally, they decide to have the
controversy settled. To this end they call the surveyor. But, on examination,
the surveyor fails to find a corner-stone, a witness-tree, or land-mark of any
description on the entire premises. What is now to be done? He refers to his
field-notes and finds an established corner, it may be, some distance from the
line to be run. After surveying, running lines in different directions, and
sundry measurements, he points to a spot and orders the loose rail that he sees
has been made there to be removed. When this is done they find the corner-stone,
with the land-marks on it, corresponding to his field-notes. He plants his staff
at "the place of beginning," places the compass on it, the needle settles, and
he is now ready to take a look through the compass. A and B are no idle
spectators, but are looking on with intense interest. No danger of either
becoming drowsy now, though they may be first-class sleepers in church. Mr. A
slips up and peeps through the compass, and perceives that his spring, trees,
and fence are about to be out off. Under much excitement and not in a very
pleasant manner, he turns to the surveyor, and exclaims, It is all wrong, sir.
The surveyor inquires deliberately, What makes you think so? He replies, with
much feeling, Why, do you not see that you are about to cut off my fine spring,
my fruit trees and fence? How much attention do you suppose a surveyor would
give to such talk? About as much as a Gospel preacher would give to the man who
thinks the Gospel line wrong because it cuts off his church. He would probably
tell him that he should have built his fence and planted his fruit-trees on the
other side of the line, and that he will run the line according to law, as he is
bound by his oath to do, if it cut off his house and barn into the bargain.
"But," shouts a man, "what would you do, when the Gospel line is run, if you
should find yourself on the wrong side of the line?" Simply as the man did who
had his land run off, and found his cabin was on the wrong side of the line; he
moved over the line, on to the right side, and on to his own land." But," says a
man, "I despise to see a turn-coat; a man leaving one church and going to
another." True, there is something a little unpleasant in turning one’s coat.
Still, there is one thing more ridiculous than a man turning his coat, and that
is to see a man so obstinate as to wear his coat wrong side out rather than to
turn it. It is much wiser and better to turn it, when it is found to be wrong
side out, than to persist in wearing it wrong side out, even if some bigot
should say "a turn-coat." If you make a mistake in roads, and go a wrong road
several miles, it is unpleasant to turn and go back to where you got out of the
road, but it is much wiser and better to do it than to continue on in the wrong
road. Who will not admit that Luther did better, in turning, than he would have
done to have continued in Romanism? The matter of turning all depends on the
question whether you are right or not. If you are right, then by all means never
turn. If you are not right then turn, the sooner the better. But since a good
illustration is at hand, it must not be thrown aside till well used. Suppose,
then, that partition running through the center of the pews in front of the
stand is the Gospel line, and that man sitting a little to one side of it is
occupying the position of his church. As the preacher is starting out to run the
line, he sees that he is to be left slightly on the wrong side, and rises and
appeals to the preacher as follows: "Hold on, if you please, a little. I do love
a charitable man. You see that my church is only a little to the wrong side; now
we have many good praying members and good paying members, too; do please be
charitable and bend the line only a little, and take my church in." Say the
preacher is one of your pliable and charitable men, with an easy conscience, and
he yields, saying, "There are good and bad in all churches; they are all right
at heart," and bends the Gospel line so as to take them in. As soon as this is
done, up spring three men, pleading for their three churches, only a little
further from the line, telling how many good people they have, and that they are
all good at heart, though they do not see precisely as other people. They, too,
tell how they love a charitable preacher, and how good a man they think the
preacher is. He has now commenced the work of bending the line, and will not
make the matter any worse to bend it a little more. He, therefore, bends it and
takes them in. Thus they continue to praise him for his charity, tell him how
good a man he is, and persuade him to bend it a little more and a little more,
till, finally, he is a Universalist, runs the line clear round the human family,
and takes them all in, leaving no church, or no world, or all church and all
world. This is the result of what these charitable folks will do when they carry
out their principles, or rather, their want of principles, to their legitimate
result. They would nullify the entire Gospel and make nothing of it. Now, turn
your eye back to Peter, as he stands up with the eleven, under the infallible
power of the Spirit of God to guide him into all truth, on the brightest day the
Lord ever created, the great Pentecost. He has a new commission, under which he
had never preached. The Lord has gone into heaven, and is seated at the right
hand of the throne of the majesty in the heavens, and is crowned Lord of all. He
now stands at the beginning. He has the keys of the kingdom of God. He now has
the death of Jesus, his burial, his resurrection, the shedding of his blood, the
office and work of the Holy Spirit, the ascension and coronation of the king,
for the first time to preach repentance and remission of sins in the name of
Jesus. He has before him Jews and proselytes, devout men from every nation under
heaven. He is in the right place, in Jerusalem, and at the right time, when the
Holy Spirit was poured out on them "at the beginning." For the first time he
opens out: "You men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a man
approved of God among you by miracles, and wonders, and signs, which God did by
him in the midst of you, as you yourselves also know; him being delivered by the
determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, you have taken, and by wicked
hands have crucified and slain; whom God hath raised up, having loosed the
pains, death; because it was not possible that he should be holden of it." He
declared to them that David had said that God had sworn that "he would raise up
Christ to sit on his throne," and that "this Jesus, God had raised up" and
"exalted to his own right hand." This was all new, having never been understood
or preached before by any of the apostles, or any body else; and when they heard
this they were cut to the heart, and cried out, "What shall we do?" Here stood
the man who had the keys of the kingdom, ready to open the door, and, in one
sentence he exercised the power, symbolized by the keys, opened the door, or,
which is the same, the way to God, the terms of pardon, in the following words:
"Repent and be immersed, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ, in order
to the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit."
Here one of the most singular things, in these times of apostasy and disloyalty
to God, makes its appearance. Men talk about "called and sent preachers," but
very few of them ever come to this grandest occasion since creation’s dawn,
where we have an account of "called and sent preachers," of their preaching,
what they preached, that the preaching cut the hearers to the heart, what they
inquired, and what they were commanded to do. They rarely come to those grand
occasions, where the Holy Spirit came to guide their "called and sent preachers"
into all truth and follow the directions given by the apostles to those
inquiring the way into the kingdom. Why do they come not here if they have any
love for what was preached "by the Holy Spirit sent down from heaven?" Why do
they come not here if they have what was preached by truly "called and sent
preachers?" Why do they come not here if they delight in that which is truly the
work of the Holy Spirit? Why, if they would understand how things were at the
start, not come up here to the "beginning?" The reason is at hand; they do not
receive the terms of pardon as laid down by Peter. They do not accept the use of
the keys of the kingdom, as set forth in his words, opening the kingdom, or
giving the terms of pardon. They have "another Gospel, which is not another,"
but a perversion of the Gospel of Christ. In turning away from the terms of
pardon, set forth by the Holy Spirit through Peter, they have no terms. They
have no plan of salvation, no definite terms, with which any person can comply,
and have the promise of remission of sins. They can exhort the sinner to seek,
to believe, to give up his whole heart, to keep back nothing, but never come to
the promise of God that he "shall be saved." They have closed their eyes to the
light of the Gospel, and are literally in the dark, on the way of salvation.
Some man responds, "But I do not believe in baptism for the remission of sins."
Who has preached any "baptism for the remission of sins?" "You have done it, not
five minutes since," he replies. Are you sure of that? "I am; I cannot he
mistaken," he replies. Well, you are not mistaken. You heard it, but it was when
the precise words of Peter were quoted, "Repent and be immersed, every one of
you, in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of sins," or, as before
quoted, "in order to the remission of sins." Do you say you cannot receive any
such teaching? If you do, it is to be regretted; but it cannot be helped if you
should refuse to receive one-half that is in the Bible. It is the precise
language of Scripture, and if you refuse to receive it, you refuse to receive
the precise language of Scripture. "I do not mean that," says a man, "but I do
not receive your interpretation of it." There has been no interpretation of it
given, nor anything but the precise words of Scripture, and if you reject
anything it must be the language of Scripture. It is the language of Scripture
that is here adopted, and not any man’s interpretation. "I want the evidence of
pardon," says a man. That is all right. You ought to have the evidence of
pardon. But where is the evidence of pardon? Is it an old revelation or a new
one, in the Bible or not in the Bible, through Christ or immediately from God?
You say "In the Bible." Right; it is in the Bible. Here it is: "He who believes
and is immersed, shall be saved." Mark 16:16. Here is the evidence of pardon in
the promise of Jesus, "Shall be saved." "Is that all the evidence of pardon?"
says one. Is not that enough? "That is the mere word," continues the objector.
What do you mean in calling the Lord’s word "the mere word?" Do you mean that it
is not sufficient; that you cannot rely on it? "The thief on the cross was saved
without baptism," continues the objector. How do you know that the thief was
saved at all? "I did not know that any body denied that." No matter whether any
body denies it or not, how do you know that he was saved? Jesus said to him,
"To-day shalt thou be with me in paradise." True, Jesus said that, but that is
"the mere word!" "Is not that sufficient?" Certainly it is; and if you have got
so far that you can believe the word, turn back to the commission: "He who
believes and is immersed, shall be saved." The words of Jesus are as true in one
case as they are in the other. They are beyond all doubt true in both cases.
Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, repent and be immersed, and you have the
promise that you shall be saved. Think of the power of the three words "shall be
saved." If you cannot depend on these words, it is not immersion you need, but
faith. Immersion is of no value to any man who has no faith in the word of God,
or not faith enough in it to rely on it for pardon, and even for the hope of
heaven. If the Lord were to take you from your seat to heaven, and set you down
before the throne, and you should exclaim, as one of old, "Lord Jesus, I am a
poor sinful man;" and the Lord should then reply, "Thy sins, which are many, are
all forgiven," and then return you to your seat, you would spring to your feet
in an ecstasy, exclaiming, "I am pardoned." But where is the evidence? Only in
the words "Thy sins are all forgiven." You may trifle with them as you please,
call them "mere words" or anything else; but they contain the evidence of your
pardon. Strike them out and you have no evidence of pardon. "I intend to turn to
God before I die; but there is time enough yet," says one. How do you know how
much time there is yet? You are like the man in a yawl, two miles above the
falls of Niagara, with two good oars, with his hands folded, floating directly
on toward the great cataract. A man on shore calls to him: "My dear friend,
there is danger ahead, lay hold of your oars and come to the shore, or you will
go over the falls and precipitate one hundred and fifty feet down." He looks up
with an air of indifference, and says, "I know there is danger ahead, but I am
coming to the shore before I get to it." On he moves one mile, when another
friend calls to him and entreats him to come to the shore. He still thinks there
is time yet, and goes on another half mile. The last friend calls to him and
entreats him to be aroused for his condition. He lifts his eyes, sees the vast
spray rising, the rainbow in the mist, and hears the roar of the immense waters
as they pour in majesty down; sees the mighty rush of the waters and the
white-caps on the rapids above the falls; is filled with alarm; seizes the oars
and struggles, but in a few moments discovers that it is too late. He calls to a
man on the tower, "O, for help!" The man exhorts him to struggle for his life.
This he does, now nobly, but it is too late. He writhes and cries, "O. why was I
so simple as to wait till it was too late?" Over he precipitates, down he
plunges into the fearful deep below, and is gone forever. Will you, men and
women of the world, waste your manhood and womanhood in sin and folly, and then
entertain the thought of performing the work of a life-time in a death struggle,
and being saved? If you do, depend on it, you may lament your folly where
lamentation will avail nothing, where there is no repentance, but where the worm
dies not and the fire is not quenched. "Turn, O turn, why will you die?" While
there is mercy, grace, and compassion, turn and live forever. "Whoever will,"
says the Lord, "let him come." "Come to me, all you who labor and are heavy
laden; and you shall find rest." Come, O, come, and have the peace of God which
passes all understanding.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 12: GP1 - 11-PREDESTINATION AND THE FOREKNOWLEDGE OF GOD
========================================================================

SERMON, No. XI.

THEME.--PREDESTINATION AND THE FOREKNOWLEDGE OF GOD.

TEXT.--"According as he has chosen us in him, before the foundation of the
world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love; having
predestinated us to the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself,
according to the good pleasure of his will, to the praise of the glory of his
grace, wherein he has made us accepted in the Beloved."--Eph 1:4-6.

THE design of this discourse is to call attention to the teaching of the Bible
on election, predestination, foreordination, and the foreknowledge of God. It is
delightful to stand free from all creeds, theories, and embarrassing opinions of
men, where one can look into the oracles of God simply with a view to understand
them. In the present instance, there is nothing in the way to hinder the fullest
and fairest investigation in determining what the Bible means by the important
terms to be examined. The terms predestination, foreordination, foreknowledge of
God, election, determinate counsel, mystery, secret, and counsel of his will,
are all Bible terms. A man of intelligence, in these matters, cannot say he does
not believe the doctrine of election, etc. Election is in the Bible; so is
predestination. The same is true of foreordination, foreknowledge, etc. Whatever
the Bible teaches by these terms is as true as what it teaches in any other
terms, or on any other subject. But any man may say, in all good conscience, if
he understands the subject, that he does not believe the following from the
Presbyterian Confession of Faith: "By the decree of God, for the manifestation
of his glory, some men and angels are predestinated unto everlasting life, and
others foreordained to everlasting death. These angels and men, thus
predestinated and foreordained, are particularly and unchangeably designed, and
their number is so certain and definite that it cannot be either increased or
diminished. Those of mankind that are thus predestinated unto life, God, before
the foundation of the world was laid, according to his eternal and immutable
purpose, and the secret counsel and good pleasure of his will, hath chosen in
Christ, unto everlasting glory, out of his mere free grace and love, without any
foresight of faith and good works, or perseverance in either of them, or any
other thing in the creature as conditions or causes moving him thereunto; and
all to the praise of his glorious grace." Con. of Faith, p. 18. This, an
intelligent man may say, he does not believe, or does not understand; but this
is one thing, and the teaching of the Scriptures referred to, another and a very
different thing. There is something in the Bible called "the foreknowledge of
God." The question to solve is simply what is it? or what does it mean? This is
the matter first to be settled. "Foreknowledge" is to know before. But the word
"know" is used in two senses in Scripture, as it is in our own time. When we say
we know certain things, we mean that we are cognizant of them, or are informed
of them. We speak of certain things which we know, or concerning which we have
information, in contradistinction from certain things of which we are not
informed. In this sense there is nothing which the Infinite One does not know;
in this sense he knows every thing. The apostles said of the Savior that he knew
all things. The Almighty Father saw the end from the beginning. Nothing is hid
from the omniscient one. In this sense there is neither foreknowledge nor
after-knowledge with God. The word know is not used in this sense where we find
the word foreknow or foreknowledge. When we read "known to God are all his
works," the import is not simply that he is acquainted with all his works, or
cognizant of them, for, in that sense, he knows every thing. The sense is,
"approved of God are all his works." Another passage of the same kind is, "The
Lord knows them that are his." If the word "know" were here used in the common
acceptation, you might respond that the Lord knows them that are not his also.
There are none whom he does not know in this sense. The Lord is not only
cognizant of them that are his, or acquainted with them, but the Lord approves
them that are his, as he does not approve them that are not his. The same is
true of the words "Depart, you workers of iniquity; I never knew you." He surely
did not mean I never was acquainted with you, but I never acknowledged or
approved you as I have those that are mine. When the Lord speaks of knowing
certain things, it is not in contradistinction from things with which he is not
acquainted, or of which he is not informed, but sometimes in contradistinction
from things which he has not made known, and sometimes things which he has not
approved. When God looked down on the works of creation, he saw that they were
good, or approved them, or rather made known his approval in pronouncing them
"very good." It is, therefore, very clear that when the Scriptures speak of "the
foreknowledge of God," they do not mean simply that with which he was before
acquainted. This falls far short of the meaning. They mean more than this. Let
reference, then, be made directly to the law and to the testimony. "Him being
delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, you have taken,
and, by wicked hands, have crucified and slain." Acts 2:23. In this passage
there are two of the strongest expressions of this kind found in the Bible,
viz., "the determinate counsel" and "the foreknowledge of God." What is the
import, or what did the apostle mean by these terms? The following passage, from
the same apostle, on the same subject, is a clear and complete explanation of
the words just quoted: "But those things which God before had showed by the
mouth of all his holy prophets, that Christ should suffer, he has so fulfilled."
Acts 3:18. It will be readily seen that what is called "determinate counsel and
foreknowledge of God," in the second chapter, is here called "those things which
God before has shown by the mouth of all the holy prophets," in the third. This
defines the foreknowledge of God to be that which he had before shown by the
prophets, in contradistinction from that which he had not before shown by the
prophets. The following, from Paul, throws some additional light on the same
point: "The Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through
faith, preached before the Gospel to Abraham, saying, ’In thee shall all nations
be blessed.’" Gal 3:8. Now, it is self-evident that precisely the same that is
meant by "foreknowledge," in the passage previously referred to, is meant by
"foreseeing" in the one last quoted. What is meant, then, by "the Scripture
foreseeing?" Is it not God foreshowing in the Scripture, or showing by the mouth
of the prophets? Another Scripture, of the same nature, says: "He has concluded
all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them
that believe." Gal 3:22. This conclusion is foreknowledge of God, or God’s
conclusion before made known, through the prophets, that all are under, and that
the promise to Abraham, by the faith of Jesus Christ, might be given to them
that believe. The eternal purpose of God contained Christ, the Gospel, the plan
of justification for the heathen through faith. The same was embodied in the
promise made to Abraham, and confirmed by an oath. This was followed in after
ages by many predictions, all, in one way or another, bearing on the great
purpose of God to give this glorious system to man. In the New Testament
frequent reference is made back to the purpose, the promise, the predictions of
the prophets; and the knowledge thus communicated before is called the
foreknowledge of God, in contradistinction to what was afterward fully unfolded
and developed to the world by the apostles. This foreknowledge, determinate
counsel, mystery, or secret, had in it Christ, the Gospel, the Church,
justification of the heathen through faith, making the Gentiles members of the
same body and partakers of the promise in Christ by the Gospel. This was the
grand secret, hid in God for ages, and not made known to the sons of men as it
is now revealed to the apostles and prophets by the Spirit. It was concerning
this the prophets "inquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace
that should come to us: searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of
Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the
sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow. To whom it was revealed,
that not to themselves, but to us they did minister the things that are now
reported to you by them that have preached the Gospel, with the Holy Spirit sent
down from heaven; which things the angels desire to look into." 1Pe 1:10; 1Pe
1:12. It was this same great secret that was before the mind of the apostle to
the Gentiles when he concluded his letter to the Church in Rome in the following
words: "Now to him who it of power to establish you according to my Gospel, and
the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which
was kept secret since the world began, but now is made manifest, and by the
Scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God,
made known to all nations for the obedience of faith." Rom 16:25-26. The Gospel
preached by Paul, the preaching of Jesus Christ, and the revelation of the
mystery are the same. It was a secret, but is now revealed; it was hid, but is
now brought out; it was in the purpose of God, the promise, in prophecy, or
foreknowledge, but is now embodied in a complete revelation of the Gospel to the
world. The eternal purpose of God was to publish the Gospel of Christ to the
nations of the earth. The promise contained the same thing--the Gospel in
promise. The prophecies contain the same, with much more said about it, and the
Gospel now contains the same, fully developed and published to the world. The
next thing in order will be to decide who the persons were, spoken of in the
text, chosen in Christ before the foundation of the world. They were elect;
God’s elect. There is no use in caviling; the word "world," here, is not age. It
is the material world. These persons were chosen in Christ before the founding
of the material world, or before bringing order out of chaos. There are two
questions to decide concerning these persons: Who were they? What were they
chosen or elected for? They are not named in the whole passage, but simply
referred to as "us," and "we." These pronouns occur a number of times between
the third and thirteenth verses. No man understands the reading who does not
know who is meant by these words. The matter in hand, then, is to find out who
is meant by these two little words "us" and "we." Four different theories have
been advocated, as now recollected. These must each, in return, receive
attention.

Some Universalists have maintained that the words "us" and "we," here, mean all
mankind, and that all mankind were chosen in Christ before the foundation of the
world. But this cannot be, for certain things are said of them that cannot be
said of all mankind. It will not do to say that he "has made all mankind
accepted in the Beloved." Universalists do not believe this themselves. They
only claim that he will do this and not that he has done it, much less that he
has "predestinated all mankind to the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to
himself," or that "all mankind have redemption through his blood, the
forgiveness of sins." It is not true that he had "abounded toward all mankind in
all wisdom and prudence," nor that he had "made known to all mankind the mystery
of his will." It is not true of all mankind that they had, in Paul’s time,
"obtained an inheritance," nor that all mankind "should be to the praise of his
glory who first trusted in Christ." If all mankind first trusted in Christ, who
trusted in Christ last, or afterward? At the thirteenth verse, the apostle says,
"In whom you also trusted, after that you heard the word of truth, the Gospel of
your salvation; in whom also, after that you believed, you were sealed with that
Holy Spirit of promise." How could the apostle say that all mankind had "first
trusted in Christ," and, in the next breath, addressing the disciples in
Ephesus, say, "In whom you also trusted?" "Also trusted," as well as whom? The
saints in Ephesus also trusted in Christ, as well as all mankind. According to
this, the saints in Ephesus were no part of "all mankind," but all mankind first
trusted in Christ and then the saints in Ephesus also trusted in Christ. This is
simply absurd.

Some have supposed that the words "us" and "we" mean the Jews. But this is
equally absurd. It will not do to say that "he has chosen the Jews in him before
the foundation of the world, that the Jews should be holy and without blame
before him in love;" nor that "he has predestinated the Jews to the adoption of
children by Jesus Christ to himself;" nor that he "has made the Jews accepted in
the beloved;" nor that "the Jews have redemption through his blood, the
forgiveness of sins;" nor yet that "he has made known to the Jews the mystery of
his will;" nor had the Jews "obtained an inheritance" at the time Paul wrote
this letter. Yet these things were true of the persons of whom the apostle was
speaking.

The Calvinists think the words "us" and "we," from the fourth to the thirteenth
verse, mean all the saints--their elect. Can what Paul says here be said of all
the saints? Certainly not. Were all the saints "blessed with all spiritual
blessings in heavenly places in Christ" when Paul wrote this? Certainly not, for
millions of them were not yet born. Nor were all the saints "predestinated to
the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself," nor had all the saints
received "forgiveness of sins" at the time of this writing, nor were they
"accepted in the beloved." It is not true that he "abounded to all the saints in
all wisdom and prudence" at the time of this writing, nor that he "had made
known to them the mystery of his will," nor that they had "obtained an
inheritance," but all these statements were true of the persons of whom Paul was
speaking. It is not true that all the saints "first trusted in Christ," but
these persons "first trusted in Christ," and the apostle adds, verse thirteenth,
"In whom you also trusted after you heard the word of truth." In whom you also
trusted as well as whom? If he meant all the saints before, he means now that
the saints at Ephesus also trusted in Christ, as well as all the saints. This
makes nonsense of it.

Who, then, does the apostle mean by the words "us" and "we," from the fourth to
the thirteenth verse? We have seen that the language cannot apply to the Jews,
to all mankind, or all the saints. To whom, then, can all this language be
applied? It can be applied to the apostles and prophets of the New Testament,
and nobody else. The apostles and prophets were "blessed with all spiritual
blessings in heavenly places in Christ." They were "chosen in him before the
foundation of the world, that they should be holy and without blame before him
in love." He had "predestinated them to the adoption of children by Jesus Christ
to himself," and he had, when Paul wrote, "made them accepted in the beloved."
They had, when Paul wrote, "redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of
sins," and he had "abounded toward them in all wisdom and prudence." He had,
when Paul wrote, "made known to them the mystery of his will," and they "had
obtained an inheritance." They did "first trust in Christ;" and when the
Ephesians heard the word of truth, the Gospel of their salvation, they "also
trusted" in him, as well as the apostles and prophets. The apostles and prophets
were chosen in him before the foundation of the world, and are the "us" and "we"
of whom the apostle speaks, from verse three to verse thirteen--the elect of
this passage.

As further evidence of the correctness of this, refer to the ninth verse. Here
the apostle says, "Having made known to us the mystery of his will, according to
his good pleasure, which he had purposed in himself." The word "us" here means
the same persons of whom he had been speaking all along, and says, "Having made
known to us the mystery." The mystery was made known to the same persons "chosen
in Christ before the foundation of the world." Who, then, were these persons to
whom he made known the mystery? Turn to Eph 3:3-5, where he says, "By revelation
he made known to me the mystery, as I wrote before in few words, whereby, when
you read, you may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ; which in
other ages was not made known to the sons of men, as it is now revealed to his
holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit." The "us," then, of chapter 1, verse
9, are the "apostles and prophets," chap. 3: verses 3-5. These apostles and
prophets, then, to whom he made known the mystery, are the elect--the persons
chosen in him before the foundation of the world. Having now ascertained who
these elect persons were of whom the apostle had been speaking, the next thing
in order will be to ascertain what they were elected, or chosen in him, for.
Were they elected for their own happiness and glory or for the benefit of
others? Were they elected simply to eternal life themselves, or as instruments
through whom others were to be benefited? The ground here maintained is, that
their election had no more in it for them, in the world to come, than for any
other persons of their time or any future time. They were not elected simply for
their own sakes, but for the benefit of the world. What, then, were they chosen
or elected for? Paul answers: "For this cause, I Paul, the prisoner of Jesus
Christ for you Gentiles, if you have heard of the dispensation of the grace of
God which was given to me toward you." What was this dispensation given to Paul?
It was the dispensation belonging to this election. He proceeds: "How that by
revelation he made known to me the mystery, as I wrote above (chapter 1: 9), in
few words, whereby, when you read, you may understand my knowledge in the
mystery of Christ, which in other ages was not made known to the sons of men, as
it is now revealed to his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit, that the
Gentiles should be fellow-heirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his
promise in Christ by the Gospel." What was all this for? He proceeds "Whereof,"
or, for this purpose, "I was made a minister," or one of the elect, "chosen in
him before the foundation of the world." "To me," says he, "who am less than the
least of all saints, is this grace given." What grace? The grace of election, of
being chosen in Christ, to the apostolic office. What was this given for? He
proceeds: "That I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of
Christ; and to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which
from the beginning of time has been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus
Christ." He still proceeds further, unfolding the purpose of this election to
the apostolic office: "To the intent," or for the purpose, "that now to the
principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known by the church the
manifold wisdom of God, according to the eternal purpose which he purposed in
Jesus Christ our Lord." This passage most clearly and explicitly sets forth the
object of the election of which the apostle had been speaking. The grace of
election, of being chosen in Christ before the foundation of the world, was to
preach the Gospel; to unite the Jews and Gentiles in one body, and to make all
men see, or to make a revelation to the world. They were chosen in Christ, as
the agents or instruments, through which God would reveal his will to man and
found the new institution. This election had something in it, not merely for the
elect themselves, but for all mankind. They were "chosen in Christ,"
"predestinated," and the "grace given them," that they should be instrumental in
blessing the world with a full revelation of the mystery--the Gospel. "But,"
says a man, "I will go to the seventeenth chapter of John, and find the persons
that were given to Christ; they were the elect." That is so. But the same two
things must be ascertained, as in the other case: 1. Who were the elect? 2. What
were they elected for? Who, then, were the persons given to Christ, as set forth
in John 17:2-20? Were they all mankind? Certainly not; for in verse sixth he
says he gave them "out of the world." They were not all the world, but out of
the world. Were they all the saints? Manifestly not, for he says, verse 11 and
12: "Holy Father, keep through shine own name those whom thou hast given me,
that they may be one as we are. While I was with them in the world, I kept them
in thy name." They were not all the saints, for he "was with them in the world,"
and he was not with all the saints in the world. But he proceeds: "Those whom
thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost but the son of perdition,
that the Scripture might be fulfilled." From this passage, it is learned that
one of those given to him, or one of the elect, was lost. The Calvinistic idea
of the elect is, that they cannot be lost; but here we have the clear concession
that one of them was lost. This one was Judas. He was one whom Jesus had chosen,
and one whom the Father gave him, and was lost. Why was he lost? On what ground
was he lost? The following passage informs us: "And they prayed and said, Thou,
Lord, who knowest the hearts of all men, show which of these two thou hast
chosen, that he may take part of this ministry and apostleship, from which Judas
by transgression fell, that he may go to his own place." Acts 1:24. This settles
the question, touching the ground on which he was lost; he was lost, or he fell
by transgression. But now the question rises, What was he given to Christ for?
Was it for his own happiness, for his eternal glory? Certainly not. What, then?
For the ministry and apostleship?? "This ministry and apostleship" from "which
Judas by transgression fell." Matthias was elected to take "part of this
ministry and apostleship." No doubt, from other considerations, he was finally
lost, but that is not what is meant here. He was given to Christ; was one of the
chosen to the ministry, the apostleship, and from this ministry and apostleship
he fell and was lost. Paul was also one of the elect, was under the necessity of
having an eye to his conduct, lest having "preached the Gospel to others, he
himself should be a castaway." 1Co 9:27. If, then, one of the elect, one of the
chosen, one given to Christ, "by transgression fell and was lost" from that to
which he was elected, and another one of the elect had to labor to keep his body
in subjection, lest having "preached the Gospel to others, he himself should be
a castaway," it would be well for others, even if they could prove that they are
elected, not to rely too confidently on their election to save them. They, too,
might fall by transgression and be lost. But to return to John 17:1-26, please
examine carefully and see if you can decide who were given to Christ. The Lord
proceeds, verse 20: "Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also who shall
believe on me through their word, that they all may be one; as thou? Father, art
in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us; that the world may
believe that thou hast sent me." This passage refers to three classes: 1. Those
given to Christ, to whom he here does not confine his prayer, and through whose
word others are to believe. 2. Those who should believe through their word. 3.
The world, whom he desired to be convinced, by the union of the believers. The
first class are the elect, the chosen, or the apostles, who were to preach the
Word. The second class, the saints, or those made believers by hearing the words
of the apostles. The third class, the unbelieving world, whom he desired to be
influenced to believe by the union of the saints, or the believers. The position
is not here taken, and will not be anywhere in this discourse, that no elect is
mentioned in Scripture but the apostles and prophets of the New Testament. The
position here taken is, that the apostles and prophets of the New Testament are
the elect of Eph 1:4-12 and John 17:2-20. Having now determined, beyond dispute,
that the apostles and prophets are the persons here spoken of as given to
Christ, chosen in him before the foundation of the world--the elect; and that
this choice of God, or election, is to the prophetic and apostolic office, not
for their own benefit or happiness, but as the instruments through whom God
would reveal his will, make known the unsearchable riches of Christ, make all
men see the wisdom and goodness of God are exhibited in this election, and none
of that crude theory called Calvinism, or Augustinism, is found in it, or having
any footing. It was a wise and benevolent purpose of God to elect those persons,
or choose them in Christ for this great and good object, and all men have reason
for thankfulness and gratitude to God for this election, but not for the
Calvinistic theory of election. In view of all this, the apostle exclaims: "O,
the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how
unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out! For who has known
the mind of the Lord? or who has been his counselor? or who has first given to
him, and it shall be recompensed to him again? For of him, and through him, and
to him, are all things: to whom be glory forever." Rom 11:33-36. But other
important passages must be considered. Some man exclaims, "Does not the
Scripture say, ’Jacob have I loved, and Esau have I hated?’ and was not this
written before these two sons were born, and consequently before they had done
any good or evil?" The words "Jacob have I loved, and Esau have I hated," are
Scripture, but they were not written before Jacob and Esau were born. This
passage is found in Rom 9:13, as quoted by Paul from Mal 1:2-3, and was written
only three hundred and ninety years before Christ. The language "Jacob have I
loved, and Esau have I hated," as we have it in the old English style, does not
express the meaning of the original well. The full force of the original, as may
be shown by any amount of authority, is, "Jacob have I respected, and Esau have
I slighted." In what, then, did the Lord respect Jacob and slight Esau? Did he
elect Jacob to eternal glory and reprobate Esau to eternal damnation? Certainly
not. There is not a word of this kind in the language of the prophet, nor in the
comment of Paul on it. It will be seen by reference to the genealogy, as
recorded by Luke, that the Lord’s genealogy is traced from Joseph up, through
Jacob, to Abraham, or, indeed, to Adam; and, by reference to Mat 1:1-25, that
the genealogy is traced down from Abraham, through Jacob, to Christ. Esau being
the first-born, or the elder son, it was his right by birth, or he had the
birthright to be enrolled in the lineage, which was the lineage of Christ. But
the Lord slighted him in striking his name out of this lineage, and respected
Jacob in enrolling his name in the sacred line, in which the blood of Jesus was
to flow. But this was not done by an immutable and an arbitrary decree. Esau was
free, and acted as freely and voluntarily as any man ever acted in bartering
away and selling his birthright to Jacob. This is clear from Heb 12:18, where
Paul says, "Lest thereby any fornicator or profane person, as Esau, who, for one
morsel of meat, sold his birthright." The birthright, to be enrolled in the
genealogy, was his; but he sold it, lost it, and could not get it again, not on
account of any previous immutable decree, but by his own free and voluntary act.
It was not eternal life he had lost, nor was the birthright lost by an
unconditional, immutable, and an eternal decree, but by his own voluntary act.
The very first sight of this case, as set forth in Scripture, demolishes a
principal item in Calvinistic election. Their idea is, once in election, or,
which is the same, in grace, always in grace. Esau was born elect, or with a
birthright, and Jacob was born non-elect, or without a birthright; and Esau,
born elect, lost the election, and Jacob, born non-elect, gained the election,
retained it, and his name stands enrolled, and will so stand, among the elect in
the genealogy of our Lord till the last trumpet shall sound. But it was said to
the mother of these children, before they were born, "the elder shall serve the
younger." Rom 9:12, and Gen 25:23. This did not mean that the elder shall be
eternally lost, nor that the younger shall be eternally saved, nor did this find
its fulfillment in the persons, or in the life-time of these two children, nor
for hundreds of years after their day. As an evidence. of this, you will notice,
that after Jacob had served his twice seven years for Rachel, and become quite
wealthy, and when he was on his return to his own country, he learned that he
was about to meet Esau, at which he was alarmed, and sent presents to appease
Esau’s wrath, for fear he might suffer from him. He feared that Esau might
remember the little transaction about the birthright when they were boys. This
circumstance shows that Esau was no servant of Jacob at the time they here met,
but was the more powerful man, and that Jacob feared him. But, by attention to
the language, it will be seen that the language does not say, nor imply, that
the servitude was to be in Esau’s own person. The Lord said, "Two nations are in
thy womb, and two manner of people shall be separated from thee; and the elder
shall be stronger than the other people; and the elder shall serve the younger."
Gen 25:23. This was a prediction to ancient Rebecca touching two nations and two
manner of people that were to descend from her, or from her twins, not yet
born--Jacob and Esau--the descendants of the latter designated "the elder," and
the descendants of the younger designated "the younger," in the brief and very
elliptical prediction. These two nations were, in course of time, respectively
called Jacob and Esau, or Israel and Edom; and when the Lord uttered the words,
Mal 1:2-3, "Jacob have I loved, and Esau have I hated," he alluded to the two
nations, called Jacob and Esau, or Israel and Edom, and not to the two men,
Jacob and Esau, in their own persons. Israel he had respected, in making them
the elect, through whom the Messiah was to come, and passing the sacred
genealogy through them, and slighted Edom in not passing the sacred line through
them, and they finally became servants of Israel. The transaction about selling
and purchasing the birthright is not merely an amusing story, about two boys, to
entertain children, but apparently an unimportant transaction between two boys
that had a divine purpose in it, and turned the line of our Lord’s genealogy
from the course it was apparently about to take through the nation of Edom, and
running down through long and eventful centuries, in the nation of Israel, from
whom our Lord came. This is the election here, and there is no other in this
transaction. "But," says a man, "the Scripture says, ’Has not the potter power
over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel to honor and another to
dishonor?’ Are we not clay in the hands of the potter? Is not the Lord the
potter? Are we not merely passive in his hands? Will he not make us, then, as
seems good in his sight? Paul, Rom 9:21, alludes to this figure, as found Jer
18:1-10. The Lord is the potter. The people of whom he is speaking are the clay
in his hands, and he has power to make them vessels of wrath or of honor, as
seems good to the potter to make them. The prophet says: ’The word which came
from the Lord to Jeremiah, saying, Arise, and go down to the potter’s house, and
I will cause thee to hear my words. And I went down to the potter’s house, and,
behold, he wrought a work on the wheels. And the vessel he made of clay was
marred in the hands of the potter; so he made it again another vessel, as seemed
good to the potter to make it. Then the word of the Lord came to me, saying, O
house of Israel, cannot I do with you as this potter? saith the Lord. Behold, as
the clay is in the potter’s hand, so are you in my hand, O house of Israel.’"
Jer 18:1-4. It occurs sometimes, when the potter is turning a vessel on the
wheel, that it mars or breaks in his hand. When it does this, what is the cause
of it? Is it because he wills or decrees it? Is it because he desired it to
break in his hand? Surely not. It is contrary to his will. Why, then, does it
break in his hand? Because the clay is not good. The failure is not in the will
or decree of the potter, but in the bad clay, that cannot be made into a good
vessel. But the potter has the power, when the clay is bad and breaks in his
hand, to make it over again, as seems good to the potter to make it, into
another vessel, a coarser and rougher vessel, for some less honorable purpose.
With this explanation, please hear the words of the prophet, and try to learn
the reason why the Lord makes some vessels to honor and others to dishonor; for
he has the power and will make some vessels to honor and some to dishonor. The
Lord says, "At what instant I shall speak concerning a nation, and concerning a
kingdom, to pluck up, and to pull down, and to destroy it; if that nation,
against whom I have pronounced, turn from their evil, I will repent of the evil
I thought to do to them." Please, notice this language carefully. If what? "If
that nation, against whom I have pronounced, turn from their evil, I will repent
of the evil I thought to do them." It turns on their behavior. The Lord has the
power, and if they turn from their evil, he will turn away his wrath. But, now,
hear the Lord state the other side: "At what instant I shall speak concerning a
nation, and concerning a kingdom, to build and to plant it; if it do evil in my
sight, that obey not my voice, then will I repent of the good wherewith I said I
would benefit them." What is the ground here on which he will refuse to benefit
them? What is the contingency? If what? "If it do evil in my sight, that obey
not my voice, then will I repent of the good wherewith I said I would benefit
them." What does the whole matter turn on? On the obedience or disobedience of a
nation. If it disobeys the voice of God and does evil in his sight, he will make
it a vessel to dishonor, or utterly overthrow it. If it shall do good, obey his
voice, he will raise it up, and make it a vessel to honor. From all this, it is
clear that it entirely depends on the clay, the house of Israel. Unless wicked
nations turn from evil and obey the voice of God, they will be overthrown and
made vessels to dishonor. The same is true of individuals as well as nations.
This teaching is confirmed by Paul, 2Ti 2:21 : "If a man, therefore, shall purge
himself from these, he shall be a vessel to honor, sanctified and fit for the
Master’s use, and prepared to every good work." This is as clear as language can
be, showing that the whole matter of being a vessel to honor is
conditional--that if a man shall purge himself from these, he shall be a vessel
to honor. Men are not wicked because God makes them vessels to dishonor; but he
makes them vessels to dishonor, because they are wicked, as a punishment. When
God speaks to men, nations, and kingdoms, to pluck up and pull down, if they
repent, obey his voice, turn from their evil, he will make them vessels to honor
and fit for the Master’s use. Let men, nations, and kingdoms, then, tremble
before the majesty of heaven and earth. But the Scripture says, "He will have
mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardens." Certainly, the
Scripture says so, and it is as unquestionably true as anything ever uttered.
The Lord will have mercy on some and harden others. This is divinely true. But
there are several things not explained in this. 1. It is not explained whom God
will have mercy on, and whom he will harden. 2. It is not explained why God will
have mercy on some, nor why he will harden others. These are matters to be
inquired into. On whom, then, will the Lord have mercy? Turn to Exo 20:5-6 :
"Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them (images), nor serve them: for I the
Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the
children to the third and fourth generations of them that hate me; and showing
mercy to thousands of them that love me and keep my commandments." On whom will
he have mercy? On them that love him and keep his commandments. Why will he have
mercy on them? Because they love him and keep his commandments. On whom will he
visit iniquity? On them that hate him. Why will he visit iniquity on them?
Because they hate him. Turn to Neh 1:5, and hear the word of the Lord: "I
beseech thee, O Lord God of heaven, the great and terrible God, that keepeth
covenant and mercy for them that love him and observe his commandments." On whom
will he have mercy? On them, that love him and keep his commandments. Why will
he have mercy on them? Because they love him and keep his commandments. The
whole matter turns on the character of men, and not on any immutable decree of
God. Listen to the Savior, Mat 5:1-48 : "Blessed are the merciful, for they
shall obtain mercy." They who are merciful themselves shall obtain mercy. The
holy apostle says, "For he shall have judgment without mercy, who has showed no
mercy." Jas 2:13. The man who is himself merciful, shall have mercy, and the man
who has showed no mercy, or is unmerciful, shall have no mercy. The Lord will
not have mercy on him. The Lord will have mercy on whom he will have mercy. This
is decreed. When he tells whom he will have mercy on, it is on those that love
him and keep his commandments; and when he explains whom he hardens, or makes
vessels to dishonor, it is clearly seen that they are those who hate him and
disobey his voice. It should also be distinctly understood, that there are two
senses in which God is said to do things: 1. When he does things directly,
without any contingency. 2. Where he permits them to be done. In this latter
sense he hardens men. In that sense he hardened Pharaoh. Hence you read in the
Bible of Pharaoh hardening himself and of God hardening him. God only did by
permitting it. Pharaoh did directly, by his own acts. Listen to the word of the
Lord once more: "The righteousness of the righteous shall he on him, and the
wickedness of the wicked shall be on him. But if the wicked will turn away born
all his sins that he has committed, and keep all my statutes, and do that which
is lawful and right, he shall surely live; he shall not die. All his
transgressions that he has committed, they shall not be mentioned to him; in his
righteousness that he has done he shall live. Have I any pleasure at all that
the wicked should die? saith the Lord God; and not that he should turn from his
ways and live? But when the righteous turns away from his righteousness, and
commits iniquity, and does according to all the abominations that the wicked man
does, shall he live? All his righteousness that he has done shall not he
mentioned; in his trespass that he has trespassed, and in his sins that he has
sinned, in them shall he die." Eze 18:20-24. If anything can he clearly stated,
this passage states the case clearly, showing whom God will have mercy on, and
who shall surely die. The man who turns from his sins shall surely live; he
shall not die; but the man who turns away from his righteousness shall not live;
he shall surely die. Such is the immutable decree of God touching those on whom
he will have mercy, and those whom he will harden. Does any one desire a fuller
explanation touching the question whom the Lord will harden? Listen to the
following: "Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan, with all
power, and signs, and lying wonders, and with all deceivableness of
unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the
truth, that they might be saved. And for this cause God shall send them strong
delusion, that they should believe the lie: that they all might be condemned who
believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness." 2Th 2:9-12. The
decree of God, then, is that he will have mercy on them who love him and keep
his commandments, and harden those who hate him and receive not the love of the
truth. Men are not, then, vile and sinful because God hardens them; nor do they
refuse to receive the love of the truth because he hardens them, but he hardens
them because they receive not the love of the truth--because they are vile and
sinful. On the other hand, men are not good because God has mercy on them, but
he has mercy on them because they love him, obey his voice, do those things that
are pleasing in his sight. "But I do not believe that men can fall from grace,"
says one. That may be. Men do not believe things that are true, in some
instances. What say the Scriptures? "For it is impossible for those who were
once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers
of the Holy Spirit, and have tasted of the good word of God, and the powers of
the world to come, if they shall fall away, to renew them again to repentance;
seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to open
shame." Heb 6:4-6. Certainly none but Christians, saints, those in Christ, in
grace, have tasted the heavenly gift, partaken of the Holy Spirit, tasted the
good word of God or the powers of the world to come. Yet Paul speaks of such,
and of their falling away, as well as the impossibility of renewing them again
to repentance. Hear the apostle again: "For if we sin willfully after we have
received the knowledge of the truth, there remains no more sacrifice for sin."
Heb 10:26. Surely none but saints ever received the knowledge of the truth, and
if such sin willfully, there remains no more sacrifice for sin. This shows that
saints may sin, and that, too, so greatly as to lose their interest in the only
sin-offering--the Lord from heaven. The theory that men cannot fall from grace
is clearly contradicted and refuted by the closing words of the Book of God: "If
any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall
take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from
the things that are written in this book." Rev 22:19. Certainly none but saints
ever had a part in the book of life, and in the holy city, and most
indisputably, if a man has his part taken out of the book of life, and out of
the holy city, he is fallen and undone forever. But hear the apostle once more:
"For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do
the whole law. Christ is become of none effect to you, whoever of you are
justified by the law; YOU ARE FALLEN FROM GRACE." Gal 5:3-4. Here is an end to
the controversy--a final settlement of the question. Do you desire, then, the
Lord to have mercy on you; that he may not harden you; send you strong
delusions, and make you vessels of dishonor? Then remember his word, that he
will have mercy on them that love him and keep his commandments; on them that
are merciful, and that he will send strong delusion on those who receive not the
love of the truth, but have pleasure in unrighteousness. As you desire that he
may not make an example of you, as he did of Pharaoh of old, harden not your
hearts against him, but receive the love of the truth, obey his voice, and he
will have mercy on you. You may run and will, as Esau did, after he sold his
birthright; but you must remember that it is God who shows mercy, and he has
clearly defined that he will have mercy on the merciful--on them who love him
and keep his commandments, and not on them who hate him and obey not his voice.
You may will and run, argue and contend that God will save you; nay, more, that
he will save all; but if you do not love God, and keep his commandments, he will
not have mercy on you. God has made you free, and says: "To whom you yield
yourselves servants to obey, his servants you are to whom you obey; whether of
sin to death, or of obedience to righteousness." Rom 6:16. "If I had not come
and spoken to them, they had not had sin; but now they have no cloak for their
sin." Again says the Lord: "If I had not done among them the works which none
other man did, they had not had sin; but now have they both seen and hated me
and my father." John 15:22-24. The Lord does not say, "You could not come to
me," but "you would not come to me that you might have life." The light has come
into the world, and men choose darkness rather than light, because their deeds
are evil. "But," says a man, "does not Jesus say, ’No man can come to me, except
the father who has sent me draw him?’" Yes, sir, he so says, and proceeds at
once to tell how the father draws them. The next verse says: "It is written in
the prophets, they shall be all taught of God. Every man, therefore, that has
heard, and learned of the father, comes to me." John 4:44-45. The father taught
them by the prophets; they heard and learned this teaching of the father by the
prophets, and were thus drawn to the Savior. "But, I do not believe any man can
come till the Lord gives him power," says a man. To whom does the Lord give
power? "As many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of
God, even to them that believe on his name." John 1:12. To whom gave he power?
"To as many as received him"--"to them that believe on his name." He did not
give to them the power to enable them to believe, or to receive him, but he gave
those who received him and believed on his name power to become the sons of God.
The Lord cried over the devoted city: "O Jerusalem! Jerusalem! thou that killest
the prophets and stonest those who have been sent to thee; how often would I
have gathered thy children as a hen gathers her brood, but you would not." Here
is the true reason why men are not gathered to the Lord: they will not be
gathered.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 13: GP1 - 12-THE NECESSITY OF REGENERATION
========================================================================

SERMON, No. XII.

THEME.--THE NECESSITY OF REGENERATION.

TEXT.--"Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God."--Mat 5:8.

THE words selected and read, are not designed as a text, in the popular sense,
but merely as a starting-point, in discussing a great theme--the necessity of
regeneration, or, which is the same, simply the necessity of turning to God. No
attempt will be made, in this discourse, to discuss regeneration or conversion
minutely, but the importance of it will be argued and maintained; or, rather,
the indispensable necessity of it. The Sermon on the Mount, as it is generally
styled, was delivered some three and a half years before the full development of
the Gospel and kingdom, and no one need expect to find, in that discourse, the
details of the new institution; or the law of induction, the plan of founding
churches, the officering, management, and discipline of the congregations, as
these matters were unfolded and developed afterward. It contained, as might have
been justly expected, the general principles of the new and better covenant on
better promises. In this opening speech, one of the great principles unfolded
is, that reference is now to be made to the state of the heart: "Blessed are the
pure in heart, for they shall see God." Some of the translations, no doubt
correctly, too, instead of this word "blessed," give us the word happy. "Happy
are the pure in heart." The word "see," here, does not mean to see with the eye,
for in that sense "every eye shall see him." It is here used in the sense of
enjoy. "Happy are the pure in heart, for they shall enjoy God." Here, then, in
the Lord’s great opening discourse, soon after he had entered his divine
mission, he makes a grand discrimination between purity and impurity, the pure
and the impure in heart. When he says "Happy are the pure in heart," he implies,
with all the force of language, that the impure in heart are not happy. The
principle is, that purity of heart and happiness go hand in hand. Impurity of
heart and unhappiness also are joined hand in hand. Men may flatter themselves
that they will escape, that they can cherish impurity of heart and still be
happy, but they will find themselves mistaken. The immutable decree of God has
settled it, that impurity and misery shall be joined hand in hand; that purity
and happiness shall be joined hand in hand. Men may try to evade as they please,
but still, there stands the law, facing them and thundering in their ears,
"Happy are the pure in heart." No man can be happy with an impure heart. A man
must be made pure in heart before he can be happy. Thus far it all relates to
the present, without looking into the future, and some Universalist may say,
that the passage sustains his doctrine, that rewards and punishments are all in
this life, that the Lord simply says, "Happy are the pure in heart," and not
that they shall receive this happiness in the future. Such an idea might be
possible, if there were nothing different anywhere else, and if the Lord had not
added the clause "for they shall see God." This makes a discrimination between
the pure and impure in heart, in reference to the future. All who have noticed
Universalists, in their writings and preaching, have observed what a world of
trouble they have with such words and phrases as the following: misery, torment,
punishment, hell, the lake of fire, second death, the devil, Satan, etc. Still,
if not one of these words or promises could be found in the Bible, and we were
to read in the first sermon of our Lord, "Happy are the pure in heart, for they
shall enjoy God," there would be no hope remaining that the impure in heart
would ever enjoy God. It throws an everlasting gloom over the prospects of the
impure in heart in reference to the boundless future. Seeing, then, that both
present and future happiness stands connected with purity of heart, as our Lord
taught in his first sermon, it becomes a matter of great importance to determine
what he meant by "pure in heart." There is a great tendency in these times, to
mix up things and make it appear that all men are pretty much alike; that they
all have some good in them, and some bad; that there is not much difference
after all. You will hear men saying every now and then, "I never knew a man so
bad that he had not some good in him; nor a man so good that he had not some bad
in him." Still, these same men know that there is a vast difference between men.
There is a vast difference between an apple-tree that yields abundance of fruit
and nearly all good, and a tree that yields but little fruit and nearly all bad.
So there is a vast difference between a man whose conduct is nearly all good,
and a man whose conduct is nearly all bad. Some men’s lives are nearly all
filled up with good deeds, while some others are so nearly filled up with bad
deeds that it is only an occasional thing to find a good deed. This is a wide
difference. But this is not ascertaining what it its to be pure in heart. It is
not, then, to be so perfect that one cannot sin, be overtaken in a fault, or
surprised into an evil. The "pure in heart" are those who ardently desire to do
good, are aiming and striving to do good; who hunger and thirst after
righteousness. They purpose good in their hearts, intend or design good. Their
meditations are good, pure, and holy. If they sin, they are surprised into sin,
or overtaken in a fault. But the impure in heart, or, which is the same, the
corrupt in heart, meditate sin, design it, purpose in their hearts frauds,
blasphemy, corruptions in general. Their designs, desires, and aims are corrupt.
How transcendently are those who are pure in heart, whose desires, aims, and
intentions are all pure, above the low, the corrupt, and degraded! They have an
abiding consciousness of the purest, holiest, and highest intentions. They are
not faultless, perfect, or immaculate, as Jesus, or as angels. They are not
utterly sinless, and do not claim to be; but they desire the perfection, purity,
and holiness of Jesus, and are seeking after it. These are pure in heart now,
and happy. They, also, have the promise that they shall in the future enjoy God.
But if Universalists could annihilate hell and the devil, as they appear so
determined sometimes to do, this passage would stand eternally in the way of the
impure or corrupt in heart ever enjoying God. No reasoning in this universe can
ever recover them from this. But that there may not appear to be too much
suspended on a single isolated expression, another passage shall be summoned:
"Follow peace with all men, and holiness, without which no man shall see the
Lord." Heb. xii :14. This is fuller than the language just commented on. It not
only includes the purity of heart, but the practice flowing from it, without
which it unequivocally declares, no man shall see the Lord. The word "see,"
here, is used in the same sense as before; that is, "without holiness no man
shall enjoy the Lord." If you could annihilate the devil, hell, the second
death, lake of fire, the bottomless pit, misery, punishment, and torment, the
case is not relieved. There stands the terrible declaration, "without which no
man shall enjoy the Lord." No matter where the man or woman is, or who, without
holiness no person shall enjoy theLord. No evasion, caviling, or sophistry can
get over this. There it stands, and there it wild stand till the eternal
judgment, testifying that men must follow peace and holiness in this life, or
they shall not enjoy the Lord in the future. Being made "pure in heart" amounts
to the same as being made holy, for it leads to following peace with all men and
holiness, without which no man shall enjoy the Lord. No man is regenerated, born
again, or converted, according to the New Testament, who is not made pure in
heart, or holy in life. An argument in favor of being made pure in heart, or
holy, is an argument in favor of regeneration, the new birth, or conversion, and
the law requiring purity of heart, or holiness, is virtually a law requiring a
man to be born again, regenerated, or converted. It is not claimed that these
several terms mean precisely the same, but the man converted, created anew, or
born again, is made pure in heart, holy, or he is regenerated. Though being made
pure in heart is not the whole process of turning to the Lord, or regeneration,
it leads to it and results in it. Hence the faith of Christ begins with the
heart, corrects it, changes, or purifies it. This purification of the heart
leads to a pure life, or corrects, or purifies the life, resulting in
righteousness and true holiness. But no reasoning on a subject like this can be
as satisfactory as an actual conversation between a man and the Savior of the
world. Attention is, therefore, invited to an actual conversation between our
Lord and a no less distinguished personage than Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews,
who came to the Savior by night to have a personal interview. It is not certain
that there is anything in the circumstances of his coming by night, but those a
little accustomed to notice the movements of religious teachers, might think
there was a little lack of bold manliness. The cause of his coming by night is
not entirely clear, and might be assumed to be that he was not willing for it to
be known that he had the interview; or that he was under the influence of a
little policy, such as is often seen on the part of religious teachers and
spiritual guides, inducing them to be cautious about setting an example that
might open the way for weak brethren to hear something not orthodox. Many
amusing things are observed on the part of spiritual guides of our own times,
who really desire to hear, but fear the influence of their example, and slip in
late, take the first seat they can find. They sit, sometimes, as if they did not
desire any one to see them there, and then show their contempt and low-breeding
by going out while the closing hymn is being sung. Politeness is not to be
expected, nor even common civility from a man who has once become a blind
devotee to party, and such a man will violate rules of politeness in such
rudeness as he would rebuke in an infidel. Nicodemus may have been under no such
low and unworthy feeling as just alluded to, but the probability is that some
such influence caused him to go at night. Be this as it may, he put on the best
address he could command, and approached the Savior in the most respectful terms
he could use. He said: "Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher from God, for no
man can do these miracles which thou doest except God be with him." He used the
title rabbi in about the same sense as some do the titles "Rev.," "Rt. Rev.,"
"Dr.," etc., as prefixes or affixes to names, not having consequence enough to
pass without some such appendages. He evidently was aiming to please the Savior,
and supposed he would be pleased, as the Jewish rabbis were, to be called rabbi.
Hence he addressed him, "Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher from God." This
was making a broader concession than many of his fellow-rabbis would thank him
for. He not only speaks for himself, but for others with himself: "We know that
thou art a teacher from God." Nor does he speak in any doubtful terms, such as
we think, we feel, we trust, or even we admit, but in the most unequivocal
terms, "We know." Nor does he, like many of the present time, say "we know,"
without telling how he knew. He adds: "For no man can do these miracles which
thou doest except God be with him." Certainly this was a good reason for saying,
"We know that thou art a teacher from God." No one could perform the wonderful
works which he did unless God was with him. The Lord looked on him in view of
the admission he had made, and the very first sentence he uttered struck from
under him his entire religious foundation, thus leaving him standing among his
fellow-citizens of the world, but outside of the kingdom of God. Hear his words:
"Verily, verily, I say to you, except a man be born again he cannot see the
kingdom of God." This was all new to Nicodemus. He understood nothing of the
meaning of this language, and, in confusion, inquired how a man can be born when
he is old, evidently seeing nothing beyond a natural birth, or a birth of the
flesh. He did not see that it was a deadly blow at his birthright membership in
the Church, and a clear declaration that his old birthright gave him no
membership in the new kingdom about to be introduced. The Lord then proceeded in
language a little fuller: "Verily, verily, I say to you, except a man be born of
water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God." Nicodemus
stands in wonder and amazement. The Lord replies, "Marvel not that I said to
you, you must be born again." Why did the Savior address him in this style? Why
did he say, "Verily, verily, I say to you, except a man be born again, he cannot
see the kingdom of God?" See how emphatic he is: "Verily, verily," is most
assuredly. "Most assuredly, I say to you, except a man be born again, he cannot
see the kingdom of God." The word "see" here is used in the sense of
enjoy--"except a man be born again, he cannot enjoy the kingdom of God." Why
does the Lord thus address the ruler in Israel? For a good and a wise reason. He
knew that not only Nicodemus, but all Jews, would be ready to claim membership
in his Church, or, which is the same, under a different form of speech,
citizenship in his kingdom, on the ground of their fleshly birthright, or their
fleshly relation to Abraham, and not on being born of the Spirit. At the time of
this conversation, the thought had never entered into the mind of Nicodemus that
the Messiah, when he came, would change the entire ground of membership, so as
to set aside entirely all claims on the old ground, and require all members of
the old church, on the old ground, the same as Pagans, to become members on the
new ground, or not enter the kingdom at all. This the Lord declared to the rabbi
in Israel, though he evidently did not understand it, nor any one else at that
time. From his earliest recollection, his fleshly birthright, which gave him
membership in the old church, was the ground of membership to which his
attention had been directed. He had never in his life heard of such a thing as a
spiritual qualification for membership in the Church, or a moral condition. As
far as he had ever heard, flesh and not spirit, blood and not faith, the first
birth and not the second, had been kept before him as the ground of membership.
The descendants of Abraham, according to the flesh, or, as the Lord expressed
it, "those born in thy house," and not those "born again," were in the covenant.
This was the ground of membership, and the only ground with a Jew. This was a
startling point to the Jew. It appeared to him like setting aside the law of
God. It was, indeed, superseding one ground of membership with another, and a
different one, or rather superseding one institution with another, and a
different one. The matter now is not to be Abraham’s children according to the
flesh, but Abraham’s children by faith; not to be of fleshly Israel, but of
spiritual Israel. They are not all of Israel, who are so according to the flesh.
It is written, "In Isaac shall the seed be counted." It is of the spirit and not
flesh, of faith and not of a blood relation. A Jew is nothing now, circumcision
is nothing, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature. We have no confidence in the
flesh now, or in a fleshly relation to Abraham. Away with your long rolls of
genealogy, and your controversies about them. It matters not now whose children
you are, or whose descendants; nor is it a matter of any consequence whose blood
flows in your veins; whether your fleshly descent is from Isaac or Ishmael, from
Jacob or Esau; whether you are of this nation or that. The question now is, have
you been "born again," "born of the Spirit," "born of God," made "a new
creature?" The question is not whether you have the blood of Abraham in your
veins, but whether you have the faith of Abraham. It is useless to set up the
cry of unchristianizing good people. This has nothing to do with the argument.
Is the ground taken true? Is is true that, in order to be in the kingdom of God,
a man "must be born again"--"must be born of water and of the Spirit?" It is as
certainly true as that the Bible is a divine book, or as that Jesus is divine.
Men must be born again, not of corruptible, but of incorruptible seed, the word
of God; not of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of the will of
God. The saints are in Christ, not by flesh nor by blood, but by faith, by the
spirit of God, by yielding themselves to the will of God to be servants of God.
This is true as Holy Writ. It cuts off no one. No one can be cut off from the
Church who was never in it. No one was ever in the Church of Christ who was
never "born again." The argument may show many that they were never in the
Church, and thus give them the opportunity to enter into it, but it will never
cut any off who were never in it. In the same way it never unchristianizes any
one. No one who has never been christianized can be unchristianized. Nicodemus
had never been christianized, and consequently was not unchristianized by
anything Jesus said. He was only shown, or would have been shown if he had
understood the Lord, that he was never in the kingdom--never christianized. The
same would be true of thousands now if they should understand this teaching;
they would learn simply that they had never been in the kingdom, and could not
be cut off from a kingdom which they had never been in; that they had never been
christianized, and consequently could not be unchristianized. What does the Lord
mean by the words, "Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot
enter into the kingdom of God?" This language was not understood by Nicodemus,
nor any other man of his time. Nor is it well understood now. It will,
therefore, be necessary to bestow a little careful attention to its elucidation
now. There is but one birth here, and not two, as some have supposed. It is one
birth, "of water and of the Spirit," and not two births, one of water and one of
Spirit. This is so clear from the structure of the language itself, that it is
useless to argue it here. What does this figurative word "birth" here stand for?
or, in other words, what does "born again" mean, or amount to, in literal
language? It literally means turned to the Lord, converted, or made a Christian.
That is all there is in it. But, returning again to the figure "born of water
and of the Spirit;" what is the sum of it? In order to a literal birth, there
are two things necessary: 1. Begetting. 2. Birth. Those two parts are included
in our Lord’s figurative language. One of these parts is ascribed to the Spirit,
and the other to the water, as the one, in a natural birth, is ascribed to the
father, and the other to the mother. When a child is born of its parents, or of
the father and mother, it is clearly begotten by the father and born of the
mother. In the figurative language in hand, the begetting is of the Spirit and
the birth of the water. But what is the precise thing meant by being begotten of
the Spirit? It it precisely the same as begotten of God, for it is of God, of
Christ, of the apostles, and of the word of God, and ascribed to God, Christ,
the Spirit, the apostles, and the Word, but in different senses. It is ascribed
to God as the author of it; to Jesus as the Mediator, by whom it is effected; by
the Spirit as the agent; by the apostles whom he employed to speak the word, and
by the word as the instrument by which it is done. Literally: what, then, is
done when a man is begotten of God? He is made a believer. This is the sum total
of what is meant by the figurative expression begotten. "Begotten of God" is
made a believer by means ordained of God. When a man is begotten by the word of
truth, he is simply made a believer by the word of truth. When the apostle says
"I have begotten you by the Gospel," it is, literally, I have made you believers
by preaching the Gospel to you. Paul ascribed this begetting to himself in view
of his instrumentality in preaching the Gospel. He could have ascribed it to the
Spirit, as the agent who spoke through him, or to God, who gave the Spirit, as
the author of it all, or to the word as the immediate instrument through whom
they were made believers. The part of the work, then, in the expression "born of
water and of the Spirit," ascribed to the Spirit, is making the believer. The
part ascribed to the water is baptism. It amounts to the same as the words in
the commission, "He who believes and is immersed, shall be saved." The part
ascribed to the Spirit stands for belief, the part ascribed to the water stands
for immersion, and entering into the kingdom amounts to the same as "saved;" for
all who enter the kingdom are saved or pardoned, and none who do not enter the
kingdom are saved or pardoned. But some one is ready to say, "You are not to
assume that ’born of water’ is the same in amount as baptism." Why not? This
language was applied to baptism by Luther, Calvin, Wesley, and all the
distinguished reformers. It is so applied by all the authorities of note in all
the libraries. This very language is quoted and applied to baptism in the
Episcopalian creed, the Methodist creed, and the Presbyterian creed, and the
churches having these creeds have so held from the commencement of their
existence. There is, then, nothing novel in taking this ground. The strange part
is, that those who have had this in their creed from the commencement of their
church existence, should now repudiate it. The sum of it is, then, that the Lord
taught, by the figurative expression, "Except a man be born of water and of the
Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God," the same he did afterward,
literally, in the words: "He who believes and is immersed shall be saved"--"or
except a man shall believe and be immersed he cannot be saved." The difference
is only in form of expression and not in substance. "But," a man exclaims, "our
preacher explains all that by quoting the words, "The wind bloweth where it
listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh
nor whither it goeth; so is every one that is born of the Spirit." Before your
preacher or any body else can explain anything by quoting that passage, he must
tell us what that passage itself means. No passage can explain anything unless
the passage itself can be understood by the person for whom the explanation is
made. But it must be here stated that this passage is not quoted to explain
anything. It is quoted for the purpose of hiding a dark or obscure passage, and
appearing to be explaining when nothing is being explained. It is a little like
Dr. George Campbell, of Scotland, in quizzing a student about a sermon he had
heard. He asked the student what he thought of it. He replied that it was very
great. "What was there in it that was great?" said the doctor. "It was
profound," replied the student. "What was there in it profound?" inquired the
doctor. "It was deep," responded the student. "Muddy water always appears deep,"
said the doctor. That is the way with referring to this passage, it is to get
into muddy water to appear deep. But now some attention must be bestowed on this
obscure passage, and an effort made to ascertain what the Lord meant. No man,
who never read anything but the common version, is to blame for not
understanding this Scripture, for it is wholly unintelligible. The first thing,
then, will be to show that there is nothing about "wind" in the passage--that
the Lord is not telling what the wind does, or what it does not; what it is
like, or what it is not like. He is talking about the Spirit; not merely spirit,
but the Spirit; what the Spirit does--the Spirit of God--and not what the wind
does or does not do. The original Greek word rendered "wind" here, in the common
version, is pneuma, and the following reasons are given to show that it does not
mean "wind," and should not be so translated: 1. Pneumais not the Greek word
translated "wind" in other passages where we know "wind" is meant. The Greek
word anemos occurs thirty-one times in the New Testament, and is rightly
translated "wind" in every instance in the common version. If the Lord had meant
"wind," he would unquestionably have used anemos, which means wind, and not
pneuma, which means "spirit." Pneo is, in one instance, translated wind in the
common version, and that, too, where it is clear that wind is meant. 2.
Pneumaoccurs three hundred and eighty-six times in the New Testament, and is not
translated "wind" in any other instance but that one in the common version. It
is the original for spirit, and is translated "spirit," or its equivalent,
"ghost," in every instance where these words are found in the common version,
with probably one exception. What ground had the translators for turning aside
here, and where pneuma not only means spirit, but the Spirit of God, translating
it "wind?" They had not a reason in the world for it. 3. The same original Greek
wordpneuma,occurs in four other instances in the same connection, and is
translated "spirit" in each of these four places in the common version. By what
rule did they, in the same connection in our Lord’s discourse, and on precisely
the same subject, translate pneuma, spirit, four times and wind once? There can
certainly be no reason for this. The Lord meant spirit every time he used the
word pneuma in this passage, and in the case in hand he meant the Holy Spirit,
or the Spirit of God. But some further attention must now be given to the King
James’ version of the passage. No man is to blame for not understanding this
passage if he never heard anything but the common version. It is simply
unintelligible. Please pause and look at it. It starts out with the word "wind."
Well, what does it make our Lord say about the wind? Why, simply, that "the wind
blows." Well, that is precisely what the wind does--it blows. Where does it make
the Lord say the wind blows? "Where it listeth." This old English word "listeth"
means pleases or wills. The wind blows where it pleases or wills. But the wind
has neither pleasure nor will. Pleasure and will belong to intelligence and not
to inanimate matter. But what more does the common version make the Lord say
about the wind? "Thou hearest the sound thereof, and canst not tell whence it
cometh nor whither it goeth." Which is it that this version makes our Lord say?
Nicodemus could not tell whence it came nor whither it went, the sound or the
wind. Certainly he could have told whence the sound or the wind either came. But
it makes the Lord proceed, "So is every one that is born of the Spirit." What is
the point of comparison here? What is every one born of the Spirit compared to?
Is he like the wind or the sound? or is the influence of the Spirit like the
wind? This cannot be, for Nicodemus could tell whence the wind came and the
influence of the Spirit. The more you try to understand this passage from the
common version the darker it appears. But now turn aside from the common
version, and dismiss all idea of "wind" from your mind, or the Lord, in this
connection, making any allusion to the wind. He has a much greater theme than
wind. He starts with "the Spirit"--to tell what the Spirit does. "The Spirit
breathes." What means this word "breathes?" Saul breathed out threatenings
against the disciples. How did he breathe out threatenings? Breathed them out in
words. "The Spirit breathes where he pleases or wills." The Spirit is an
intelligence, and it is consistent to speak of his breathing where he will. He
has a will or pleasure, and does as he wills or pleases. Well, he breathes or
inspires where he wills or pleases, and "you hear his voice." This shows that
the breathing results in uttering words with the voice, else you could not hear
his voice. Jesus said to the apostles, in view of their preaching under the last
commission, "It shall not be you that speak, but the Holy Spirit shall speak in
you." The Holy Spirit speaks in the apostles, and men hear his voice; but at the
time the Lord talked with Nicodemus, neither he nor any other man knew whence
this voice of inspiration came, nor whither it tended. That was not yet opened
up. That was true and applicable in the case of Nicodemus and all others then,
but not of us now. The Lord does not say to us now that we cannot tell whence
this voice of the Spirit of God comes nor whither it tends. It comes from
heaven, clothed with all authority. The Spirit of God inspires or breathes where
he pleases, and you hear his voice. What is the result of hearing his voice? "So
is every one that is born of the Spirit." Instead of "born," here, we should
have begotten: "So is every one that is begotten of the Spirit." Still this
leaves the passage dark. There is one word wanting to complete the sense. "So,"
or, in this way, "is every one begotten that is begotten of the Spirit." In what
way? By hearing the voice of the Spirit. The Spirit of God breathes where he
will, or inspires where he pleases, and through these inspired persons you hear
his voice and are thus begotten by the Spirit. This makes the passage teach the
same as "I have begotten you by the Gospel," which is the same as made you
believers by the Gospel, or "begotten by the word of truth," which is the same
as made you believers by the word of truth. Whether this is correct or not, one
thing is certain, it makes it teach truth, as taught in other passages. This is
safe at least, and makes it intelligible, and doubtless it is the meaning of the
passage. Speaking of the entire process of turning to God, under the figure of
being "born again," the Lord said to the rabbi of Israel, "Marvel not that I
said to you, that you must be born again." This is putting the case in strong
terms. It is not that you ought to be born again, that it would be well to be
born again, or that you should be born again, if you feel like it; but "you must
be born again." This includes the whole--the faith, being made pure in heart,
repentance, and being immersed--the entire process, or regeneration. It is
something that must be. Regeneration is not simply something that may be, ought
to be, or should be, but something that must be. It is indispensable. Having now
seen that our Lord, when speaking of the process of turning to God, as a whole,
declares it to be something that must be, let a few moments be spent in looking
at some of the parts of the process and see if he speaks of them in the same
unequivocal manner. Faith is a part of the process, the first part, and that
which makes the first impression on the human soul, and leads to every thing
else following in the conversion and new life. How, then, does the Lord speak of
faith? It is indispensable. Hear the word of the Lord: "Without faith it is
impossible to please him; for he who comes to God must believe that he is, and
that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him." Heb 9:6. He does not
say, that it would be well for men to believe, that men should believe, or that
men ought to believe; but that "he who comes to God must believe." That which
the Lord says must be, cannot be set aside, except at the peril of him who does
it. Please look at another item. Is repentance indispensable, or something that
must be? "Except you repent, you shall all likewise perish." But some one will
say, "It does not say you must repent." Do not be too certain of that. What does
the Lord mean by the word "except?" "Except you repent, you shall all likewise
perish." We must have his own comment on this. "Except a man be born again he
cannot enter into the kingdom of God." A few words further on, he says,
referring to the same thing: "Marvel not that I said to you, you must be born
again." He here explains his words, "Except you be born again, you cannot enter
into the kingdom of God," to mean "You must be born again." So, when he says,
"Except you repent, you shall all likewise perish," it is the same as "You must
repent or perish." The Lord does not trifle with men, but informs them what they
must and what they must not do. There is no such thing as dispensing with
repentance any more than faith. "He who comes to God must believe, and it is
equally true that he who comes to God must repent. There is no coming to God, on
the part of any human being, without these indispensable prerequisites. Without
these, a confession, an immersion, joining a church, communing, deeds of
charity, etc., would all avail nothing. They must be in their place. "Well,"
says a man, "I am glad that it does not say You mustbe immersed." In that you
may find yourself sadly mistaken. It does virtually say, "You must be immersed."
Turn, if you please, to Acts 9:6, and you will find the account of the Lord’s
appearing to young Saul, and proclaiming to him, "I am Jesus of Nazareth whom
you persecute." Saul inquires, "Lord, what wilt thou have me to do?" The Lord
replies, "Arise and go into the city, and it shall be told you what you must
do." The Lord does not say, It shall be told you what is your duty to do, or
what would be well to do, what you ought to do, if it accords with your way of
thinking, or if you feel like it, but what you must do. The Lord appears to
Ananias, and commands him to go to Saul and tell him what he must do. Ananias
says, We have heard of this man, and learn that he is persecuting all who call
on thy name. The Lord explains that he had appeared to him, called him to the
ministry, and shown him how great things he shall suffer for the name of Jesus,
and that he was actually praying to him. Ananias, hearing this explanation,
hesitates not to go to him, to tell him, as the Lord commanded, what he must
do.Acts 22:16, we learn what Ananias told him to do, in the following words:
"Why tarriest thou? Arise, and be immersed, and wash away your sins, calling on
the name of the Lord." In these words, he told him, as the Lord commanded, what
he must do, in doing which he commanded him to be immersed. This was one thing,
then, that the Lord said he must do. It is, then, one thing that men must do now
in turning to God. It is the terminating act in turning to the Lord. It
concludes the process. This is no stronger than the Lord’s own language: "Except
a man be born of water and of the Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of
God." "Born of water" is undoubtedly an allusion to immersion, and, as before
stated in this discourse, is quoted and applied to baptism by all the standard
works, the creeds, and principal authorities. The Lord gave significance and
authority to this institution, when he came to John the Immerser and demanded
immersion of him. John excused himself, saying, "I have need to be immersed of
thee, and comest thou to me?" The Lord replied, "Suffer it to be so now, for
thus it becomes us to fulfill all righteousness." John yielded, in view of this
exposition, and immersed him. Ascending the bank of Jordan, they lifted their
eyes, and saw heaven opened and the Spirit, in a visible form, descending and
resting on the Lord. The Almighty Father made this the occasion to introduce his
Son to Israel, and spoke from his excellent glory, saying, "This is my Son, in
whom I am well pleased." The Lord still further shows the importance of this
ordinance, in saying, as he did to certain Jews, "You rejected the counsel of
God against yourselves, not being immersed by John." If men, in refusing to be
immersed by John, rejected the counsel of God against themselves, what will be
the result in rejecting the greater immersion, appointed by our Lord, "into the
name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit?" But you shall be
detained no longer, now, with the discussion of the importance of immersion. It
has been shown clearly that a man must believe. The reason of this is, that
faith changes or purifies the heart, and prepares it for the service of God.
Unless the heart is thus prepared, nothing good can follow. It has also been
shown that a man must repent. The reason of this is, that repentance is such a
change in the mind as will result in a change in the future life prepares him in
character or life for the new state or relation. When the heart is changed by
faith, and the life is changed by repentance, the subject is ready for
induction, or initiation, or for a new state or relation. When Saul had believed
and repented, and Ananias told what he must do, it was what he must do in
addition to his faith and repentance, in order to salvation from past sin and
admission into the kingdom. In order to this end, he was commanded to be
immersed. The reason that a man must be immersed is, that in immersion he is
initiated or inducted into the kingdom, the new state or relation. The heart
being already changed by faith, and his life already changed by repentance, he
is ready for the enjoyment of the new state or relation. Faith does not initiate
any one into a new state, but only changes the heart and prepares a person in
heart for the new state. Repentance does not initiate any person into the new
state, but only prepares the person in life for initiation. Immersion does not
change the heart or life, but changes the state or relation of the person
previously prepared in heart and life by faith and repentance for the new state
or relation. Nor is immersion the evidence of a previous pardon, but the last
step in order to a future pardon--a pardon promised on certain conditions. "He
who believes and is immersed shall be saved." "Except a man be born again he
cannot enjoy the kingdom of God," or enjoy justification, salvation from sin, or
pardon. "That teaching is unreasonable," says a man. No, sir; it is not
unreasonable. There is nothing more reasonable and certain than that a man must
be born again before he can enjoy the kingdom of God, enjoy God himself, or our
Lord Jesus the Christ. That the unregenerate, the unconverted, or the people of
the world, as they are in their sins, cannot enjoy God, is as evident as any
proposition ever uttered. Look at it for a few moments. Here is a man who is
moral, truthful, honest, and honorable as a man of the world; kind and good as a
neighbor and in his family. He stands transcendently above the immoral, the
lying, corrupt, debased, and dishonest. He says to himself, "I am as good as
many in the Church. I speak the truth, deal honestly, live morally, and would
not do manythings that members of church do, and if I should die, I believe I
shall be saved." Well, sir, suppose you come up here and take the front seat at
the Lord’s table, as you are already so good, and join in the celebration of the
Lord’s death. You, no doubt, will be happy in contemplating his great sufferings
for our sins, and partaking of the emblems of his body and blood. Come, sit with
the saints and view him, as he hung on the cross, crowned with thorns, his hands
nailed to the cross. Look at his face, all crimsoned with blood, and all his
muscles in a quiver, as he is in the very agonies of death. View him, oh! view
him, and keep your mind on him till, in your imagination, you see him breathe
the last breath, silently expire, and his head fall lifeless on his breast. See
the thick darkness gathering down over the whole land. Oh! try and realize the
wonderful surroundings, the trembling earth, crumbling rocks, and the parting of
the vail in the temple! Come, as you are good; sit here and contemplate this
scene. You respond "No." Again, you say "No; I cannot enjoy such a scene; I
cannot come." No; you cannot come. Your heart would revolt at the thought and
shrink back from the scene. You are as conscious as you are of your existence
that you would be miserable to attempt to participate in this institution. Your
soul revolts at the idea, and you say, "No, friends, let me have a seat in some
remote part of the house, or walk out." Yes, dear sir; and, for the very same
reason, if you were in heaven, you could not enjoy it, and would want to walk
out. Every man not converted, born again, or not regenerated, knows this to be
the case. There is an utter incongeniality, on the part of the unconverted, with
Christ, his religion, with his Church and worship, or, of course, they would be
attracted and drawn into it. They know that they do not enjoy the apostles’
teaching, the prayers, praises, thanksgiving, exhortations, and communion--the
immediate mingling in the worship; you always see the class alluded to in a
remote part of the house, or entirely outside in time of communion. They feel
much better at a distance. Suppose such a one were carried up into heaven and
seated among those who have washed their robes and made them white in the blood
of the Lamb, and he would lift his eyes, and survey the immense throng, from
every nation, and kindred, and tribe, and tongue, and people, who have loved
Jesus,, worshiped, devoted themselves to him and honored him in this life, and
hear them lift their voices and sing "Blessing, and glory, and honor, and power,
and dominion, and thanksgiving to him who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb
forever and ever," and suppose he lifts his eyes, and sees Abraham, Isaac, and
Jacob, Enoch and Elijah, Job and Daniel, Isaiah and Jeremiah, with all the
ancient worthies, arrayed in white, and praising God and the Lamb, would he be
prepared to join in the grand anthems? He looks again, and beholds the apostles
of Jesus, immense ranks of the martyrs of Jesus, as they walk the streets of the
New Jerusalem. He looks again, and sees the long ranks on ranks of the angels of
God, in the most profound awe and subordination, praising and adoring God and
the Lamb. He beholds the grand throng which no man could number, redeemed by the
blood of Jesus, and, turning his eye, sees Jesus, in the midst of his sublime
glory, as he sits on the throne in the heaven of heavens, and beholds the face
of the Almighty Father of heaven and earth. Would not the spirit of him who
could not come to the Lord’s table, and who could not enjoy the worship of God
in this world, utterly fail here? Will not such call for rocks and mountains to
fall on them and hide them from the face of him who sits on the throne, and from
the wrath of the Lamb; for the great day of his wrath is come, and who shall be
able to stand? The reflection, then, that Jesus loved me, that he died for me,
that he gave himself for me, that he, in transcendent kindness, invited me to
come to him and I would not, will thunder home on the conscience. Such language
as the following will then rush into the mind: "Come to me, all you that labor
and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest." "He who comes to me, I will in
nowise cast out." "The Spirit says, Come; and the bride says, Come; and whoever
will, let him come and partake of the water of life freely." These invitations,
he will remember, were all slighted, and are now gone forever. His opportunities
are all gone, and he is not regenerated and not conformed to the image of Jesus;
not created anew. We need something more to make us happy than mere admission
into a place of happiness. We must be regenerated, made new creatures, or we
could not be happy among the happy, in heaven itself. Turn, then, to the Lord,
enter the covenant, and live forever. Come with Christ, become conformed to him
and made inexpressibly happy in him now and prepared to you must be born again."
"No man comes to the Father, but by me." "I, if I be lifted up, will draw all
men to me." "I am the Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, the first
and the last, the bright and morning star." To his name be honor and power
everlasting.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 14: GP1 - 13-THE UNION OF CHRISTIANS
========================================================================

SERMON, No. XIII.

THEME.--UNION OF CHRISTIANS.

TEXT.--"There is one body, and one Spirit, even as you are called in one hope of
your calling; one Lord, one faith, one immersion, one God and Father of all, who
is above all, and through and in you all."--Eph 4:4-6.

THE subject in hand is the union of the people of God. It is necessary to have a
clear understanding at the start. It is not the union of "professors of
religion," "professed Christians," "Christian sects," or "Christian
denominations," that is to be considered, but simply the union of Christians,
those who are truly the people of God. The union of others, before they are
connected to God, is not in view nor desirable. They will do less harm divided
than united. Two propositions will be discussed in this discourse and sustained:
I. God requires all Christians to unite in one body. II. There is a common
ground on which all the people of God can unite without any sacrifice of truth
or conscience. Those two points being well cleared up, the way is open for the
union of all God’s children, for them to be one, to dwell in peace and love. To
the work in hand, then, let attention be directed. I. God requires all
Christians to unite in one body. Something of immense value may be learned by
careful attention to the practice of the most devoted and pious. Turn your
attention, then, to this class for a few moments. There have been some in all
ages who have read the Scriptures and worshiped in their families. What kind of
prayers have been going up to heaven from these pious family circles for
generations? Among many subjects of prayer, the union of the children of God has
been one constant subject. The cry has been ascending to heaven from the pure in
heart, the true and the holy, "O that the time may come when we shall all see
eye to eye, and walk hand in hand." Will this supplication all be lost, or will
it yet be answered? It will be answered as sure as the Lord lives. Turn your
attention to another place of prayer. There is a meeting they call the
"prayer-meeting." This is not a popular meeting. It usually averages from three
up to twenty. At this meeting a few of the true and the holy, the devoted and
pious, come together, frequently without any preacher to dispute about
depravity, effectual calling, final perseverance, or any of the antiquated bones
of contention that never had any substance to keep a saint from starving, and
they engage in devout supplications. Here, again, the fervent petition wells up
from a devout heart: "O that the time may come when all jars, discords, and
divisions shall be done away forever, and when all the saints shall be united."
These holy cries have not been ascending to heaven in vain for ages past. They
are all treasured up in the mind of the most gracious and merciful Father in
heaven. They will one day all be answered. But turn your attention to the great
"union prayer-meeting," in some city, where a thousand meet on a morning for
prayer. A brother rises to speak, and all eyes are turned toward him. His whole
countenance is lighted up. He commences: "I believe the millennium is coming; I
never was so happy in all my life. Here we are from different churches, all on
one floor, without regard to our different views or denominations." A hundred
voices are heard at once, "Thank God for it." They all solemnly bow down, and
the prayer goes up to heaven: "O that we may all speak the same thing; be of the
same mind and the same judgment; be perfectly joined together, and that there
may be no divisions among us." These petitions are not, and will not, be lost.
They will all be answered. "I wanted Scripture," says a man, "and not prayers;
these prove nothing." Do not be mistaken. They contain the righteous sentiment
of the souls of the pure and the holy. Please turn your attention to one more
prayer. Just before the Lord suffered he poured forth his holy soul in that
wonderful prayer, usually styled his intercessory--truly and properly "the
Lord’s prayer"--the prayer he prayed himself, and not the one he taught his
disciples to pray. In the midst of his solemn and sublime supplications he says,
"I pray not for these alone; but for them also who shall believe on me through
their word. That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee,
that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent
me." John 17:20-21. What is the sum of this prayer? 1. It is a prayer for all
who shall believe through the words of the apostles. 2. The prayer is that they
all may be one. 3. The manner of the oneness--to be one as he and the Father are
one. 4. What is to be accomplished by the oneness or union--that the world may
believe, or that the world may be converted. Do you inquire how, or in what
sense, he and his Father are one? They are one in mind, in the work of saving
man, in the will of God to save men--one in the same Gospel, the same Church,
ordinances, worship, and every thing. They work in perfect harmony, in the same
mind and in the same judgment. There is not a jar nor a discord between them.
They coöperate in the same work. This is the way in which the saints should be
one--as Jesus and his Father are one in the same work, in the same mind, and the
same judgment, without a jar or discord. The tendency of such union would be the
conversion of the world, for he adds, "That the world may believe that thou hast
sent me." Can any one having the Spirit of Christ fail to pray for such union?
If we pray for it, can we fail to labor for it? Where the love of partyism
prevails, they not only do not pray for union, but teach the people that it is a
wise providence of God that we have so many churches, and thank God for them, as
extended means of grace. Before the founding of the Church, and speaking of it
prospectively--John 10:16 --the Lord said: "There shall be one fold and one
Shepherd." The "one fold," or one flock, spoken of here is the Church or
kingdom. When he uttered this he did not see any wise providence of God in
having many folds and many shepherds, but authoritatively declared "There shall
be one fold and one Shepherd." Again--1Co 10:17 --Paul says: "For we being many
are one bread," or one loaf, "and one body; for we are all partakers of that one
bread," or one loaf. Again--1Co 12:12 --he says: "For as the body is one, and
has many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one
body; so also is Christ." In the next verse he says: "By one Spirit are we all
immersed into one body, whether Jews or Gentiles, bond or free; and have all
been made to drink into one Spirit." There is, then, but one body or Church, or,
which is the same, but one kingdom of Christ. Hence you read of the one fold,
the house of God, the family of God, the building of God, the temple of God,
God’s husbandry, etc.; and while these are all figurative expressions, the same
idea of unity is all the time maintained in all of them. In the first chapter of
the first letter to the Corinthians, the apostle alludes to divisions partially
formed in the Church, and the passage is so instructive that it must not be
passed by with a single remark. Some apologize for the divisions now existing on
the ground that they are not about vital or fundamental matters--that they are
about unimportant and non-essential matters. On that account the divisions are
not of much consequence, and excusable. But what were the divisions, coming into
existence and rapidly culminating at the time the apostle wrote this letter,
about? Were they about fundamental matters? Certainly not, but their preferences
for their preachers. Some said, "I am of Paul;" others, "I am of Apollos;" or,
to modernize it, "I am a Paulite; I am an Apollosite," etc. There was no
fundamental question at issue among them. The questions in dispute were quite
non-essential; simply about their preferences for their most public and
influential men. Some were for one, and some for another. 1Co 3:4, he says,
"While one says, I am of Paul: and another, I am of Apollos, are you not carnal?
Who then is Paul, and who is Apollos, but ministers by whom you believed, even
as the Lord gave to every man?" 1Co 4:6, he says: "And these things, brethren, I
have in a figure transferred to myself, and to Apollos for your sakes." This
prudence he exercised to avoid the mention of names more immediately involved.
Why did he not excuse the matter on the ground that the divisions were about
unimportant matters--merely about their preferences for their preachers? Instead
of this being an excuse, it was the more shame for them that they should be
divided about such an unimportant matter as the preferences for their public
men. The next item of importance appearing in the case is that division among
Christians is an evidence of carnality. 1Co 3:3, he says, "For you are yet
carnal: for whereas there is among you envying, and strife, and divisions, are
you not carnal, and walk as men?" Jude says, "These be they who separate
themselves, sensual, not having the Spirit." Jude 1:19. Carnal is the opposite
of spiritual. "Sensual" is the same as carnal, or fleshly, and Jude explains
more fully by adding "not having the Spirit." People who have divisions are
carnal, sensual, not having the Spirit. Another important item of instruction
derived from this passage is that it is not allowable to assume a human
religious name, or to call a body of Christians after a man, or to take the name
of a man as a religious designation. If it were right to take the name of any
man as a religious designation, it would certainly be right to take the name of
such a man as Paul, Peter, or Apollos. Yet Paul makes a direct argument against
this. Hear him: "For it has been declared to me of you, my brethren, by those of
the house of Chloe, that there are contentions among you. Now this I say, that
every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I
of Christ." 1Co 1:11-12. This is the state of case as he finds it. In order to
show them how absurd and ridiculous their position was, he puts the question,
"Is Christ divided?" Their position implied that Christ was divided. This
question he put to the whole of them, knowing that there could be but one
answer. The Lord is one--a unit. Then, with propriety, he turns to those who
said they were of Paul, or that they were Paulites, and inquired, "Was Paul
crucified for you?" If you are to be Paulites, Paul should have been crucified
for you, but as Paul was not crucified for you, there was no ground for saying
you are of Paul. This reasoning he knew sensible people would apply to all other
names as well as the name of Paul. But he proceeded to press them still more
tightly: "Were you immersed into the name of Paul?" He knew that they all would
say certainly we were not immersed into the name of Paul, but "into Christ." He
proceeds further to argue that he gave them no ground for saying they were of
Paul, or Paulites, by adding: "I thank God that I immersed none of you, but
Crispus and Gaius; lest any should say that I immersed into my own name. And I
immersed also the house of Stephanas; besides, I do not know whether I immersed
any others." 1Co 1:13-16. This language needs a little careful attention in this
age of perversion. He does not say, as many quote, that he thanked God that he
never immersed many, nor even that he had not immersed many of the Christians,
but, speaking to those who said they were of Paul, "I thank God that I immersed
none of you"--you who say you are of Paul, only the few specified. Why does he
thank God for this? Because he did not think immersion of much consequence? No;
that is not his reason. What, then? He adds, "Lest any should say I had immersed
into my own name." He might have added, For here are some saying I am of Paul,
and I am thankful that I never gave them any ground for saying "I am of Paul,"
not even so much as to have immersed them, excepting a few. From this reasoning
the following, is clear:

That as Christ was crucified for them, they should be called after him.

As they were not immersed into the name of Paul, but into Christ, they should be
called after Christ, and not after Paul, or any other man.

That it is schismatical and sinful to have any human leader or name in the
kingdom of God.

That as Christ was crucified for them, and they had been immersed into Christ,
into one body and one name, they should remain in union in the one body and the
name of the Lord.

But now for the remedy where Christians are divided. What did he entreat or
beseech these divided Christians to do? Does he make some feeble excuse for them
that they cannot see alike; that they differ in their personal appearance; that
there are varieties in all nature, and tell them that it is a wise providence of
God that they are divided, etc. Not a word of it. What, then? Hear his holy
entreaty: "Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ,
that you all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but
that you be perfectly joined together in the same mind, and in the same
judgment." Where this divine authority prevails, there is an end to division
among Christians. Where it does not prevail, rebellion against God prevails. But
now turn to the text read at the outset, Eph 4:1-6 : "I, therefore, the prisoner
of the Lord, beseech you that you walk worthy of the vocation wherewith you are
called, with all lowliness and long-suffering, forbearing one another in love;
endeavoring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace." The apostle
alludes to his being the prisoner of the Lord to touch their hearts. He, no
doubt, remembered the solemn and affectionate parting when he in person
separated from them, and when they "sorrowed most of all for the words which he
spoke, that they should see his face no more." Having alluded to his being "the
prisoner of the Lord," he entreats them to endeavor to keep the unity of the
Spirit in the bond of peace. He then proceeds to give seven reasons why they
should endeavor to keep the unity of the Spirit, or, which is the same, maintain
union. These reasons are as follows: 1. "There is one body," orbut one body. The
argument is this: Inasmuch as there is but one body of Christ, or one Church, we
should endeavor to keep the unity of the Spirit. 2. There is "one Spirit," orbut
one Spirit to dwell in the one body; and as there is but one Holy Spirit to
dwell in the one body, or Church, we should endeavor to keep the unity of the
Spirit, or maintain union in the body. 3. There is "one hope," orbut one hope
for the whole family both in heaven and on earth. As we all have but the one
hope, we should endeavor to keep the unity of the Spirit--maintain union among
all who have this one hope in the one body. 4. There is "one Lord," orbut one
Lord; the head of the one body, and, inasmuch as there is but one Lord, the head
of the one body, we should keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. 5.
There is "one faith," orbut one faith from God for the one body; and as there is
but one faith for the one body, we should all endeavor to keep the unity of the
Spirit, or strive to maintain union among all God’s children. 6. There is "one
immersion," or butone immersion, the initiatory rite for the one body. It is not
one sprinkle, one sprinkling, one pour, or one pouring; nor three immersions
into three names, but "one immersion" into one name, one body, or Church; and,
as there is but one immersion into one body, we should endeavor to keep the
unity of the Spirit. 7. There is "one God and Father of all, who is above all,
and through all, and in you all." This is the grand culmination of all his
reasons for keeping the unity of the Spirit. As there is one God, or but one God
and Father of all, above all, and through all, and in you all, you should
endeavor to keep the unity of the Spirit, or maintain union among the children
of God, in the one body. Such is the apostle’s argument in detail. It may all be
summed up in one sentence. as follows: As there is but one body or Church; but
one Spirit to dwell in that one body; but one hope set before that one body; but
one Lord, the head of that one body; but one faith in that one body; but one
immersion, the initiatory rite of that one body; and but one God and Father of
all, above all, through all, and in you all, the author of it all, we should
endeavor to maintain the unity of the Spirit, in the bond of peace, in that one
body. So far, then, as Scripture authority can settle anything, these scriptures
and reasonings show that God requires all Christians to unite. The way is now
clear for the second head introduced at the commencement. II. There is a common
ground on which all the people of God can unite without any sacrifice of truth
or conscience. Negative preaching generally does not amount to much, but it may
be of some importance to show up some ground on which union is not possible.
This can be done by an illustration. Suppose, then, you were in a vast
convention of fifty of the religious parties, all largely represented by
preachers and private members. Suppose, further, that they have all agreed that
the Lord requires the union of Christians. They are now in convention, searching
for ground on which they can unite. Archbishop Purcell proceeds to address the
convention as follows: "I am rejoiced that you have all agreed that God requires
union among all the people of God. We in Holy Mother Church have held this all
the time; but I never saw my way clear till now to propose union. But as you
have now all agreed that union is right, I am encouraged to propose a plan of
union. Here I have in my hand the oldest creed in the world. Our Church is the
oldest and the largest church. Look at our tall spires and massive cathedrals in
all parts of the world. Look at our extended schools and colleges. See, too,
what an extended ministry. Here is the Church and creed for union. Here is the
true union ground where we stand. Now, all you who are willing to unite on one
creed and in our church, hold up your hand." He stands and looks over the
convention in immense suspense and astonishment, seeing but one hand--the
Romanist hand--high up, while there are forty-nine down. He takes his seat and
hangs down his head in discouragement. A bishop in the Episcopalian Church rises
next and says: "I did not think we could ever agree to unite in the Roman
Catholic Church. There has been too much persecution in that body for us
Protestants. We never could unite there. But I have risen to propose union in
our church and on the Prayer-Book. Our church is older than many others, and is
now considered an established thing. The Prayer-Book is older than the most of
your creeds, is entirely orthodox, and, I believe, the best book in the world
except the Bible. We have a learned ministry, an elegant literature, and the
most elegant church edifices in the land. Now, I trust, you will all see that we
occupy the true ground of union, and that you will all unite with us in our
church, and on our creed. All you who are in favor of uniting on our ground,
will please hold up the hand." He stands in anxiety, looking over the house and
sees one hand--the Episcopalian--high up, but forty-nine down. "Is it possible
that there is but one out of forty-nine for our church?" he exclaims, and takes
his seat. Next comes Dr. N. L. Rice, of the Presbyterian Church, with the
Confession of Faith in his hand, exclaiming; "I knew that you could never unite
in the Roman Catholic Church. I have no doubt you have read my lectures on
Romanism, delivered in Bardstown, Kentucky, many years ago, in which I showed up
the dangers of that church. As to my friend, the Episcopalian bishop, he and
myself are on good terms, but I did not think you could unite with him on his
Prayer-Book. But here I hold in my hand the best book in the world except the
Bible; this blessed little book, the Confession of Faith. Here is the book on
which we can unite. Here each point of our doctrine is stated clearly and
concisely, and below it is the scripture that proves it. Then look at our wise
church polity, with our presbyteries, synods, and general assemblies. Then look
at our learned ministry, our extended literature, our elegant church edifices,
colleges, and theological schools. Here is the ground for union. All who are for
union on our ground, in our church and on our creed, will please hold up the
hand." With anxious suspense, he looks over the house and sees one hand--the
Presbyterian hand--high up, but forty-nine hands down. Forty-nine against the
Presbyterian ground of union for one for it. There is no possibility of union on
that ground. He is not more than seated till up comes a Methodist bishop,
Discipline in hand, who proceeds to speak as follows: "I know that you could
never unite in that old persecuting church--the Romish--and I also knew that you
would never agree to unite in the Episcopalian Church. We Methodists have read
how Episcopalians persecuted Father Wesley for forming his little praying
societies, meeting innocently in them, and praying for more personal holiness
and a deeper work of grace. Nor could we Methodists ever think of uniting on the
Presbyterian Confession, containing what Father Wesley called ’the horrible
decree of election and predestination,’ and that other doctrine, that church
officers have power to open and shut the kingdom of God, to remit and retain
sins, as taught under the heads ’Decrees,’ and ’Church Censures.’ But now, here
is our most excellent book of Discipline, with its twenty-five articles, its
general rules, its arrangement for class, its mighty ministry, circuit-riders,
presiding elders, and bishops; its great book-concern, with all its massive
publications, spacious church edifices, schools, colleges, and theological
schools. I do believe our church will take the world. Now here is our ground of
union. All who are in favor of uniting with us on our ground, in our church and
on the Discipline, will please hold up the hand." He stands in awful suspense
and looks, and, to his profound astonishment, there is but one hand up--the
Methodist hand--and forty-nine hands down. Forty- nine against and one for
Methodism! He takes his seat with the others. Do not say this is only a piece of
imagination. You cannot deny that this is the way they would vote, if they were
here and acting on the subject. Some man shouts from the audience, "Try the
Campbellite church, and see if they will fare any better." That is a puzzling
matter. It is said they will not write out their doctrine, and that no man knows
what they believe. It must not, therefore, be expected that a statement of the
doctrine, or the ground, be presented. The least that can be done for the case
is promised. Suppose, then, there is a man of that order here and he takes the
stand and says, "I have found the true ground of union, the catholicon, the
grand panacea for all your troubles." He puts in his plea, states his doctrine,
and square out calls it "Campbellism," and, crying aloud, calls for all who are
for uniting with him on his ground to hold up their hand. In profound amazement
and astonishment, he sees not one hand up. Nobody is for it. It is hoped,
therefore, that it will not come in the way any more. But what is to be done? No
ground of union is developed. But far back a little man is seen, of quick step
and venerable appearance, advancing toward the stand. To the astonishment of all
it is "Paul the aged." He takes the Bible in hand and says, "I see a passage in
this book that I wrote eighteen hundred years ago, under the inspiration of the
Spirit of God. It reads as follows: ’All scripture is given by inspiration of
God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for
instruction in righteousness; that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly
furnished to all good works.’ 2Ti 3:16-17. I understand that you all admit that
the things I wrote, except where I explained that it was my own advice, were
from the Lord. As these Scriptures (holding the Bible) are from God, and
profitable for doctrine, reproof, correction, and instruction, that the man of
God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished to all good works, I propose that you
all agree to unite on those Scriptures, with the determination that you will
receive heartily and believe every thing in them and practice as they teach in
all things. This you can do without any sacrifice of truth or conscience, for
you all admit that you believe all that is contained in these Scriptures and
that you believe nothing in religion that is not contained in them. Now, I
propose that you all believe on Christ, unite on these Scriptures and stand
where we, the apostles and the first Christians all stood. All who are in favor
of uniting on this ground, will please hold up the hand." Forty-nine can go for
this, without any sacrifice of truth or conscience, and only one cannot. The
Romanists cannot, without rejecting their unwritten traditions. Here is the only
possible union ground for the people of God. This ground is possible, and there
is not a man living who can offer a reasonable objection to it. Some man
explains as follows: "Our creed is the same as Scripture. We took it all from
the Bible." Then the way is clear for you to unite on the Bible, for if you took
all your creed out of the Bible, you will find it all in the Bible, and you will
lose nothing of truth or conscience. Some other man explains a little different
from the one just alluded to. He says, "Our creed was not, word for word, taken
from the Bible, but it is like the Bible--the same in substance." If that is so,
your way is clear for uniting on the Bible, for if your "creed is like the
Bible--the same in substance," the Bible will answer the purpose as well as your
creed. The Bible will certainly do as well as a creed like the Bible. You can
unite on the Bible without any sacrifice of truth or conscience. The matter
rests here: If a creed contains than the Bible, it contains too much, and
whatever it contains more than the Bible is objectionable, and it is to be
rejected because it contains too much. If a creed contains less than the Bible,
it contains too little, and whatever it contains less than the Bible, is
demanded, and the creed is rejected because it contains too little. If a creed
differs from the Bible, it is wrong where it differs from the Bible, and is to
be rejected because it differs from the Bible. If a creed is like the Bible, it
is useless, for, in that case, the Bible will certainly do as well as a creed
like the Bible. There is no other ground that a man can take. If he wants a
creed, it must be because it contains more than the Bible, because it contains
less than the Bible, because it differs from the Bible, or because it is like
the Bible. If it contains more than the Bible, whatever it contains more is an
addition to the Bible. We must not add to the Word of God. If it contains less
than the Bible, it takes from the Bible. This incurs the displeasure of the
Lord. "If any man shall take away from the book of this prophecy, God shall take
away his part out of the book of life." If it differs from the Bible, all know
it is wrong where it differs from the Bible, for the Bible is right. If it is
like the Bible, it is useless, for we have the Bible. "What, then, is to be done
with all the creeds?" says a man. Do with the whole of them as some of the
preachers have done with the Bible--pronounce them "a dead letter." There can be
no general union till they are abolished, made null and void, entirely
abrogated. As long as a single one of them is in force anywhere, schism will
exist. They are subversive of the peace, harmony, cooperation, and fellowship of
the people of God in the way of every good work, and subversive of the divine
authority. Their influence must be entirely swept away, and the supreme
authority of the Holy Scriptures restored, not in word, but in practice, before
the restoration of union among the children of God. They are not the unwritten
traditions of Rome, but the written traditions of Protestants, and it is as
indispensable to the success of the cause of Christ, and the peace and harmony
of the children of God, that their power be destroyed as it was that the power
of the unwritten traditions of the Church of Rome should have been destroyed in
the time of Luther. Why, for illustration, are not the Methodists and
Presbyterians united? You reply, "They do not believe alike." They both believe
the Bible. Wherein, then, do they not believe alike? The Methodist Discipline is
an addition to the Bible, and the Presbyterians do not believe it. The
Presbyterian Confession of Faith is an addition to the Word of God, and the
Methodists do not believe it. They are not divided about the Bible, for, as
stated before, they both believe the Bible. They are agreed about the
Bible--that it is all true. They disagree about their creeds. Neither party
believes the other party’s creed. Their difference is not about the Bible nor
Christianity. They all believe the Bible and Christianity; but their difference
is about their creeds. Methodism and Presbyterianism--things not in the Bible.
But now some reasons, in regular order, must be produced for proposing union on
the Bible alone:

The Church had no creed but the Bible, or the law of God as found in the Bible,
during the first three centuries. That it had no creed but the law of God during
the life-time of the apostles, when it had all the grand and sublime sanctions
of supernatural power, is equal to divine authority for no creed but the law of
God. That its prosperity when it had no creed but the Bible was greater than it
has ever been under any creed, is also an argument against all human creeds.
That it never had a general division during the period when it had no law but
the law of God, is a transcendent argument against all human laws in religion.

Wesley said, "Would to God that all party names were forgot, and that we, as
humble, loving brethren, might sit down together at the Master’s feet, read his
Holy Word, imbibe his Spirit, and transcribe his life in our own." The
Episcopalian, Presbyterian, and Methodist creeds contain the following: "The
Holy Scriptures contain all things necessary to salvation, so that whatsoever is
not read therein, or may not be proved thereby, is not to be required of any man
that it should be believed as an article of faith or thought requisite to
salvation." Wesley says in the General Rules for his Societies, and speaking of
them, "All of which we are taught of God to observe, even in his written word,
which is the sufficient and the only infallible rule both of our faith and
practice." Chillingworth says, "The Bible, and the Bible alone, is the religion
of Protestants." The time is now come not only to announce these things as
eulogies on the Bible, but to carry them out in practice. These things are all
backed up by Paul in the Scripture before quoted. "All Scripture is given by
inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction,
and instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly
furnished to every good work." This is an end to the controversy with reasonable
people. You can have no more than the man of God perfected and thoroughly
furnished for all good works.

The Bible-alone ground is not now a mere matter of theory. The thing has been
submitted to practice, and, before the heavens and the earth, there is now
actual demonstration. When the movement was first made, the opposers used to
tell its friends that in a few years there would be nothing of it; that it would
soon be numbered among the things that were; that the novelty of the movement
was the chief attraction; that many persons are always seeking something new.
But in many communities in the United States, the movement has been before the
world fifty years. The cause has had the trial of time. The result is, that in
such communities it is more firmly established than anywhere else. In the
section of country where Barton W. Stone first broke the Presbyterian ranks, the
cause is as firmly established as anywhere else, and the general sentiment of
the people is now on the side of the Bible cause. But Presbyterianism is on the
decline there, and has been ever since. At the time the movement was fully
inaugurated in Kentucky, the Presbyterians numbered some thirty thousand in that
State. They have dwindled down till they now number less than ten thousand,
while the Disciples of the Lord have increased till they number probably one
hundred thousand. In all the means and resources for operating on the world and
moving society, the Christians in that State now stand in advance of all others.
This is true of other sections of country, and large sections too. It is true,
too, of those sections where the intelligence, the cultivation, and elevation of
the country are of the first order.

It was argued, at an early period in the movement for union on the Bible, that
preachers and private members of such different doctrines and views as exist
among the people of this and other countries, were better off separated than
they would be united--that such discordant elements could not be brought
together and harmonized. But this reasoning was all short-sighted and
fallacious. It proceeded on the assumption that they were to remain partisans,
to love partyism, cherish party spirit and feeling. They did not understand that
the very first thing was to cure a man of that--to destroy all that party
feeling in his soul, and plant, in its stead, the love of Christ, of union,
harmony, and fellowship. They have lived long enough now, in many instances, to
see actual demonstration. They now see the preachers from different orders
coming, uniting, and harmoniously working together. They see the private members
coming from all parties and uniting on the Bible, falling in with the utmost
harmony. Thousands who have thus been gathered are now on every Lord’s day
seated together at the Lord’s table and commemorating the Lord’s death as if
they had always been one. Many of these have thus traveled the road together
till they have grown old and are waiting for their departure. They have
demonstrated the possibility of union on the Bible by an actual union, not for
an hour, a day, a week, or a year, but for ever.

"We are all getting on very well if you would let us alone," says a man. Suppose
you look over the ground once in your life and see how well you are getting on.
In the country towns and villages, numbering from one to ten thousand
inhabitants, they average from five to ten churches, or that many parties. They
then need from five to ten meeting-houses. If they were united they would only
need from one to two meeting-houses. Here, then, at the outset, four-fifths of
the money spent in building meeting-houses is wasted, or worse than
wasted--given to maintain these divisions. This is wasting the Lord’s money for
which, as his stewards, we shall give an account. But this is only the
beginning. Instead of from one to two preachers in each of these towns, which
would be all they would need if they were all united, they now need from five to
ten. Here four-fifths of the money given to sustain preachers is thrown away, or
worse, given to sustain partyism. Then four-fifths of all the expense of
furniture, fuel, lights, etc., in running these establishments, is also wasted
in maintaining these divisions. Then, when you have all this expense, instead of
these parties laboring to turn sinners to the Lord, the general effort all round
is to convert people to our party. Sensible men of the world listen to their
general Babel, their confusion of tongues, crying "Lo! here, and lo! there," and
turn away in disgust into unbelief. The Lord saw all this when he prayed that
they might be one, that the world might believe. But you say "we are all getting
along well enough if we were let alone." But please look again. A preacher was
once invited to a house. Entering the apartment, the gentleman of the house
introduced the preacher to his wife. As the preacher took the lady by the hand,
he inquired of the gentleman, "Is your good wife a member of any church?" He
replied that she was, naming the church, and at the same time pointing in the
direction of the meeting-house. "And," continued the preacher, "are you a member
of church?" He replied that he was, naming the church, and pointing toward the
meeting-house, but in an opposite direction from the house where his wife
attended. He was then introduced to two daughters, and, on inquiry, learned that
they belonged to another church. On being introduced to two sons, and,
inquiring, he learned that one of them belonged to still a different church from
any of the others, and that the other one did not believe any of it, nor the
Bible. Look at this family when the Lord’s day comes. The husband starts in one
direction, the wife in another, the daughters in a third direction, and one son
in a fourth direction, and the other son goes to no church, but reads Tom
Paine’s infidel book, falsely styled the "Age of Reason." Do you call this
"getting along well enough?" But the preacher inquired of this man, "How do you
get along in this condition of things?" Drawing a long breath he replied,
"Tolerably well." Said the preacher, "How?" "Well," said the gentleman, "I
belonged to my church when we married, and when my wife went over here and
joined her church, it hurt my feelings very much, and I determined to talk to
her, but on attempting to do so, I soon found that we would hurt each other’s
feelings, and we agreed to disagree and say no more about it." He also gave a
similar history about his daughters and his son. The preacher then said to him,
"I presume you never commune with your own wife." He replied, "I never did." The
preacher continued, "You do not then fellowship your own wife?" This was hard,
but, clearing up his voice, he answered faintly, "No, sir." Turning to the wife
the preacher said, "And you, madam, do not fellowship your own husband?" She
said she did not. The preacher continued to the husband, "Do you not think your
wife is a Christian?" "I do," said he, seeming to find much relief in saying it.
"And do you not, madam, believe your husband is a Christian?" "I certainly do,"
said she. "Then," pressingly inquired the preacher, "why did you never commune
together?" The husband replied, "It is contrary to the rules of our church." Who
made these "rules of our church?" inquired the preacher. "Our great and good
men," was the reply. "Great and good men," said the preacher, "made rules of our
church forbidding the Christian husband and Christian wife to commune together!
God joined together this Christian husband and Christian wife, and said, ’Let
not man put them asunder,’ but these ’rules of our church,’ made by uninspired
men, have come in and put them asunder in the kingdom of God, where they should
be more completely one than anywhere else! From this day forward I will put
forth every power of my soul and body to abolish all these uninspired rules, and
blot them out forever." On what ground does this family propose to get along
agreeably? Simply on the ground of keeping their lips sealed and saying nothing
about religion. Never was the great enemy of God and man better pleased than
when he succeeded in closing the lips of this whole family and excluding all
talk about the name of Jesus Christ and the kingdom of God. "How are we to
obviate the difficulty?" some one inquires. As in the following case: A preacher
was invited to a house where the husband belonged to one church and the wife to
another. Being seated in the parlor, the husband and wife near by? the preacher
was trying to say a few words to interest a sweet little daughter of theirs of
six or seven years. It came into his mind that he might turn it to some
practical account, and he inquired of the child, "When you grow up to be a
woman, do you intend to join your mother’s church?" The child looked toward her
father with deep concern, but made no reply. He then inquired, "Do you intend to
join your father’s church?" The child showed more feeling, but made no answer,
looking toward her mother. He then pressed in another form: "Which church do you
intend to join, your father’s or your mother’s?" The child stood with its eyes
filled with tears, but made no answer. The preacher then appealed to the father
and mother to tell why the child did not answer, but they made no reply. The
reason it did not answer was obvious. If it joined its mother’s church, it had
to leave its father. If it joined its father’s church, it had to leave its
mother. It would not entertain the idea of doing either. The preacher then made
his appeal to the father and mother: "Do you intend to keep this stumbling-block
in the way of your child, and thus keep it out of the Church, or will you not
unite on the Bible and remove it out of the way?" In an evening or two after,
when an invitation was given, the husband walked into the partition in the pews
and beckoned to the wife to come to him. She instantly came, and he extended his
hand and said, "I have come to offer you my hand to unite on the Bible." She did
not wait more than a moment till she took his hand and said, "The Lord helping
me, I will go with you." They immediately came forward and united on the Bible.
The daughter can now go with both father and mother, and, above all, according
to the will of God. Here is the ground on which all Christians can unite without
any sacrifice of truth or conscience. There is not a reason in the world why
every husband and wife, parent and child, brother and sister, may not come on
the same ground. "You are too exclusive, talking about the Bible as if nobody
else had a right to it." That is not the style of Christians. The Bible is for
you as much as for any body, and the argument is to induce you to adopt it, and
avail yourself of all the blessings and advantages contained in it. They are for
you, and you should not deprive yourself of that which the Lord intended for you
and cut yourselves off from it. When you unite on the Bible, that does not
deprive any other man from uniting on it. This is the highest ground a man can
take. No man can go above it, nor beyond it. To go back to the apostles and
first Christians, receive the Gospel, the whole Gospel, and nothing but the
Gospel; believe it with all the heart, follow its holy teaching faithfully and
honestly in all things, is the highest ground man can take, the best that can be
done. The effort to do this is simply an effort to return to the Lord, take him
as the great leader in all things, learn of him, and make the best effort in the
power of honest men and women to do his will in all things. Ask them what they
are, and they reply, Christians, disciples of Christ. To what church do you
belong? The Church of God, or body of Christ. What creed have you? The law of
God. Who is the founder of your church? The Lord is the founder of his Church,
of which all Christians are members. Who is your leader? The Lord from heaven.
There is no getting above this ground. If a man leaves it, he leaves God,
Christ, the Holy Spirit, the saints, the Bible, the Church of God, and leaves
off being a Christian. He becomes an apostate. The precise thing for the people
of God to do is to keep our Lord before the people, his Gospel and teaching, his
cause and kingdom, and nothing else. The issue is not about men, nor about the
teaching of men, but about Christ, his Gospel and teaching. Those who are for
Christ, his Gospel and teaching, his cause and kingdom, and nothing else, are to
stand out and make themselves known. They are on the one side, and form the one
army. Those for anything else, no matter what, with all those who are
indifferent, or for nothing, are on the other side, in one awful, confused, and
motley group, under the one leader, "that old serpent, the devil and Satan,"
arrayed against the "right way of the Lord." On their side there is no scruple
about means and appliances. They are for anything that will militate against the
government of God, the union of saints, and the salvation of man. The cause of
the army of the Lord, the redeemed hosts of the true Israel of God, is the cause
of righteousness, and no means but righteous means can be employed. The work the
Lord has now committed to the hands of his people is a great work. The
responsibility is on them. They must see to it that their work is done, and well
done. Let every saint be true to the Lord and his cause, and ultimately receive
the crown of righteousness that fades not away. O, that they all may be one!
that the world may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God!


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 15: GP1 - 14-A NEW TESTAMENT EXAMPLE OF CONVERSION
========================================================================

SERMON, No. XIV.

THEME.--A NEW TESTAMENT EXAMPLE OF CONVERSION.

COMMENCING Acts 8:26, a report is found of the conversion of the distinguished
officer of state, the treasurer of Queen Candace. The title given to this book,
in the common version of the New Testament, is incorrect. It is not the Acts of
the Apostles, but only some acts, or transactions, of some apostles. Even "Acts
of Apostles" imparts but feebly what is contained in it. This book is a history,
by Luke, an evangelist of the Christ, of the election of Matthias to supply the
vacancy occasioned by the apostasy and fall of Judas; the descent of the Holy
Spirit; the endowment of the apostles with supernatural power, to guide them
into all truth, in performing the great work of their mission; the first
preaching, conversions, founding churches, setting them in order, visiting and
encouraging them. In this book are found brief reports of preaching of apostles
and first evangelists; and, from these reports, in a goodly degree, we were to
learn what was preached, and how to preach. When these reports are taken
together and summed up, the amount of apostolic preaching is found in them. The
length and breadth, the height and depth, of what is found here is what is to be
preached now to convert and save sinners. To these reports the man who wants to
know what to preach and how to preach must go. To these reports the man who
wants to know what the apostles preached and how they preached must go. To these
reports of apostolic and evangelical preaching, conversions under that
preaching, must men go to learn how men and women were converted. Here must they
go to ascertain precisely what was preached to sinners, what effect it had on
them, what they believed, what they were commanded to do, what it was to be done
for, and what the Lord would do for them. Here is the divine pattern for all
preaching, in matter and manner; the pattern of all conversions, the example
that occurred under the eyes of the apostles, with their direction and sanction.
The preacher who is free, and has no purpose only to preach the Gospel precisely
as it was preached at the first, and maintain it, will examine all the preaching
reported in Acts, in all its parts, and maintain it. He does not have to inquire
what this man or that man says, but continually inquires what the Lord says,
what the apostles say, and what they did. With him that is authority. The
examples, of which be finds record in Acts of Apostles, are divine precedents
with him. Every item he finds here he treasures up. What was preached once must
be preached all the time. What men and women believed at that time, and in one
instance, must be believed in every instance and at any other time. What they
had to do in any one instance to become Christians had to be done in all
instances. The preacher bound up in some human system, so that he cannot plant
himself on the Lord’s commission to his apostles, and follow the apostles as
they went forth under that commission, learn and re-preach precisely what they
preached, and who cannot, when sinners inquire "What shall we do?" give the
precise answer given by the apostles when the same question was propounded to
them, in the same words, is not a free man, but is in spiritual bondage. It is,
nevertheless, a lamentable truth, that a large proportion of the religious
teachers of these times are thus bound up. There is but one body of people in
this country among whom the preacher of the Gospel can stand up boldly, plant
himself squarely on the commission which the Lord gave to the apostles, declare
openly and independently that he will follow the apostles and preach precisely
what they preached in all things--that men and women must now believe precisely
what persons believed in the time of the apostles, do the same things and for
the same purpose, in order to become Christians or to be saved, and when they
come to the question "What shall we do?" give the answer in the precise words of
the apostle. How a man must feel straightened when he preaches to sinners till
they are penitent and cry out "What must we do?" and is so tied up and bound
that he dare not give an answer to this vital question in the very words of the
inspired apostle and maintain that it is right! Yet thousands of men are thus
tied up in spiritual bondage, and some of these think they are considerable men
and free, but they never knew what it was to draw one free and spiritual breath.
In all kindness and with the utmost good feeling, permit an example or two to be
introduced. Let a Baptist preacher take for his text the last commission given
to the apostles, and tell his audience that he will, by the blessing of God,
follow the apostles as they proceeded under that commission. Suppose him to
follow up to the sermon of Peter on Pentecost, proceed honestly and faithfully
to present every thing contained in the discourse of Peter, and, at the close,
some in his audience cry out "What shall we do?" and he honestly and fairly
proceeds, in the very language of the inspired apostle, "Repent, and be baptized
every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of sins; and
you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit." Suppose he would thus proceed on
through Acts, and present what was preached in every case, and the inspired
answer, how long would he be received as a sound Baptist preacher? Not a month.
The same is true in the Methodist Church, the Presbyterian Church, and every
other church, except the one before alluded to. That "one body," "the body of
Christ," requires a man to plant himself on our Lord’s commission, follow the
apostles, preach precisely what the apostles preached, and nothing else. When
sinners inquire what they shall do, that body requires the precise words in
answer to that inquiry to be given, and nothing else. It requires the "right way
of the Lord" to be set forth, and no other, and requires the converts to walk in
it. It is delightful to stand in the "one body," looking to the one great Head
of the Church, then, with no human system in the way, nor fear of man, when
about to give the example reported, commencing Acts 8:26. The points to be
considered in the investigation of this case are the following: 1. What did the
angel of the Lord do in the case? 2. What did the Holy Spirit do in the case? 3.
What did the preacher of Jesus do? 4. What did the officer do himself? 5. What
did God do for him? These are all plain matters of inquiry, and the young men
and women should be able to explain them to the children in the Sunday-school,
as parents should to their children at home. But several things should be
observed before proceeding with the examination, such as the following:

If there shall be anything found in this case, on careful examination, not
agreeing with any man’s views or practice now, no one here is to blame for it.
This case occurred before any one of this generation came into the world. Any
one, then, differing from what is found in this case, must make his objection to
the record made by Luke, or to the manner in which Philip the evangelist
transacted his part, and not to any one now living.

The case is taken, in this discourse, as it is found on the sacred record, and
assumed to be right. Therefore, no effort is here made to prove any part of the
transaction to be right, but the case is taken as an authoritative example, so
far as the conversion is concerned.

1. What did the angel of the Lord do? He did not directly do anything to the man
to be converted. He did not go to the man to be converted, nor did he preach to
him the Gospel; nor yet did he appear to him in a dream, a voice, some
mysterious sight or sound. What, then? Why not go to him and preach the Gospel?
The Lord did not call nor send angels to preach the Gospel, but committed that
work to men. He ordained that men should be instrumental in saving men. The
auger went to the preacher--to Philip, an evangelist--and had but a brief
message for him. He simply said to him, "Rise, and go toward the south, to the
way that goes down from Jerusalem to Gaza, which is desert." This was the sum of
the angel’s mission in the case, so far as the record informs us. There is, too,
something beautiful in the simple-hearted obedience of this ancient preacher.
There were several points which preachers generally want some light on, left
entirely in the dark, after the angel had delivered his entire message. Such
points as the following would occupy the mind of most preachers to some extent:
Why send me down a way that is desert? Why not send me to some populous town,
large city, and into the midst of the people? Then., there was no light on
another subject that sometimes comes into the minds of preachers. There was no
light about the pay, who will foot the bill, the expenses of the tour, and the
laborer for work done. On these points there was no light. Then there was no
instruction what was to be done down that way. The Lord assumes absolute
authority over his servant, and orders him to the spot where he has use for him,
without informing him what he is to do. The servant of the Lord has to take it
for granted that his Master understands his business, will order him to the
right place, and find the work for him. He, therefore, gives him the order to
go. There is no intimation of his hesitating a moment asking a question, or, in
any way, taking any concern on himself about what was to be done, or the
consequences. "He rose and went." This is an example of most implicit obedience
on the part of the preacher. This ends all the angel had to do with the matter.
When his work was done, the man to be converted was not touched. Not an
impression is made on him. He put the preacher in the way leading to the work to
be done. 2. What did the Spirit do? He did not enter the man to be converted, go
to him, preach to him, immediately impress him, change his heart, or convert
him. He did not impress the man to be converted in a dream, in a strange noise
or sight. Immediately, he did nothing to him in the way of regenerating him, or
anything of the kind. What, then, was his part of the work? As the officer
approaches in his chariot, reading the prophetic Scriptures--the preacher, up to
this point, not knowing that he is to have anything to do with the officer, or
that he had reached his divinely-intended work--the Spirit of the Lord said to
Philip, "Join yourself to this chariot." This was an influence of the Spirit not
easily mistaken. It was in open day. It was not an intelligible and
unintelligible operation that took effect in the flesh, and reached the
understanding through the sense of feeling, but an intelligible utterance, in
clear words, distinctly heard, understood, remembered, reported, and
incorporated in Luke’s narrative, entitled Acts of Apostles. It impressed him
that he should join the chariot, or, in modern style, made him feel like joining
the chariot; but the feeling came from the knowledge of the requirement to join
the chariot, but the knowledge of the requirement did not come from the feeling.
The requirement came to the understanding embodied in intelligible words, and
the feeling followed, resulting from the knowledge. This was the part directly
performed by the Spirit, not on the man to be converted, but in bringing his
conversion about. His part of the work was like that of the angel, not in
changing the officer’s heart, taking away his sins, or preaching the Gospel to
him, but in bringing the man, whom the Lord had sent to preach to him, in
contact with him. This the Spirit did by words. 3. What did the preacher do?
Before this matter is attended to, a curiosity, a strange thing demands
attention. An officer of state, in great authority, having charge of the
treasure of the Queen Candace, as he journeys, is seen reading the Scriptures!
Though this occurred eighteen centuries back, it has novelty about it to any one
of our time. What! you are ready to inquire, an officer of state, of immense
power and distinction, reading the Scriptures? That is not the kind of reading
indulged in by officers of state now. They glance over the political news, then
pass over some cunningly-devised and artfully-conceived tale of law, of
disappointment or triumph, of achievement or failure. True, there are some
honorable exceptions, but they are the exceptions, not the rule. This man was
not only reading the Scriptures, but the most appropriate scripture in the holy
volume for him, the fifty-third chapter of Isaiah. Shall it be said that he was
accidentally reading this scripture, or was it not providential? At any rate, he
was reading the following most graphic prophetic description: "Surely he has
borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: we did esteem him stricken, smitten
of God, and afflicted. But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised
for our iniquities; the chastisement of our peace was on him; and with his
stripes we are healed. All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every
one to his own way; and the Lord has laid on him the iniquity of us all. He was
oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a
lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before the shearers is dumb, so he opened
not his mouth. He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare
his generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the
transgression of my people was he stricken. And he made his grave with the
wicked, and with the rich in his death; because he had done no violence, neither
was any deceit in his mouth. Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise him; he hath put
him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see
his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper
in his hand." This wonderful description, written seven hundred and fifty years
before its fulfillment, is almost as graphic and full as the historical account
of the same matters given by Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John. As Philip approached
him and found him reading this prophecy, he said to him, "Do you understand what
you are reading?" He replied, "How can I understand unless some man guide me?"
He invited the preacher to a seat with him, which was accepted, and the chariot
moved on. This preacher was emphatically a Gospel preacher. Had he been of the
type of some, getting into company, with a distinguished officer of state, he
would have taken the opportunity to have shown that he, too, was posted and
deeply interested in matters of state, and they would have had a fine discussion
of the civil affairs of the world. The officer would have seen that the preacher
was more under the influence of the kingdoms of this world than the kingdoms of
God; of the flesh than of the Spirit. But, the preacher sent of God was not of
that kind. He was a preacher of Jesus, and his soul was full of love to God and
to his race. He had a divine mission, loved it, and did not forget it when an
opportunity was afforded to do the work of his Divine Master. He immediately
proceeded with his grand work without waiting for meeting-house, pulpit, or a
great audience; nor did he wait to prepare a sermon, to write it out, or read
it, but "begun at the same scripture, and preached to him Jesus." He did not
preach to him his opinion about Jesus, his views about Jesus, or the views of
his brethren, but preached to him Jesus. How was that done? It was done as Moses
was read. Reading Moses was reading the writings or the law of Moses. Preaching
Jesus is preaching the Gospel, or the good news of Jesus. It is not preaching
some man’s opinion of the Gospel, nor proving some man’s opinion by the Gospel,
or some creed, doctrine, or commandment of men, nor preaching about the Gospel,
but preaching the Gospel itself--nothing else. It is complete in itself, the
thing to be preached, the wisdom of God and the power of God. This was the theme
the preacher had in his heart, and the theme that dwelt on his lips, as he
discoursed to the officer of the Queen Candace. He opened and begun at the
scripture the officer was reading, and showed him, no doubt, that the language
of the prophet referred to had its fulfillment in Jesus of Nazareth, and the
transactions connected with his trial and crucifixion recently in Jerusalem. He
had no modern doctrines to preach nor prove. All he had to do was to bring his
Lord before the officer and convince him that he was the promised Messiah--that
he had come and fulfilled the prediction of the prophet. This work he did. 4.
What did the officer do? He did not say he could not do anything, nor did the
preacher tell him that he could do nothing. The only way to ascertain correctly
all about it is to follow the record carefully. The historian says: "As they
went on their way, they came to a certain water: and the officer said, See, here
is water: what hinders my being immersed?" This is an important inquiry. It
opens the way for looking round in many directions. No man of intelligence can
avoid thinking what would have been the reply if some preacher of the present
time had been there instead of Philip. One sort would have brought him before a
church to tell an experience, and give evidence that his sins were pardoned and
he had obtained a hope, before he could have been immersed. Another class would
have proposed to put him on six months’ trial, and, if he proved faithful and
"got religion," he could then be "baptized by immersion" if he desired it. But
the unsophisticated Philip knew no such supplements, amendments, or improvements
on the Lord’s method of justification, but proceeded in a way divinely adapted
to man, saying, "If you believe with all your heart, you may." When the officer
heard this, without hesitation, he told Philip what he believed. Said he, "I
believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God." Do you say "It is a great
matter to believe with all the heart." It certainly is, and no other kind of
belief is of any value. "I thought you made a bare assent of the mind, faith,
and all the faith required," says one. In that you have been misled by
misrepresentations and false statements. No man of intelligence ever taught that
the Lord would receive any person to the ordinance of immersion, or to himself
in any way, on the bare assent of the mind. The requirement of the Lord is to
believe with all the heart. But what is the meaning of that? It is the cordial,
free, full, and cheerful assent to the grand proposition, that "Jesus is the
Christ, the Son of God." It is like this: You are in distress. A small amount of
money will relieve you. You see two men of your acquaintance standing together,
and apply to one, asking for the amount required to relieve you. He listens to
you, is slow to answer, and finally, but evidently reluctantly, replies, "I
suppose I can let you have the amount." You see that it is not free, cordial,
nor cheerful--that he would rather not do it, and that if another ounce were on
the other end of the scale, he would not. That is the bare assent of the
mind--no more. But the other man advances toward you, with an earnest look, and
says, "Sir, I will let you have the amount you need with all my heart." Who can
fail to see the difference? It is no bare assent of the mind in this latter
case, but a cordial, free, and cheerful thing. He enters into the act with his
heart. It does him good to do it. How can there be an intelligent human being
who cannot, on becoming acquainted with the evidence, cordially, most freely and
cheerfully, or, which is the same, with the whole heart or affections, believe
that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God? We are in a world of uncertainty, and
liable in a single moment to be hurried out of it. Jesus is the soul of the
Bible, the center, the grand embodiment of it. On him it all rests. To deny him
is to deny it all. He is the light of the world, the way, the truth, and the
life. Set him aside, and not one ray of light penetrates beyond the grave. All
your friends who passed away from this world are covered in eternal darkness.
When you shall sink into the grave, eternal night will brood over you. Not one
ray of light have you, if you reject Jesus, in reference to all that have died.
They have gone into an eternal oblivion. Well may you, then, with all your heart
or affections, press the faith of Christ to your soul. "If you believe with all
your heart, you may." "I believe," replied the officer, "that Jesus is the
Christ, the Son of God." On this grand fundamental and sublime statement the man
of God received him to the obedience of the faith. The historian says, "He
commanded the chariot to stand still; and they went down both into the water,
both Philip and the officer; and he immersed him." Owing to the captious,
perverted, and caviling spirit of these times, some things must be noticed here
that would not, under other circumstances, demand any attention. Some men, whose
business it appears to be to darken counsel, instead of opening the way for the
clear light to shine, and who yet claim to be called and sent to preach, have,
in numerous instances, said that they could not tell from this history which one
baptized the other. To this it may be replied, that if any man has so little
mind that he cannot tell, after making an honest trial, which one baptized the
other, he is simply not a subject of religion. Preaching cannot do him any good.
If any one who can easily see which immersed the other, still tries to blind the
weak and ignorant, by saying he cannot tell, he is too insincere and uncandid to
have anything to do with any appointment of God. When one man inquires what
hinders that he may not be immersed, and another informs him of the terms on
which he may be immersed, and the history explains that the terms were complied
with on his part, and "he immersed him," and a man persists in saying that he
cannot tell which one immersed the other, it is useless to waste time in talking
with him. A man must have in him a good and honest heart before he hears the
word. The officer inquired, "What hinders that I may not be immersed?" Philip
says, "If you believe with all your heart, you may." He answers, "I believe that
Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God." Giving the attending circumstances, the
history says "and he immersed him." There is no such thing as misunderstanding
which one immersed the other. But now attention must be given to the
circumstances attending the case, and the peculiarity of the narrative. There is
something very peculiar in this little piece of history. The Divine Spirit of
all wisdom and all revelation appears to have looked down through eighteen long
centuries and seen the little cavilers and caviling of these times, and to have
employed such a class of terms and so arranged them as to leave no possible room
for mistake. Open your book and look at the passage: "And they came to a certain
water." Where does that place them? "To a certain water," or "unto" it, as it is
in the common version, is at the water, to the edge of the water. What followed
after they were to the water, or at it? The history proceeds: "They went down."
In giving a common history, this word "down," is not strictly necessary, for
they could not have gone into the water without going down. Who went down? "Both
Philip and the officer." In a simple narrative the word "both" is not necessary.
The word "they," used just before it, included both. But after this apparent
redundancy, to be still more descriptive, and to put caviling out of the
question, he adds the words "Philip and the officer." Why all this
particularity? Evidently to put honest misunderstanding out of the question
entirely. They came to the water first, then went down into the water. Does some
one say, that "into" only means to or at the water? That cannot be, for they had
already come to the water, and were at it, after which they went. Went where,
after they were to the water, or at it? "They both went down into the water."
They were already at the water; to it before they advanced beyond that point, or
"both went down into the water." This placed them in advance of where they
were--at the water or to it--which advanced position was "down into the water."
They were now in the right position for the performance of the act which the
Lord commanded. The commandment was not obeyed when they had gone "done into the
water." What they had gone through was preliminary and necessary to the
performance of the act commanded. Some little things must be noticed here,
seeing that little men sometimes darken counsel with them.

It has been said that there was no water of consequence there--not more than a
quart or two at the outside. How this precise information is obtained cannot be
explained here. But one thing is certain, and that is, that Luke’s statement is
true, that "they both went down into the water;" but they did not both go down
into a bowl, cup, a quart, or a gallon of water, nor do sensible people think
they did. This needs no argument.

"But there was no water in the desert." That cannot be, for they came to "a
certain water." The man who does not believe the narrative needs no baptism, nor
is he a fit subject for baptism. It is faith that he needs. He must become a
believer before he has anything to do with baptism. The atlases teach falsely if
there is no water there, for they were in the course of a stream of water more
than a hundred miles in length, including its windings. Do you say, "It was a
water that went dry at some seasons of the year?" No matter if it was. It was
not dry at the time the event in question occurred; or they could not have gone
"down into the water," nor "come up out of the water," as the history says they
did if there had been no water there.

"But the apostles could not have immersed three thousand in one day," says an
objector. What is to be argued from that? The assumptions run as follows:

That none but preachers could have immersed. This cannot be proved, but stands
as an unsupported assumption, and cannot be reasoned from as a settled matter.

There were no preachers present but the apostles. This is another unsupported
assumption for which there is no proof. A short time before this the Lord had
sent out seventy preachers besides the apostles. It is not in argument to be
assumed that none of these were present on Pentecost, and reasoned from as a
settled point.

It is assumed that the apostles could not have immersed the three thousand in
the given time. This assumption not only cannot be proved, but can be clearly
demonstrated to be false. The apostles alone could have immersed the whole three
thousand in three hours.

It is, then, assumed that, as immersion was impossible, the three thousand must
have been sprinkled. But this by no means follows. There is no sprinkling in all
this. The only thing attempted is to find something opposed to immersion. That
is not done; but if it were, there would be nothing in it for sprinkling. There
is nothing in all that about sprinkling at all. Sprinkling is entirely out of
the question. Independently of all that, sprinkling must be found and proved.
There is not one word about sprinkling for baptism in the Bible, or in anything
written in the first three centuries.

What was the precise thing done while Philip and the officer were both in the
water? In the common version it says "He baptized him." What does that mean? It
does not say, he baptized water on him. It is a noticeable thing that we never
read of baptizing water. The element used in baptizing is not the subject of the
action, no matter whether it be water, fire, sufferings, or Spirit. We never
read of baptizing water, Spirit, fire, or sufferings on any person or thing.
Where water is the element, and sprinkling is the action, the water is sprinkled
on the subject. The same is true where pouring is the action. The Spirit was
poured out, but not baptized. The persons were baptized, but not "poured out."
Philip did not pour him out, but "baptized him." Some modern teachers of
religion, who draw more on their imaginations than on the authority of
Scripture, have discovered, or thought they discovered, that the officer got the
idea of being baptized from the expression "so shall he sprinkle many nations,"
in the last verse of the chapter preceding the one which he was reading. True,
in the common version of the Old Testament we find the word "sprinkle," but the
officer was not reading the common version, but, in all probability, the Greek
Septuagint, which does not contain the Greek word for sprinkle in the passage,
nor any word meaning sprinkle, nor is there anything about baptism in the
passage in any translation or the original. It is simply "He shall astonish many
nations." There is nothing about sprinkling or baptizing in the passage. The
officer did not, therefore, find baptism in this reading, unless he found it
where it was not, like our modern divines. He learned, in one of two ways, that
he must be baptized.

He may have learned while in Jerusalem that all who became Christians were
baptized.

In preaching Jesus, or the Gospel of Jesus, Philip may have preached it to him.
No matter in which of these ways he learned it, the information was right.

We find, now, that he went down into the water, and, after the act in question,
"they came up out of the water." What, then, did he do to him when "he baptized
him?" This question cannot be examined here carefully, but a few things may be
set forth in a few words. There would have been no difficulty here had not the
word "baptize" been left untranslated. It is a Greek word, and when it is
correctly translated, the thing done is so clearly set forth that no one can
misunderstand. It is simply "he immersed him." There is no misunderstanding
that. But the mere English reader is ready to say "How shall I know that your
statement is correct?" By the following:

All admit that "baptize" is a Greek word.

There is no translation, no matter by whom made, in which it is rendered
sprinkle or pour.

No scholar maintains that baptize should be translated sprinkle or pour.

No lexicon in common use defines baptize to mean sprinkle or pour.

There is not a trace of sprinkling or pouring for baptism in anything written in
the first two centuries, in the Bible or any other book.

There is not a more clearly established fact in history than that immersion was
invariably practiced for the initiatory rite during the first two centuries.

There is not a more clearly established fact in history than that, after
sprinkling or pouring came into use in case of weakness or sickness, that it was
not regarded as regular baptism; but the subjects of it were not permitted to
hold any office in the church.

The change from immersion to sprinkling or pouring is clearly admitted in all
the authorities of any note.

Immersion was invariably practiced by all Christians, except the cases of
weakness already alluded to, for the first thirteen hundred years.

Luther, Calvin, and Wesley admit that immersion was the original practice. The
Romish and Greek Churches admit this.

The Greek Church, which has always spoken the Greek language, has immersed from
its origin.

It makes sense to read immerse for baptize in every instance where it occurs. It
does not make sense to read sprinkle or pour.

The figurative allusions to baptism, such as "buried with him in baptism," "born
of water," "planted together in the likeness of his death," are admitted by all
the authorities of any note to refer to the original rite--immersion.

Changes from the appointments of God are seldom from the easier to the more
difficult, but are almost invariably from the more difficult and unpleasant to
that which is easy and pleasant.

It is a notorious matter of fact, that but few if any who have been immersed, on
a confession of their faith in Christ, ever doubt the validity of their baptism.
Those who have received sprinkling for baptism frequently doubt the validity of
their baptism, and cannot rest till they are immersed.

Persons in their last and most solemn moments, in the immediate expectation of
death, frequently distrust the validity of their sprinkling or pouring for
baptism, but no one has ever been known to distrust the validity of immersion,
even in the midst of the solemnities of the approach of death.

There is, therefore, no doubt that when they were in the water he immersed him.
This is precisely what was done, and this is precisely what the Lord commands to
be done now. "Repent and be immersed every one of you, in the name of Jesus
Christ," is the commandment. What has appeared in the investigation may now be
recapitulated, as follows: 1. The part of the work performed by the angel, in
bringing about the conversion of the nobleman, was to send the preacher down the
way leading from Jerusalem to Gaza. 2. The part of the work performed by the
Spirit was to command the preacher to join himself to the chariot. 3 The part of
the work performed by the preacher was to preach Jesus to the officer and
immerse him. 4. The part performed by the officer was to hear the preaching,
believe it, and yield himself to the Lord. The repentance is not mentioned, but
was unquestionably in its place, as he could not have believed "with all the
heart" without the repentance. Repentance is present in every case. Not a man
ever turns to the Lord without repentance. 5. The fifth and last part to be
considered in this discourse, is whatthe Lord did for him. This part, like
repentance, is not mentioned in Luke’s account, but no one must infer from that
circumstance that that part of the work was omitted, or that the Lord did
nothing for him. From other parts of the holy record it is clearly seen what the
parts already found were in order to. He had heard, believed, repented,
confessed, and been immersed. He passed through this process in order to
justification or pardon. The Lord says, in the great commission, "He who
believes and is immersed, shall be saved." This he had done, and thus came to
the promise--"shall be saved," or pardoned. In accordance with the promise the
Lord granted pardon. This was not something done in him, but in heaven for him.
It was an act of God performed in heaven which freed him from all his past sins.
This was one thing done by the Lord for him--saved him from his sins. Another
thing done for him was the impartation of the Holy Spirit. The Lord imparted to
him the Spirit. This is omitted in the history. It is clearly shown to be the
case from other scriptures. The Gospel opened out with the assurance that the
Holy Spirit was imparted as widely as pardon was granted: "Repent and be
immersed every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of
sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit." This promise stands
connected with pardon at the opening of the kingdom, and extends to all who
receive remission of sins. This promise was, in his case, as in all other cases,
fulfilled when he yielded to the Gospel of the grace of God. He received the
Holy Spirit. What is the last that is seen of him in the sacred record? It is
that "he went on his way rejoicing." What was the ground of his joy? Surely
there was great reason for joy. When Philip met him, he did not know of whom the
prophet was speaking in the scripture he was reading, though the prophet was
pointing to the Savior of the world, his humiliation, his pouring out his soul
even to death, and making his soul an offering for sin. Now he has the matter
explained to him, that the prophet was speaking of the Messiah; that Jesus of
Nazareth was the Messiah; that all that was described by the prophet was
fulfilled in him. He believes with all the heart that Jesus is the Christ, the
Son of God; has repented, confessed his faith, and been immersed into the name
of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. He has thus been adopted
into the new-born family, received a full, free, and gracious pardon of all past
sins, and received the spirit of adoption, whereby he can call God his Father.
Instead of the mazes in which he was before Philip preached to him, when he did
not know of whom the prophet was speaking--whether of himself or some other
man--he now has the clear understanding that he was speaking of the Messiah, of
whom all the prophets spoke, who had now come in accordance with the prophecies,
lived the life assigned him, died the death, risen from the dead, ascended into
heaven, and been crowned Lord of all; that he had sent the Holy Spirit, inspired
the apostles, enabled them to preach the Gospel, founded the kingdom or Church,
opened the door, and introduced many thousands into the new and living way--nay,
more, that he had received this faith himself, been translated into the kingdom
of God’s dear Son, made an heir of God and a joint heir with Christ. For the
first time in his life, he saw that all the light of prophecy had culminated in
the Messiah, and that the way to the Father was not only opened, but that he had
entered by that way, and was not now simply a son of Abraham according to the
flesh, but a son by faith, an heir of God, and a joint heir with Christ. His
sins are to be remembered no more forever. The Spirit of God has now been
imparted to him to dwell with him forever. "He went on his way rejoicing," as he
had great reason to do, and, no doubt, carried the joyful tidings to his own
country. May we expect all these parts connected with every conversion now? So
far as related to what the officer heard, believed, and did, and what the Lord
did directly for him, all may be expected now. No man need wait for an angel to
appear to a preacher now, and tell him which road to go to find him and preach
to him. This part of the case transpired in the incipient period--the creative
period--in which the supernatural was necessary in founding, unfolding, and
confirming the new institution. So far as the work of the angel was concerned,
it was miraculous, and forms no precedent for any other conversion. It may not
be expected, nor necessary, that an angel of the Lord should appear to a
preacher and guide him to every man to be converted. So, the Spirit of the Lord
speaking to Philip, and commanding him to join himself to the chariot, was
miraculous, and not a precedent for every case. The preacher need not now expect
to hear the Spirit say, "Join yourself to this chariot." That was a special act
for a special case, in the age of miracles, and not a precedent in the general
law for all cases. But the hearing the Gospel, or being in some way brought to
know it, believe it, repent, confess the faith, and be immersed into the name
the the and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit--the remission of sins, and the
impartation of the Holy Spirit, belong to all cases of conversion alike. Not one
of these items can be omitted in any case. They are not each one mentioned, in
every case, in the holy record. But while every item mentioned in any one case
really exists in every case, whether mentioned or not, no item can ever be
omitted mentioned in any one case. For instance, in the reference to the
commission made by Mark, he does not give repentance. He says, "He who believes
and is immersed shall be saved." But that does not prove that repentance can be
omitted, in any case, in the justification of the sinner. In the words of Paul
to the jailer, he said "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be
saved." Here repentance and immersion both are omitted. That does not prove that
they were left out in the case of the jailer, for he "took them the same hour of
the night and washed their stripes, and was immersed, he and all his,
straightway." In the words of Peter, on Pentecost, faith is omitted. He said,
"Repent, and be immersed every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ, for the
remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit." You are
not to assume, because faith is not mentioned in this case, that it was omitted,
or that they were saved without faith. It was present in their justification and
performed its regular part, as it does in every other case. The reason Peter did
not command them to believe was that they already believed. He had regard to
their position, and commanded them not to do what they had done, but what they
had not done--to repent and be immersed. In the words "the like figure whereunto
even immersion doth also now save us," neither faith nor repentance is
mentioned, yet immersion is nothing to any one without faith and repentance. The
conversion of the Ethiopian treasurer, therefore, in all that pertained strictly
to it, was the same as any other conversion, aside from the work of the angel
and the Spirit in guiding the preacher to and bringing him in contact with him.
Apart from what the angel said and what the Spirit said to Philip, the process
was the same as in every other case. The work of God, of Christ, of the Holy
Spirit, of the preacher, and of the man himself, was precisely the same as in
all other cases. The case forms a divine precedent. In the examination it will
be found:

That he heard the same Gospel that is the power of God to salvation to every
other person that believes.

That he believed the same Gospel that all are required to believe in order to
salvation.

That he repented the same as all others.

That he made the same good confession as others.

That he was pardoned the same as all others who become Christians.

That the Lord imparted to him the Holy Spirit the same as he did to all others
on their becoming obedient to the faith.

That he had the same ground for rejoicing as existed in all other cases of
turning to God.

What remained for him after his turning to the Lord, was to be faithful till
death; to be true and loyal to his new and glorious Sovereign; to fight the good
fight; to run the race with patience; to continue in well-doing; seek for glory,
and honor, and immortality, in order to the obtaining of eternal life. The Lord
is reasonable, and what he has laid down for us, in order to becoming Christians
and living to his honor and glory, is clear, easy, and reasonable. If men and
women are not saved, it will be their own fault. They are left without excuse,
and have no cloak for their sins. Come, then, be persuaded, by all his tender
mercies, his love, his goodness and compassion, by his long-suffering and
forbearance, to turn and live. "He is not willing that any should perish, but
that all should come to repentance." Come, then, to him that loved you and gave
himself for you, and live forever and ever.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 16: GP1 - 15-THE COURSE TO PURSUE TO BE INFALLIBLY SAFE
========================================================================

SERMON, No. XV.

THEME.--THE COURSE TO PURSUE TO BE INFALLIBLY SAFE.

TEXT.--"Enter in at the strait gate."--Mat 7:13.

IT is a circumstance not to be denied, that immense confusion exists in the
public mind touching the way of salvation. No matter whether the cause of this
confusion can be pointed out or not, the fact of its existence cannot be denied.
It is also a fact that many men of good character, fine intelligence, and who
are excellent citizens, are standing aloof from all connection with any church,
or identification with religion in any form. No doubt, a main cause of this is
that a large amount of the preaching is either insipid, lifeless, and powerless
talk, and nothing more, or wholly unintelligible; so that, on one hand; there is
no interest in it, and, on the other hand, they cannot understand it. No matter
whether the fact can be accounted for or not, it is a fact, and an indisputable
fact, that darkness pervades the public mind on the very matter of the highest
importance to man of all others--the way to eternal happiness and renown. It is
useless to try to blur it over, to disguise or deny it. There stands the
stumbling-block before the people. One teaches this way and another that; one
says, lo here, and another, lo there. Many stand confounded, and know not which
way to go. Turning to the clear teaching of the Savior, the command is found:
"Enter you in at the strait gate; for wide is the gate, and broad is the way,
that leadeth to destruction, and many there be who go in thereat: because strait
is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be
that find it." This is a candid and solemn warning, and shows that the Lord saw
the narrow way in which his followers would have to walk to gain everlasting
life. A speculative man, more interested in some perplexing question than in
regard to his own salvation, and, probably, desiring to procure some means of
prejudicing the public mind against the Lord’s teaching, came to the Savior and
said, "Lord, are there few that be saved?" The Lord gave him a more extended
answer than he desired. He said: "Strive to enter in at the strait gate: for
many, I say unto you, will seek to enter in, and shall not be able. When once
the Master of the house is risen up, and hath shut to the door, and ye begin to
stand without, and to knock at the door, saying, Lord, Lord, open unto us; and
he shall answer and say unto you, I know you not whence ye are. Then shall ye
begin to say, We have eaten and drunk in thy presence, and thou hast taught in
our streets. But he shall say, I tell you, I know you not whence ye are; depart
from me, all ye workers of iniquity." Luk 13:24-27. The Lord warned the people
to be on their guard; to be careful and not be deceived. You cannot determine
which is the right way by the multitude walking in a way, for many are walking
in the broad road, leading to ruin. An important reason for being cautious that
no mistake be made in finding the right way, is that each person is to make but
one trip. If you were to travel the road many times after missing the way once,
you might avoid the mistake next time. But we pass over the way but once, and if
we miss it, the mistake can never be corrected. All should make sure work of it,
and be certain not to miss the way. In the midst, then, of all the confusion of
these times, the different ways held up to the people, as leading to heaven, is
there any possible course that a human being can pursue that is infallibly safe?
The purpose of this discourse is to give an affirmative answer to this
question--to show that there is a course to pursue that is infallibly safe. The
labor of this discourse will not be to refute those opposed to the positions
maintained, but to show an honest and humble person what course to pursue in the
midst of all the confusion of the times to be infallibly safe. In order to this
end, a few of the most serious difficulties existing; will be handled and
disposed of in such a way as to show the safe course. What, then, is the first
difficulty to be encountered? It is the difficulty between the infidel and the
Christian. A man says: "I have read Hume, Voltaire, Volney, Gibbon, Paine, etc.,
and you admit that some of these were, at least, men of learning, extended
knowledge in antiquity, with vast libraries and time for reading; and they
maintain stoutly, and most determinedly, that the Bible is the work of man, and
nothing else; that they have no confidence in it. On the other hand, I have read
Paley, Watson, Faber, Nelson, Barnes, etc., men of learning, vast knowledge,
antiquity, immense libraries, with any amount of time for research, and they say
that the Bible contains a revelation from God, and that the man who does not
believe it will be condemned. Now, if these great and learned men, on each side,
cannot decide the matter, settle the question, and put it beyond dispute, how am
I ever to decide the matter? If any means were at command by which this
difficulty could be made to appear more difficult, such means should be
employed, as the intention is to meet the difficulty itself, and not to demolish
a man of straw." Now, do not forget the purpose had in view--to show what course
to pursue to be infallibly safe. To what danger is the man exposed who believes
the Bible with his whole heart, and honestly practices it, in any conceivable
event? To say the least, the man who believes the Bible, and practices its
teaching, is as good as the unbeliever. He is certainly as happy. Beyond all
dispute, he does as much for his race as the unbeliever. So far as this world is
concerned, he is certainly infallibly safe in any possible or conceivable event.
Nor does any man doubt that he is infallibly safe so far as the world to come is
concerned. Conceive the idea, if you please, that, in the final winding up of
human affairs, it were possible for every thing to turn out as the skeptic has
argued; the Bible to be entirely of man--as Robert Owen argued, all religion
founded in ignorance; to what danger is the man who honestly believed and obeyed
the Bible exposed? Conceive the possibility, if you please, for every thing to
turn out finally as skeptics have argued, and the Christian to have honestly
believed the Bible with his whole heart and practiced it faithfully; to have
preached it, written it, published it, and advocated it with all the power in
him, through his entire life, and to have opposed infidelity, fought against and
done every thing in his power to put it down, to what danger will he stand
exposed, living or dying, in this world or that which is to come? No danger of
any sort. No man living can show that he has lost anything that can in any way
contribute to greatness, goodness, or happiness in this life, and the skeptic
himself will not claim that he has endangered himself in reference to the life
to come. No man of any sort, no matter where he stands, nor what he holds,
maintains that any great danger can befall a man on account of his believing and
practicing the Bible; that he is, on this account, in any sense, not safe for
this world and that which is to come, even if all the skeptic claims could, by
any conceivable event, prove true. If, in the end, he shall find that all he
believed concerning God, Christ, the Holy Spirit, angels, and men--in one word,
all he believed about the Bible--to be true, he will be an eternal gainer; he
will have gained all things. But if you conceive the possibility of his being
entirely mistaken, and the skeptic right in every particular, he is then as safe
as any skeptic on earth, living and dying, in time and eternity. You may
confidently defy any skeptic to show that he is not infallibly safe in any
event. But, now, turn round and look at the other side of the question. Let the
skeptic prove mistaken, and look to the consequences of his mistake. He finds
himself, in the end, standing in opposition to his merciful Creator, who has, in
kindness and compassion, put forth his hand to save him; opposed to his gracious
Redeemer, who died for him, and to the Bible, intended to guide him to happiness
and eternal glory. He believed not the God who created him, and the Lord who
gave himself for him. The sentence is, "He who believes not shall be condemned."
"He who believes not the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides on
him." He knows that his skepticism cannot possibly make him any better in this
life, any more happy; that it cannot do the world any possible good; that it has
nothing in it to elevate, ennoble, and adorn humanity; that it cannot possibly
bring anything great and good to a single soul of the human race; that it cannot
civilize, educate, or enlighten mankind; in one word, that its whole tendency is
to pull down morals, education, and enlightenment in general; and if all its
claims could, by any conceivable event, prove true, every believer in the Bible
would be as safe in all respects as he for time and eternity! Skepticism is an
awful experiment. It is simply taking the risk of losing every thing, without
the possibility of gaining anything for this world or the world to come. It is
like this: A father tells his son that he has ten thousand dollars to set him
out in business; to select a business and he will give him the money. The son
goes out, looks around, and comes home delighted; he has found a grand
speculation, and calls for the money. The father calls for an explanation of the
speculation. The young man sets it forth with much eloquence and fluency. The
father listens to him with deep interest, and, when he is through, calls his
attention to a certain point in the speculation, and inquires what the result
would be should he be mistaken at said point. The young man’s countenance falls.
He admits that he had not thought of that; that a mistake there would involve
the loss of the whole ten thousand dollars. In a few minutes the father calls
his attention to many points, at any one of which a single mistake would involve
the loss of all his money. His father then turns to the other side and inquires
for the result, in case there shall be no mistake, and finds that the best that
can possibly be the result, in any event, will be to come out even with the
amount with which he started in. "What!" says the father, "a speculation in
which there are many chances to lose every thing and no chance to gain anything!
No, sir; you cannot have the money." This is the speculation of skeptics. They
not only have many chances to lose every thing without any chance to gain
anything, but are certain to lose all, and have no chance to gain anything in
any possible or even conceivable event. Well may skeptics say, "It is a leap in
the dark." Shall a man of intelligence make such an experiment, take such a
risk, when he can be infallibly safe? It is infallibly safe to believe the Bible
with the whole heart and practice its teaching. This no man denies. This is
indisputable. It would be exceedingly strange if that which is infallibly safe
were not infallibly correct. Why is it that such a large proportion of skeptics,
when near the close of their lives, or are in the immediate expectation of
death, renounce and repudiate their skepticism? Why does their foundation fail
them at the very time when they need support more than at any former period? Why
is it that, at the gate of death, so many of them renounce what had been upon
their lips for years? Why is it that the most impudent scoffers, bold and
ridiculing unbelievers, in such large proportions, when they approach the change
of worlds, repudiate, frequently with their last words, the unbelief that had
dwelt upon their lips for years? Why does the meekest believer in the kingdom of
God press his faith to his heart the more closely as he approaches death? Why is
it that not a man who claimed to believe the Bible, while in life and health,
ever denied it when he approached death? The answer is, that the divine
testimony is sufficient for all confidence, worthy of all acceptation; and the
human soul, at the hour of dissolution, when it needs support, leans on that
which is infallibly safe, as also infallibly correct. It matters not, then,
whether you can remove all the difficulties skeptics can produce, answer all
their questions, or understand all their subtleties or not; they can point the
honest believer to no danger to which he is exposed, no serious consequences
that can result from his faith in any conceivable event. To believe the Bible,
then, and practice its teaching is infallibly safe for this world and the world
to come. Does some man reply that this is no refutation of skepticism? It does
not propose to be, but shows you what course to pursue to be infallibly safe,
whether you can refute skepticism or not, or even whether you can understand it.
It has nothing in it good for you in any conceivable event, whether true or
false, and it is useless to trouble your mind about it. "Well," says a man, "I
supposed you could dispose of the difficulty so far as skepticism is concerned;
but I have a difficulty beyond that. My difficulty is among the preachers. For
instance, one man says he can prove, clear as holy writ, that all mankind will
be finally made holy and happy; quotes Scripture; talks of Latin, Greek, Hebrew;
of lexicons, concordances, and exegesis. Another man argues that ’the wicked
shall be turned into hell with all the nations that forget God.’ I find that
there are men of learning and talent on both sides; men of reading and books;
and if they cannot settle the question, and show who is right, I do not see how
I am ever to settle it." There is not much difficulty in that case. If the man
was here who says he can prove so clearly that all will be saved, it would be
well to ask him a few questions, such as the following: Do you not admit that
all mankind ought to believe the Bible and honestly obey its teaching? He would
reply, Certainly I do. Is not the man who believes and obeys the teaching of the
Bible as happy as any one in this life? He will answer, Certainly he is the
happiest man in this world. Very well; will he not be happy in the world to
come? Undoubtedly he will, he will readily reply, for all will be saved in the
world to come. Then, being yourself the judge, all who believe the Bible, and
obey its teaching, are infallibly safe for this world and that world to come. He
will reply, Certainly they are. But what if a man does not happen to believe the
Bible and obey its teachings in this life? He is not safe, and no argument can
make him safe. He stands on doubtful ground, while he might stand on safe
ground. He takes a risk, while he might have a certainty. He admits that all who
believe and honestly obey the Bible are safe--infallibly safe. This nobody
denies. All men can, then, believe the Bible and obey its teaching, and thus be
infallibly safe. Conceive the idea, if you can, that it could possibly turn out
that all men will be saved, the man who believes the Bible and obeys its
teaching will be saved. Those who believe the Bible and obey it are infallibly
safe in any conceivable event. "But," says a man, "one preacher says ’God
unchangeably foreordains whatever comes to pass,’ and that the number of the
elect is so definite that it can neither be increased nor diminished; and
another says, Christ died for all, and that all can come to Christ and be saved.
Now, if those preachers themselves cannot settle this matter, and show who is
right, how can I ever decide it?" Suppose you never should decide that matter in
this life, might you not still be happy for this world and that which is to
come? Explaining these intricate matters, while it may be some satisfaction to
the curious, will never save one human being. It would have been transcendently
better for mankind if such subtleties had never been started. Men have gotten
much credit from the people for starting, handling, and seeming to know much of
such matters, as men of learning, depth of thought, and wonderful genius; but
they have, to an alarming extent, confused the world thereby and obstructed the
way of salvation. They have involved millions of our race in utter confusion.
But now, what is to be done? Is there any clear course that can be pursued to
avoid all this? There certainly is; and that course is not to try to settle
these intricate questions, nor even thoroughly to understand them. It is much
shorter and easier than all that. It is obvious that the apostles preached the
Gospel to all wherever they went. They approved those who believed and obeyed,
and disapproved those who did not believe. The grounds of consideration are
various. Not more than two need be mentioned now. Unbelief is a ground of
condemnation: "He who believes not shall be condemned." Disobedience is
mentioned as a ground of condemnation: "The Lord will take vengeance on those
who know not God, and obey not the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ." The Gospel
is, then, the only thing to be preached. It is to be preached to all nations for
the obedience of faith. It is infallibly safe to preach the Gospel to all men,
for all men to believe it and obey it. In any event this is safe. If it could
possibly turn out that "God did unchangeably ordain whatever comes to pass," and
that the number of "the elect is so definite that it can neither be increased
nor diminished," those who believe the Gospel with all their heart, and obey it,
are certainly as safe as any body. It cannot possibly make the matter any worse
for them to have believed and obeyed the Gospel in any event. They are
infallibly safe in their belief and obedience. Even if Calvinism should prove
true, and they should turn out non-elect, their condition is by no means worsted
by their belief and obedience. This is infallibly safe for all men: to make the
best possible effort to know and to do the will of God. If this is not safe,
there is no safety. We must live and die in uncertainty. But it is
safe--infallibly safe. The strongest Calvinist admits that it is right to preach
the Gospel to all. It is right for all to believe the Gospel. It is right for
all to obey the Gospel. There is nobody, who believes that the Bible came from
God, that does not admit that it is right to believe and obey its teaching. This
is infallibly right, as all admit. That which is infallibly right is, beyond all
doubt, infallibly safe. Another man says: "I have a difficulty beyond all you
have mentioned, that I know not how to settle. It is this: One preacher
maintains that baptism is essential to salvation; another, equally learned,
denies it. If learned preachers, on each side of this question, cannot settle
it, and thus end the controversy, how am I to decide who is right?" That may
appear puzzling to a man at first thought, but a little reflection will open a
clear path to any man who is simply looking for a safe course to pursue. There
is much in shaping questions. The teacher who desires to keep the public mind
clear, states all his positions and questions with a view to that end. The man
who desires to mystify, confuse, and perplex the public mind, frames his
questions and takes his position with a view to that end. Now, why should any
one discuss the question whether baptism is essential to salvation? Why not
discuss the question whether prayer, the communion, or the contribution is
essential to salvation? Why discuss the question whether anything the Lord has
commanded is essential? All such questions have their foundation in disloyalty
to the divine government. There is a much easier method of investigation than
this, and more satisfactory. There is no need of starting the question whether
baptism is essential to salvation. Do you inquire for the simpler and easier way
of arriving at something satisfactory and safe? Then start with the inquiry, Is
baptism a commandment of God? All parties of any note respond, Certainly it is a
commandment. About this there is no dispute of importance. It being admitted
that baptism is a commandment of God, the next question is simply this: Is it
right to obey the commandment of God? Here, again, there is but one answer. All
admit that it is right. Then, the man who is a proper subject, and is baptized,
obeys a commandment of God, and does right. Is there any man of any note that
does not admit that? So far he is safe. But what if he is not baptized? He,
then, does not obey this commandment, and is not thus far safe. But there is no
necessity for this. If all agree, as all of any consequence do, that baptism is
a commandment of God, it is infallibly right to be baptized; and, if infallibly
right, beyond all doubt infallibly safe. This is all a conscientious man wants.
He only wants to know what is right and safe, and this is right and infallibly
safe. "But many good people have died without being baptized, and must I believe
that they will not be saved, simply because they were not baptized?" says one.
No, sir; that is taking unnecessary trouble on yourself. No one says you must
believe that. Belief is not in what will not be. Belief is not negative, but
affirmative. Belief is not that something will not be, but that something is, or
will be. In certain cases you may lack the evidence that persons will be saved.
Where you have not the evidence to believe, you do not believe. It is not the
same not to have the evidence to prove that a person will be saved, as to have
the evidence to prove that one will be lost. It is not the same not to believe a
person will be saved, and believe one will be lost. In the one case you tell
what you believe; in the other, you tell what you do not believe. But the matter
in hand is not to settle the question of being saved or lost, so as to say with
certainty precisely who or how many will be saved or lost. The matter is to
determine what is right, and how to do it. The commandment is baptism, and it is
right to obey it. Those who are baptized do right. Those who do right are safe.
But since so much is said about baptism being essential, it may be well to
inquire how essential the popular churches in this country make it? The
Episcopalian Church makes it so essential, that you cannot get into it without
what it calls baptism. If the salvation of the Lord is in that church, no one
can get that salvation without what the church calls baptism; for, without that,
no one can get into the church at all. The same is true of the Presbyterian
Church. No one can get into it at all without what it calls baptism. Essential
or not, they will not receive a man without it. There is no Presbyterian
salvation without baptism. The same is true of the Methodist Church. There is no
"full membership," as the Methodist friends phrase it, without what the church
calls baptism. The same is true of the Baptist Church. There is no salvation for
any body in the Baptist Church without baptism, for there is no admittance
without it--no membership. If the salvation of the Lord is in the Baptist
Church, no person can obtain it without baptism. Whatever salvation the Baptist
Church has for the human race, or blessings of any sort, baptism is essential to
all there is in it. No man can obtain present or future salvation, or any
blessing from the Lord in the Baptist Church, without baptism. Baptism is
essential to Baptist communion, and to every thing else in the Baptist Church.
How essential, then, is baptism in the kingdom of God! It is so essential that
you cannot get into the kingdom without it. "Except a man be born of water, and
of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God," says the great Head of
the Church. The kingdom of God, here, is the Church. "He who believes, and is
immersed, shall be saved," says the Lord. "Repent, and be immersed, every one of
you, in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of sins, and you shall
receive the gift of the Holy Spirit." "Go, therefore, and disciple all nations,
immersing them into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy
Spirit, teaching them to observe all things whatever I have commanded you." "We
are all baptized into one body." Such is a sample of the expressions used in
Scripture, sometimes connecting baptism with remission of sins; in one instance
with induction "into the name," one instance with induction "into one body," one
"into the kingdom of God," and there is also an instance where we read of
baptizing into Christ, or induction "into Christ." These expressions all, in
amount, are the same. "Into the name," "into the kingdom," "into Christ," "into
one body," and "for the remission of sins," in substance, all amount to the
same. If a man is in the name, he is in Christ, in the body, has the remission
of sins, is in the Church, in the kingdom. So, if a man is in the kingdom, he is
in the body, in Christ, in the name, and is pardoned. There is not an intimation
of any man being in the Church, in the time of the apostles, without baptism.
Where is the ground, then, for disputing about baptism being essential? If it is
the initiatory rite of the new institution, none were in the first Church
without it, and none are admitted into any church now, of any note, without what
the Church calls baptism, where is the ground for the dispute about its being
essential? There is no ground for this skeptical dispute. All admit that it is a
commandment of God, and that it is right to obey the commandment. Then, let all
do what they admit to be right, and they will be safe so far as baptism is
concerned. "I have another difficulty about baptism," says a man. "One preacher
says nothing but immersion is baptism; another says sprinkling or pouring will
do as well--that he would as soon have sprinkling as anything. I find that there
are strong, talented, and learned men on both sides of this question, and if the
preachers cannot settle it and decide which is right, how am I to determine what
to do?" There need be but little dispute about that. Who denies that immersion
is valid as the initiatory rite? The whole Romish Church admits not only the
validity of immersion, but that it was the original practice. The Greek Church
has practiced immersion from the beginning. The Episcopalian Church admits that
immersion was the original practice. The Methodist Church has indorsed immersion
in its creed, its standard works, and its occasional practice, from the
commencement of its existence. The great historians, John L. Mosheim, Neander,
and Wall, admit the validity of immersion, and that it was the original
practice. There is not a better authenticated fact in history than that
immersion was the invariable practice for the first two centuries, and, from the
commencement of sprinkling or pouring in the third century the invariable
practice for the first thirteen hundred years among all Christians, except
clinics, or persons supposed to be too weak to bear immersion; but, in these
cases, they were never permitted to hold any office in the Church, because their
baptism was not considered regular. Luther, Calvin, Wesley, and more than three
hundred others, whose names appear in the quotations from the learned
authorities on this subject, of the most distinguished religious teachers that
have appeared in the past three centuries; reformers, critics, commentators,
historians, and translators in one form or other, have committed to writing, and
left the testimony, that immersion was the original practice and valid. You will
inquire, then, why so many of them sprinkled? They did it, not on the ground
that there was any authority in the Bible for sprinkling or pouring, but on the
ground that a change in the form would not vitiate the ordinance if they
retained the substance. They admitted the change from the original
practice--immersion to sprinkling or pouring--to accommodate the ordinance to
supposed cases that might occur in cold countries, or where water would be
difficult to obtain, and cases of weakness where they could not bear immersion,
arguing only the law of expediency for it, but claiming no divine authority for
the change. This has been the ground all the time taken by all who practiced
sprinkling or pouring at all, till within the past fifty or seventy-five years.
More recently a class of men have arisen, less enlightened and far less
scrupulous, who talk about proving sprinkling or pouring by Scripture, and talk
of different modes of baptism. A few religious adventurers are now found who
care nothing for the authority of history, critics, commentators,
lexicographers, translators--and, probably, many of them know as little as they
care about these authorities--who deny immersion outright as having any
authority in the Bible or anywhere, and utterly refuse to immerse at all. But
these are no guide to any body, nor are they to be reached by any weight of
authority or argument. They are what they are, because they are, and intend to
be. These irresponsible men are the only exception to the universal proposition,
that immersion has been received as valid by all Christians; that it has never
been in doubt or dispute. Up to this time there has not been a debate on the
simple question, Is immersion baptism? On this question the friends of immersion
are ready and willing to affirm all the time. But no man of learning and
reputation is willing to deny this in discussion. The validity of immersion
remains unquestioned by anything deserving the name of authority, and is
sanctioned by the weight of all the historians, critics, commentators,
lexicographers, translators. No matter what you may think of sprinkling or
pouring, there is no question about immersion. It has never been in dispute nor
doubt. It remains unquestioned and unquestionable, so far as men of learning and
reputation are concerned. Those who receive immersion are satisfied, living and
dying. Their minds are at rest about the ordinance. They never hear any
preaching that unsettles their minds. Their conscience is at rest so far as
baptism is concerned. They have no doubt about it, living or dying. This is not
the case with those who have received sprinkling or pouring for baptism. Their
conscience is not at rest. Many of them live in continual doubt and perplexity
about their baptism. They are continually hearing preaching, or reading books or
tracts, such as unsettle their minds and fill them with doubts and confusion.
Their preacher visits them, prays with them, talks with them, brings them tracts
and books to read, and preaches on baptism. In this way he occasionally pacifies
them for the time being, but again they hear some one quoting the admissions of
the learned authorities, that immersion was the invariable practice of the
original Church; and that "buried in baptism"--Col 2:12 --and "buried by
baptism"--Rom 6:4 --and immersion comes into the mind in spite of all efforts to
keep it out. The mind is again unsettled more than ever. The minds of many of
this class are unsettled in death, and they go thus unsettled and in doubts into
the presence of God. What, then, is the safe course to pursue? Undoubtedly, to
practice that which never was in doubt; that which never was in dispute among
great, good, and pious men. "Go," according to the Scriptures, "to a certain
water," where there is "much water," go "down into the water," be "buried in
baptism," come "up out of the water," and the controversy is ended so far as you
are concerned. Touching this institution, your soul is at rest. This is
infallibly safe. No matter what they can prove about sprinkling or pouring, your
baptism stands unquestioned and your conscience is at rest. It may be
illustrated in this way: You owe a man fifty dollars, and show him a
fifty-dollar bill on some private bank, admitting that many to whom you have
showed it say it is counterfeit; but you add that you have shown it to others,
who say it is good, and they would as soon have it as any. You show him another
bill, making similar admissions, at the same time asserting that you would as
soon have either as a ten-dollar greenback, and lay this last-named along-side
of the others, proposing to the man to take his choice. Do you suppose you would
find a man in fifty miles round green enough to take either of the doubtful
bills when one about which there is no doubt is offered? No, sir; in matters of
this kind you take nothing doubtful when you can get that which never was in
doubt. What would you give for a farm with a doubtful title? No matter if
three-fourths of the attorneys in your acquaintance would declare the title
good, and only one-fourth declare it doubtful, you would not have it. Use the
same good sense in your acts of obedience to God. Do nothing that is doubtful as
an act of obedience to the Lord, when you can do that which was never doubtful.
If you are aiming to please God, be certain and do that which all of any note
admit to be valid, and leave the doubtful. This is infallibly safe. Be immersed
on a confession of your faith, into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and
of the Holy Spirit, and you will have no more trouble about baptism. "But there
is a difficulty about the operation of the Spirit. The preachers do not agree on
this subject; and, if the preachers cannot settle this question, how am I ever
to decide who is right?" says some one. Could you not be a Christian and be
saved if you never do settle that question, or if you never can determine who is
right? The operation of the Spirit, whatever it may be and however it may be, is
something which you are not to perform yourself Whatever men may say about it,
there is one thing about which there is no dispute, and that is, whatever
influence God may please to exercise is from himself and not from man, and he
will exercise it, and that, too, whether men understand how he does it or not.
No matter whether men understand how the Lord raises the water into the
atmosphere, and causes the rain to descend or not. The Lord sends the rain. No
theorizing about it, on the part of men, hinders or accelerates the rain. In the
same way, no theorizing of men hinders or accelerates the influence of the
Spirit. What men must do, they, of course, must know how to do it. That which
the Lord does himself, he knows how to do it, and will do it, in his own way,
whether men theorize correctly about it or not. Preaching theories about the
influence of the Spirit, or the operation of the Spirit, may sound religious to
those who do not understand the matter, but there is nothing in it to save a
single human being. The thing for man to do is to listen to the word of the
Lord, believe it with the whole heart, and do what the Lord commands. This is
the best man can do. It is all that he can do. If he believes all the Lord has
said, and makes every effort in his power to do all the Lord requires, the Lord
will do every thing right on his part. The matter for man to do is to exercise
faith in God that he will do his part, in all things, faithfully, whether man
can understand how he will do it or not. All should come to God in full
assurance of faith, all confidence that he is able and willing to do all things
well--to do all for man that he needs--to save his soul. The Lord will do his
part whether man understands how he will do it or not. It is faith men
need--confidence in God that he is able and willing to do for man more than he
asks or thinks, whether he understand how the Lord will do it or not. It is not
theories about the influence of the Spirit that man needs, but faith and
obedience to the commandments of God. There is no threat against any man because
he does not understand any theory about the influence of the Spirit, but there
are terrible threats against the disobedient and unbelieving. "Some preachers
say that justification is by faith only, and others say it is not by faith only.
I know not how to decide," says one. What if you never do decide? You know that
it is commanded to "believe on the Lord Jesus Christ." Then, it is clearly right
to believe. So far, there is no difficulty. You know that God has commanded all
men everywhere to repent. Then, it is right to repent. So far, the way is clear.
Baptism is commanded: "Then Peter commanded them to be baptized in the name of
the Lord." Then, it is right to be baptized. So far, the way is clear. It is
always safe to do what you know to be right. You know it is right to believe
with all your heart. You know it is right to repent. You know it is right to be
baptized. Do what you know to be right, and you are safe so far as these matters
are concerned. Then, if it should turn out that justification is "by faith
only," you are safe, for you have the faith. There will be no disappointment,
only that you were justified a little sooner than you thought you were. You will
certainly not regret that you obeyed the commands to repent and be baptized. But
if you should stop at faith, and find that justification is not "by faith only,"
you would find yourself still not justified. It is, then, infallibly safe to
believe, repent, and be immersed. So far, there is no difficulty where the
desire is simply to do right--to be safe. "But there are so many creeds, all
claiming to be right, that I should not know which to take. They were all made
by learned men, and if they cannot agree on the kind of a creed, how am I to
decide which is right?" says one. It is a matter of great moment and of much
relief that, aside from all these conflicting, clashing, and erring creeds,
there is one book that all parties concede is right. They all agree that the
Bible is right--that it came from God. They all further agree that it contains
the law of God--that the law of the Lord is perfect. The only wonder is, that
man ever attempted to make any other creed or law for the Church. Such an
undertaking could not have commenced without two wicked assumptions: 1. That the
law of God, as set forth in the Bible, is not sufficient--is a failure. 2. That
the insufficiency or failure can be remedied by weak, erring, and uninspired
men. No man of intelligence will affirm, in plain terms, that the Bible is not
sufficient for the government of the saints; or that man--uninspired man--can
make a creed that will serve a better purpose than the Bible. Still such
affirmations are implied in every attempt made by uninspired men to make a
creed. If you admit, as all are bound to do, that the law of God is in the
Bible; that nothing may be added to it, nothing taken from it, and that no part
of it may be changed, there is not an excuse in the world for making another
law. The law of God in the Bible is the law, the divine law, the supreme law, in
the kingdom of God; and it is a treasonable movement to attempt to get up
another constitution, law, name, body, or officers, apart from the constitution,
law, name, body, and officers as found in the Bible. But the matter now in hand
is to find a safe course to pursue. Can this be done? Certainly it can. All
admit the Bible to be right. All admit that the law of God in the Bible is
right. All admit that those who follow the Bible honestly and faithfully, in
faith and practice, will be saved. All admit that wherever any creed differs
from the Bible it is wrong. Then it is infallibly safe to take the Bible and
follow it. When men undertake to prove that a human creed is a good one, they
argue that it is like the Bible. If a creed like the Bible is a good one, why
will not the Bible itself do? If the Bible will not serve the purpose--is
insufficient and a failure--a creed like it would be equally insufficient. When
men make a creed to do what the Bible would not do, they should certainly make
it different from the Bible, or it would serve no better purpose than the Bible
itself. Why does not some man, who thinks we cannot govern the Church with the
law of God, come out and show us wherein the law of God is deficient; where the
creed should be made different from the law of God, so as to serve the purpose
better? No man does this; but every advocate of a human creed maintains that he
took his creed from the Bible; that he can prove it by the Bible, or that it is
like the Bible. There are not many positions that are conceivable touching this
matter. It might be a source of some satisfaction to look at the positions
possible: 1. Did the Lord design the Bible, or his law set forth in it, as the
creed--the rule of faith and practice? He certainly did; for the first
Christians and the Church had no creed or rule of faith and practice but the
instructions found in the sacred writings, the law of God, as now found in the
Bible. It is simply a matter of fact, that the first Christians and Church had
no guide but the teaching of Christ and the apostles. Then, the apostolic
requirement to "preach the word"--to commit the things learned of the apostles
to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also; to preach no other
Gospel, nor even pervert the Gospel; to add nothing, take away nothing; to
continue in the things learned; to hold fast the form of sound words--sound
speech, that cannot be condemned, shows that the Lord intended us to go to him
for the creed, the rule of faith and practice; to adhere to his teaching, as set
forth by him and his apostles, and not to be turned away after the commandments
of men and the rudiments of the world. The grand statement of Paul, that "all
scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for teaching, for
reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness; that the man of God
may be perfect, thoroughly furnished to all good works," shows the use that the
Lord intended should be made of the Scriptures. They were intended to perfect
the man of God, and thoroughly furnish him for every good work. This leaves no
room for any human creed, and no excuse for any man to hanker after one It
shows, also, the Lord’s design--that he designed the inspired Scriptures to be
the rule of faith and practice. 2. Seeing, now, the Lord’s design, to make the
inspired Scriptures the rule of faith and practice, has he failed in that
design? And shall some man, or set of men’ presume to improve on the Lord’s
design, and accomplish that wherein the Lord failed? This would be presumption
added to presumption. 3. But it is a fact, that no human creed existed for about
three hundred years after the birth of Christ. During the most successful and
triumphant period of the existence of the Church, she had no human creed, but
was governed wholly by the law of God. This ought to satisfy all good men. 4.
But what is gained when you make a creed? Nothing, only that a foundation is
laid for a party. No man nor set of men can make a creed that will give general
satisfaction to any considerable number even of the best men in the world. Vast
numbers of them will never indorse it, and will never unite with those who hold
the creed. Even those who indorse it, every few years will get into contentions
about it, and split asunder. Take the Presbyterians as an example. They have a
creed with as much human skill, wisdom, and labor bestowed on it as any creed in
the world. What has resulted from it? 1. It has barred them from all other
denominations. 2. It is not believed nor received by any people in the world
except themselves. 3. They have had eight or ten divisions over it. 4. The Old
and New School are now divided about the interpretation of the creed. 5. After a
struggle of some two hundred years, all the sorts of Presbyterians together in
the United States amount to not more than five hundred thousand, or about one in
seventy of our entire population! The effort to return to apostolic ground and
teaching, in all things, in the great reformatory movement of the nineteenth
century, has risen up and outnumbered them in fifty years, in defiance of the
combined opposition of all the parties in the land. The same has been
illustrated by the Methodist and Baptist creeds, only that they have been more
prolific in both numbers and divisions. 5. There is not a human creed in the
world that has any popularity in a single party on the face of the earth, except
the one that has adopted it. All other religious parties utterly disregard it.
The idea of any extended success on a human creed is utterly hopeless. There is
nothing clearer than that the parties built on these human platforms are
decomposing and crumbling away to nothing. The man bowed down under a human
creed, at this late date, with the history of the past three hundred years
before him, must be a dull scholar truly. 6. The Bible has the advantage in
every respect. All admit that it is from God, that it is right in all respects;
that it is perfect in all its parts; that it contains all things that pertain to
life and godliness; that it contains the whole will of God to man; that it
contains the law of God; that it contains the teaching of Christ and the
apostles; the word of God, able to save the soul, to build up the saints, and
give them an inheritance among the sanctified; thoroughly furnish them for every
good work; that it contains the rule by which all shall be judged in the last
day. It has the weight of divine authority in it. It has the power of God in it.
It is backed up by the Almighty Father of heaven and earth; by his oath, by the
throne, and him who sits on the throne; by the crown and all the armies of the
upper world. The men who stand by it defend it, and commit their all to it; are
girded as with the everlasting hills, and continually realize that the
everlasting arms are underneath. They depend not on their own wisdom, but on the
wisdom of God, as set forth in the holy teaching of Scripture; the power of God
and the wisdom of God, as played in the preaching of the cross of Christ. They
depend on no teaching of their own, views, nor theories, but on their great
Master, the Messiah; his teaching, and that of his apostles; his cause and his
work. They have identified themselves with him and his cause, and have lost
sight of themselves in beholding the glories of their Lord and Redeemer. They
have taken their stand behind their great Leader, the Lord, the King, who sits
on the throne in heaven, and intend to keep him in front of them. They have
planted themselves squarely on the foundation which the Lord laid, on which the
Church was at the first planted, and on the law of the Lord, and intend to stand
by their Lord, his cause, all he said and did; to defend and maintain that and
nothing else. This, they know, is infallibly safe for this world and that which
is to come. They intend to stand by every man, side by side, in full fellowship,
who is identified with their Lord and his cause, and push the Bible, the law of
the Lord, the teaching of Christ and his apostles, through the world. The Gospel
of Christ is their theme. Those for the Gospel of Christ, his teaching, and that
of the apostles, and nothing else, will find themselves all united in one cause
and one work, under their one great Leader and Commander. The Lord of hosts will
be with them. On the other hand, those on the side of human creeds, if they have
not seen enough to satisfy them, will soon see enough. They have no cohesion.
They are splitting on every pretext. They are crumbling and falling to pieces on
every hand. They are convincing sensible men that they have nothing tangible nor
intelligible. They are groping their way in the dark. They cannot stand before
Bible men. For they admit that the Bible is right; that it is from God; that it
is perfect; that their creed is not right, not from God, not perfect. With these
admissions, they cannot stand before the Bible and Bible men. They cannot
maintain their plea for a creed which they admit is not right, not from God, not
perfect, in competition with the book which all admit is from God, right,
perfect. They cannot withstand the men for Christ, his cause, his Gospel, his
teaching, and that of his apostles, and nothing else. There is no standing
before the Lord and his cause, nor before his word--his Gospel. The men who
intend to oppose the friends of Jesus, should be informed what they will have to
withstand, so as to enable them to make up the issue and prepare themselves for
the contest. It is now in tangible and intelligible form, so that they can
understand it. They need not commence isolating scraps from writings among
Christians of the present day, or of any day, as exponents of the teaching of
Bible men. Many of these scraps might be shown to be all right, if taken in
their contextual connection; but whether this can be done in every instance or
not, is a matter of no importance. The slips of the pens of good men, the chance
erroneous positions taken by them, or mistakes made, are not the teaching, or a
fair representation of their effort. No man is bound to defend these. They are
not the ground of Bible men. The Gospel, the teaching of the Lord and his
apostles, the ground on which the first Christians stood, is the ground, the
Gospel, and teaching maintained, advocated, and defended. As one man, the
friends of the Lord Jesus stand here, and, by the grace of God, intend to stand
here till the last. If it is not safe, then all the Christians for the first
three hundred years were not safe, for they all stood here. They believed the
Gospel, and became obedient to the faith. They, then, followed the apostles’
teaching faithfully, and had the promise of a crown of life. This is infallibly
safe for this world and the world to come. May all the friends of the Lord prove
themselves worthy of this ground, defend and maintain it with integrity till the
Lord . shall come, and thus be able to say, "I have kept the faith." In the
Lord, their strength and Redeemer, is their everlasting trust. To his name be
the honor and power everlasting.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 17: GP1 - 16-THE LOVE OF GOD TO MAN
========================================================================

SERMON, No. XVI.

THEME.--THE LOVE OF GOD TO MAN.

TEXT.--"God so loved the world, that he gave his only-begotten Son, that whoever
believes on him should not perish, but have eternal life."--John 3:16.

THE words just read set forth the most wonderful statement ever uttered, and yet
one of the most encouraging to the human race. When we consider that the history
of mankind for four thousand years had been but little else than the history of
sin and transgression; and that, at the time Jesus came into the world, the race
had all gone out of the way--that there were none good--that the whole world had
become guilty before God, was conducted in unbelief--all lost; when the
corruptions, crimes, and iniquities that constantly were in remembrance before
God from all parts of the world, is it not wonderful beyond expression "that God
so loved the world, that he gave his only-begotten Son, that whoever believes on
him might not perish, but have everlasting life?" What a wonderful lesson there
is contained in this, and with what child-like simplicity the apostle deduces
that lesson from it: "If God so loved us, we ought also to love one another."
1Jn 4:11. What an unspeakable satisfaction it is to every human being to know
that, however neglected by men, cast off and forsaken; however down-trodden,
oppressed, and despised of men, each one is loved by the Creator and Benefactor
of all! When a poor creature is seen degraded, corrupted and cast down, how
blessed it is to know that God has loved such an one. When one is friendless and
homeless in this world, how rich it is to know that God has loved such an one.
However degraded, debased, and despised, every creature of the human race is a
subject of the love of God. God loved the world; nay more, he "so loved the
world that he gave his only-begotten Son, that whoever believes on him might not
perish, but have everlasting life!" In noticing speakers, in their efforts to
give expression to their ideas of the lofty origin of the grand scheme of divine
benevolence vouchsafed to men, you will hear one assert that it originated in
the Infinite Power. That is truly a lofty origin for the Gospel scheme, but it
rises not high enough. Another effort is made, and the speaker says it
originated in the Infinite Wisdom. That is certainly ascending one step higher
in the scale, but is by no means satisfactory. He makes another struggle, and
rises another step. He says the glorious plan originated in the Infinite Will:
the Lord willed it, and it was done. But he makes one more effort, and declares
that the grand scheme of human redemption originated in the Infinite Goodness;
that the Infinite Goodness originated and suggested it, the Infinite Will
resolved it, the Infinite Wisdom devised it, and the Infinite Power executed it.
What an overwhelming thought, that the infinitely pure, holy, and just One, in
looking over the debased, degraded, and corrupted children of men--fallen, lost,
and in ruins, should have had compassion--that the Infinite breast should have
been moved with pity for man! What amazing pity, what wonderful compassion, what
boundless mercy! He loved the world, was moved with compassion, and resolved: "I
will have mercy on a lost race. I will extend my hand in pity, in infinite
compassion, in divine mercy, to save, to lift up, purify, ennoble, happify, and
glorify humanity." But when the divine resolve was made to make an offering for
sin, where was an offering to be found rich enough to be an exponent of the
infinite compassion for man--an offering to expiate the sins of the world? The
cattle on a thousand hills would be by far too feeble, too poor, and mean an
offering. Such an offering could not take away sin. The gold of the four
quarters of the globe could not take away sin. All the landed patrimony of
earth, concentrated into one sin-offering, could not expiate one sin, free one
soul from death--could not save one lost sinner. Where was a sin-offering to be
found rich enough, a victim sufficiently precious to be, at the same time, an
expression of the love, the infinite compassion, and that could expiate sin--be
the one sin-offering, and purge us forever from our sins? When men make a
sacrifice, they frequently seek something that they can give, as they express
it, and "never feel it." But those sacrifices that men make without feeling it,
are miserably poor and mean sacrifices. They ought to be ashamed of them. Even a
Jew selected the best, the most perfect, and the richest gifts for offerings.
When the Lord was about to make a sin-offering, where did he find the gift? He
looked through his vast dominions, and selected the dearest object, the richest
jewel--that which lay nearest to his own bosom--his own dear Son--the
only-begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth, and gave him--yes, blessed
be his name, gave him up freely for us all, that whoever believes on him might
not perish, but have everlasting life. How beautifully Paul alludes to this, in
his plea for a rich gift for the poor saints: "Know you not the grace of our
Lord Jesus Christ, that though he was rich, yet, for our sakes, he became poor;
that we, through his poverty, might be made rich." Well, too, does the poet
break forth in the following strain:

"Let everlasting thanks be thine For such a bright display, As makes the world
of darkness shine With beams of heavenly day. Oh, for this love, let rocks and
hills Their lasting silence break, And all harmonious human tongues Their
Savior’s praises speak."

But seeing that our Lord became poor that we might be rich, it might be
profitable to inquire how poor he became. To this there is a ready answer. He
became so poor that, on one occasion, he exclaimed: "The foxes have dens, and
the birds have places of repose, but the Son of Man has not where to lay his
head." Is there anywhere a murmuring, repining, and complaining disciple of
Jesus, lamenting his hard fate, his poverty, his lowly condition? Is there
anywhere a poor, weak, and complaining preacher, lamenting over his hard fate,
his poor fare, his scanty support? If there is, let him look up and inquire, Is
the servant better than his Master? Is the disciple better than his Lord? If the
Lord had not where to lay his head, and did not murmur nor complain, why should
his followers, for whom, in the general, there is much better provision made,
murmur or complain? There are but few preachers now, poorly as they are cared
for, and many of them meagerly supported, as well as lacking that hearty
encouragement which they should receive, who can honestly say they have not
where to lay their heads. Many of them are poorly provided with the good things
of this world, and some lack the comforts of this life really due them, and very
many brethren will find themselves unable to render a just account in the final
judgment, on account of withholding from them their just due. These should be
taught to lay up for themselves a good foundation against the time to come, that
they may lay hold on eternal life. But this does not by any means justify any
man in murmuring, as a follower of Jesus, or a preacher of the Gospel, because
he is poor or has a hard lot. The poor men of the kingdom have done, and are
doing, to a great extent, as private members and preachers, the main body of the
hard work--doing it for a small compensation, and living hard. In doing this,
without complaining, they are following their Lord and Master. What a wonderful
thought, that he, who was rich with the Father in heaven, should have become
poor, that we, through his poverty, should be made rich! This our Lord
did--become so poor that he had not where to lay his head, and that, too, when
those whom he came to bless had plenty, and not only would not bestow anything
for his support, but despised and rejected him. What a scene, too, it was for
him to look upon, to see his own people, whom he came to save, in the open way
to ruin, as they turned away from him, and dashed the cup of salvation from
their lips! What a scene for the contemplation of the children of men, to see
him, as he stands, looking over the devoted city, and cries, "Jerusalem!
Jerusalem! thou that stonest the prophets, and killest those that are sent to
thee; how often would I have gathered your children as a hen gathers her brood,
but you would not!" In infinite love he came to save them; to lift them up, and
crown them with glory and honor, but they would not have him to reign over them.
The present occasion should not be disturbed by any dry and tough theories, but
a bare allusion must be made to one, without attempting to tell how far wrong or
how near right it is. The theory in view starts out by contemplating the Father
as filled with rage and fury, with an uplifted hand, ready to smite the earth
with a curse. But just as the fatal blow, which was due to man, was about to
fall, the most gracious Lord and Savior Jesus Christ stepped in, and the blow
that was due to us fell on him. As just stated, it is not the purpose now to try
to determine how far this is wrong, nor how near it is right; but one thing is
obvious, and that is, that while it presents the Savior as a most benevolent,
lovely, and compassionate being, there is nothing in it to lead us to love the
Father. The Scripture says, "We love God, because he first loved us." We love
the Father, because he gave the Son; and love the Son, because he loved us, and
gave himself for us. This leads us to love both the Father and the Son. Some men
have much to say of the love of God and of salvation, who sweep away all ground
of the love of God and all idea of salvation. The love of God was in view of man
perishing. He "so loved the world that he gave his only-begotten Son, that
whoever believes on him might not perish, but have everlasting life." Man was in
sin, in danger of perishing, of losing eternal life. The love of God to man was
in view of his perishing and falling to obtain eternal life. It was that he
might not perish but have eternal life. The man, therefore, that does not
believe that man can perish, that there is any danger of man perishing, or that
there is any such thing as man perishing or losing eternal life, has no
foundation for the love of God. If man was never lost, in any danger of
perishing, of losing eternal life, of losing both soul and body in hell, why
should God have loved the world, and what did Jesus accomplish by coming into
the world? In that view, what salvation is there? Salvation is deliverance.
Where there is no deliverance there is no salvation. If man was never lost,
never in any danger of perishing, nor of losing his soul--if there is no hell,
second death, nor eternal punishment--if the soul cannot be lost in hell; in one
word, if there is no danger of any sort, all idea of salvation is wiped out. The
vaporing of some men about the salvation of all mankind, is the most idle
fiction ever dreamed of. Salvation from what? From sin in this world? Certainly
not, for they deny that any are saved from sin in this world. From hell after
death? Surely not, according to their theory; for there is no hell beyond this
life. From the second death? By no means; for with them there is no second
death. Where, then, is their salvation or their deliverance? They literally have
no salvation from anything in this world or the world to come--no deliverance
from anything in time or eternity. But the scriptural idea of it is, that man
was lost under sin, included in unbelief, and God loved him--so loved him that
he gave his only-begotten Son, that whoever believes on him might not perish,
but have eternal life. Jesus came in divine compassion to save that which was
lost--came into the world, that the world through him might be saved. This is
the great trouble in preaching in the present day, to induce men to realize that
they are sinners; that they are lost, in unbelief, under condemnation, and will
finally be lost, soul and body in hell, unless they are united with Christ. If
men could be brought to realize their danger of being lost, as they generally do
in the immediate expectation of death, what an effort there would be to come to
the Savior. The reason preaching does not take more effect is not that men
cannot understand the Gospel, but they are not sensible of their danger. They
are not impressed with the idea that they are guilty before God, condemned and
must be pardoned or be lost forever. The reason, too, why there is not more zeal
in the preachers and private members of the Church than there is, may be found
in the fact that they are not sufficiently impressed with the awful truth that
the world is lost, under condemnation, and must perish forever, unless turned to
God. This is really the case whether we realize it or not, and the great matter
is for the preacher to keep his soul impressed continually with the awful idea
that it is so. In doing this he is certain to impress those who hear him with
the same overwhelming idea. The man made conscious of the idea that he is lost,
guilty, and condemned; that he must finally perish unless he turns to God, will
desire salvation and seek the way. Such an one will find the way. The very
circumstance that God so loved the world that he gave his only-begotten Son,
that whoever believes on him might not perish, but have eternal life, and that
our Lord became poor that we, through his poverty, might be rich, should rouse
every human being, stir every power within, and cause one general rush to the
extended hands of compassion, the offers of mercy, and a most gracious pardon.
How can any one be content for a single day; how can any one rest for a moment;
how can any one ever slumber till he is reconciled to God, justified or
pardoned, after learning that the deplorable condition, the inevitable ruin to
which he was rushing, and the awful punishment to which he was exposed, so to
speak, moved the great, the infinite and eternal One in compassion, love, and
mercy; yes, not only moved, roused, and called forth the infinite compassion,
but so wonderfully moved the divine compassion as to call the Lord from heaven
to earth to recover man from ruin? "We love God, because he first loved us." God
was manifested in the flesh, so that he who saw Jesus saw the Father in him. As
man loves and honors the Son, so he loves and honors the Father. The object now
is to turn attention to the Son of God, and inquire into the reasons why we
should love him. In his life are these reasons found why we should love him. Let
the mind, then, follow him, examine what he said and did in search of reasons
for loving him. How did he act toward objects of pity, of compassion and mercy?
Follow him, if you please, and notice. Imagine that you see him, followed by a
vast multitude, passing along, and, as he passes, you notice a poor blind man
sitting by the way. The blind man inquires for the cause of this vast concourse
of people, when some one explains to him that "Jesus of Nazareth is passing by."
You notice the pitiable object to see what he will do. He lifts his sightless
eye-balls, and most imploringly calls out, "Jesus of Nazareth, Son of David,
have pity on me." The Lord stops, gives attention to this poor blind man. He who
was with the Father before the beginning of time, by whom and for whom were all
things, inquires of the pitiable object of mercy, "What will you have?" In the
simplicity of a child, and in view of his great calamity, he exclaims, "O that I
might receive my sight." In the same moment, and by the same act, the Lord put
forth his almighty power, and gave both a demonstration of his benevolence and
divinity in giving this poor man sight. For the first time the man looked up and
saw the beautiful heavens above him, all nature around him, and, it may be, his
own father and mother, sisters and brothers. Had you been there, would you not
have been disposed to fall down before him and exclaim, as one did on another
occasion, "Lord Jesus have mercy on me, for I am a poor sinful man." He showed
that he was the friend of the objects of pity and compassion, and, at the same
time, that he possessed infinite power. There is reason to love him, then, both
in view of his condescension to the lowly and his demonstration of almighty
power. Please turn attention to another point and view him on another occasion.
He was out at sea, on one of those frail vessels anciently used mainly in
coasting, in company with some of his disciples, and they were overtaken in a
frightful storm. He was composedly lying on his pillow asleep. When the
disciples saw the danger they were greatly frightened, and in much consternation
came to him, exclaiming, "Master, behold we perish." Our gracious Lord rose up
quietly, deliberately, and without the least trepidation, calmly he walked
forward, looked out into the dark and furious heavens and over the foaming sea;
gently he lifted his hand, and in mildness said, "Peace, be still." In a few
moments all is calm, serene, and secure. Some one, amazed, exclaimed, "Who is
this, that even the winds and the sea obey him?" Well may he be called
"Emanuel," or, when translated, "God with us." Here he demonstrated both his
power and willingness to save. How could the disciples, then, with him have
failed to love and adore him as their Savior, after such a grand transaction?
How can any man now fail to love, adore, and honor him as the chief among all
the ten thousands, and altogether lovely? Please accompany him on another
occasion--one more touching and sympathetic. You remember the account of that
remnant of a family consisting of Lazarus, Mary, and Martha. The probability is
that the father, mother, and, it may be, other brothers and sisters had died,
and these were alone. In affection and devotion to each other they cling
together. It is now a precious little circle--an only brother and two sisters
dwelling quietly and in love together. But suddenly the king of terror forces
his way into the little circle and strikes down the last male member of the
family. Lazarus is dead! All is solemnity. The heart-broken sisters are in
unutterable grief. Their brother is gone! He had now been dead four days. Jesus
is passing that way. As he draws near, one of the weeping and heart-broken
sisters hastens to meet him, overwhelmed with grief, and exclaims, "Lord, if
thou hadst been here, my brother had not died. But I know that even now,
whatever thou wilt ask of God, God will give it thee." See John 11:21-22. Jesus
replied, "Your brother shall rise again." Martha replied, "I know that he shall
rise again at the resurrection at the last day." This, however, was not
precisely the comfort she desired. She desired that her brother be restored now.
"Jesus said to her, I am the resurrection and the life; he that believes on me,
though he were dead, yet shall he live; and whoever lives and believes on me,
shall never die. Do you believe this?" She replied, "Yes, Lord, I believe that
thou art the Christ, the Son of God, who should come into the world." She then
hastened and called Mary, and when she was come she fell at his feet and said,
"Lord, if thou hadst been here my brother had not died." "When Jesus saw her
weeping, and the Jews also weeping who came with her, he groaned in the Spirit
and was troubled," and inquired where they had laid him, and the historian says
"Jesus wept." Blessed be his name; he can be touched with the feeling of our
infirmities. He entered into sympathy with humanity, and was moved by the
sorrows and bereavements of the children of men. "Come," says he, "and show me
where you have laid him." They accompany him to the grave of Lazarus, and he
commands them to take away the stone from the entrance of the tomb. Martha said,
"By this time the body has become offensive." Jesus replied, "Did I not say to
you, if you would believe, you should see the glory of God?" He then lifted his
eyes and addressed his Father, thanking him that he always heard him, and
explaining that because of the people he made the address, that they might
believe that the Father had sent him; and, having concluded his address to the
Father, he turned and addressed himself to the dead man. Did you ever hear any
one address a dead person? Did you ever hear the bereaved and disconsolate widow
address her dead husband as he lay in the coffin? No response is made! Did you
ever hear the mother as she addressed her dead child? The child gave no answer.
All was still and silent. What appalling gloom! But, thanks to God, when Jesus
shall speak to the dead they will respond. "He cried with a loud voice, Lazarus,
come forth." He who was dead came forth, bound hand and foot, with grave-clothes
on, and his face bound with a napkin; and Jesus commanded them to loose him and
let him go. Thus he demonstrated his benevolence in restoring a brother to his
afflicted sisters, and his divinity in raising a man from the dead; showed his
love to all mankind, and his power to raise the dead. What an unbounded relief
to the soul, to know that we have a friend, a Savior, who is able and willing to
make the dead alive. "As I live, you shall also live," says "he who was dead and
is alive, and lives forever and ever." Please accompany the Savior at another
point. Imagine you see him late in the evening, accompanied by Peter, James, and
John, on his way to the garden of Gethsemane. They walk along quietly and
silently. The disciples are guided by him, but know not where they are going nor
what is to be done. He was accustomed to retire to the solitude for devotions.
It is said of him, in one instance, that he prayed all night. He so frequently
drew aside from the multitude for prayer, for composure, and an opportunity for
imparting private instructions, that they had no need of any surprise at his
drawing aside at this time nor in this manner. No new interest appears to have
been excited in them by the movement. They passed along their quiet way, entered
the garden, and after walking a short distance he turned to them and said, "You
stay here and watch, while I go yonder and pray." His soul was heavy. He was
exceeding sorrowful. Advancing a few paces he fell down on his face and prayed:
"O, my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me! Nevertheless, not
my will but thine be done." Who can repeat this language with a due appreciation
of what is contained in it? This was prayer in the true sense--prayer indeed. He
had the cross in view, with all the shame and mockery accompanying, with his
wonderful sufferings. He had a sinful world on his soul. Rising up he returned
and found the men whom he commanded to watch, asleep. How mortifying in this
hour of trial, when his soul was bowed down in grief, that these men, whom he
had specially called and who had accompanied him for about three and a half
years, should have been so little interested in and impressed by the great
matters in hand, that they had, in a few moments when he stepped aside from
them, fallen asleep. But they had misunderstood him all the time, had no
realization of all that was at hand, nor expectation of what was soon to occur.
"What!" said he, "could you not watch with me one hour?" After rebuking them,
with all the wonderful matters soon to transpire in Jerusalem on his soul, he
returned, and, falling down, prayed the same words again: "O, my Father, if it
be possible, let this cup pass from me! Nevertheless, not my will but thine be
done." Rising again he found them asleep the second time, and rebuked them. How
hard that they should have fallen asleep while he was in the midst of these
terrible agonies! Returning again he prayed the same words: "O, my Father, if it
be possible, let this cup pass from me! Nevertheless, not my will but thine be
done." In his terrible agony his sweat became as great drops of blood. How great
was his love! How wonderful the agony of mind, his trouble in spirit! In view of
this scene, let no saint fear that his zeal, solicitude, and anxiety are too
great, that his prayers are too fervent, that he has too vivid and lively an
appreciation of the great cause in which he is engaged in striving to save man.
What everlasting obligations we are under to love, adore, and honor the Savior
of men! Returning to the disciples, he found them sleeping the third time, and
told them to sleep on now, and take their rest. No wonder that poor, weak, and
care-worn men and women should fall asleep now, under the best efforts men can
make in preaching the Gospel, if they could not have kept awake on that night.
But their rest was not permitted to last long. Soon he says, "Let us be going."
He knows what they are to meet. Often had he crossed the Cedron to this garden,
and Judas, who betrayed him, knew the place; and, having received a band of men
and officers from the chief priests and Pharisees, came, with lanterns, torches,
and weapons. Jesus knew all these things; went out, met them, and inquired,
"Whom do you seek?" They replied, "Jesus of Nazareth." He answered them, "I am
he." How bold and independent! No evasion, no apology, nor expression of
surprise. Judas, who betrayed him, was there with them. When the Lord answered
"I am he," they went backward, and fell to the ground. Then he inquired again of
them, "Whom do you seek?" They replied, "Jesus of Nazareth." Again he said, "I
am he." Peter, who was standing by, with all his ideas of an earthly kingdom in
his mind, resolute, and determined to fight for his Master, instantly drew his
sword, struck the high priest’s servant, and cut off his ear. The Lord then
turned to Peter, and commanded him to put up his sword, adding, "The cup which
my Father has given me, shall I not drink it?" "Then the band, the captain, and
officers of the Jews, took Jesus, bound him," and led him away. Peter and John
followed him, witnessing all that was done; but, seeing their Master under
arrest, and in the hands of his enemies, their courage failed them. The high
priest asked Jesus concerning his disciples and his teaching. The Lord replied,
"I spake openly to the world; I ever taught in the synagogue and in the temple,
where the Jews always resort, and in secret have I said nothing. Why do you ask
me? Ask them who heard me what I have said to them; behold, they know what I
said." An officer who stood by struck Jesus with the palm of his hand, adding,
"Do you thus answer the high priest?" What an indignity! How mildly and meekly
it was endured! He calmly replied, "If I have spoken evil, bear testimony of the
evil; but if well, why do you strike me?" During the trial, and when he needed a
friend more than he had ever done before, Peter had been given over to Satan to
be sifted, and denied him three times. What a scene was here for men and angels
to witness! The only absolutely pure, perfect, and sinless inhabitant this world
has ever had, was arrested, and brought before the civil court, and tried for
his life. After a calm and impartial examination of the case, their judge said,
"I find in him no fault at all," or, as they express it in the civil courts now,
"I find him not guilty." What a picture! He, who knew all things, had power to
call twelve legions of angels to his relief, stood in the court; permitted
himself to be treated as a criminal; made no effort to escape condemnation; made
not a single explanation, nor correction of mistake or misunderstanding, but
permitted them to proceed in their own way, and come to their own conclusion. He
appeared to express no concern in the matter of their decision, but gave them an
opportunity to act entirely free, thus giving the world a complete demonstration
what the wickedness of humanity would do when left entirely to itself or free.
What did it do? It cried, "Let him be crucified." When the Roman judge had such
scruples as to wash his hands before the court, as their custom was, and say "I
have cleansed my hands of the blood of this innocent person," the rage of the
Jews, their prejudice, and determination in the matter, were such, that they
cried, "Let his blood be on us and our children." The Lord pity humanity when
left to itself. How man should fear and dread the idea of the Lord leaving him
to himself, to rush down to ruin! to condemn the innocent, and let the guilty go
clear. The immaculate Savior is condemned to die, and the robber, Barrabas, is
released. What cannot sin do? It can pervert civil courts--courts of justice
turn away their wise and good purpose, and make them a means to condemn the
innocent and release the guilty. It can work into the highest courts, and secure
the most cruel and wicked decisions, the most unjust and unreasonable. Sin can
work its way up to the most august legislative bodies; gain the ascendancy over
justice and equity; secure the enactment of the most unjust, partial, and cruel
laws. It can control magistrates, executives, and prevent the enforcement of the
purest and best laws ever enacted by man. It can push schemes of gain and
oppression through the world. It can produce commotion, confusion, and strife,
deluging the land in blood, filling it with widows and orphans, death and
mourning! Still, men and women press it to their hearts! Pilate went forth and
said, "Behold, I bring him forth to you, that you may know that I find no fault
in him." They deliberately placed a crown of thorns on his head, and robed him
in purple; and as Jesus came forth, crowned with thorns, and robed in purple,
Pilate exclaimed, "Behold the man!" "Ecce Homo!" When the chief priests and
officers saw him, they cried out, "Crucify him, crucify him." Pilate said, "Take
ye him, and crucify him, for I find no fault in him." They responded, "We have a
law, and by our law he ought to die, because he made himself the Son of God."
These were religious men that thus persisted in the clamor to crucify; and not
only religious men, but religious rulers and teachers. They were the men who
were looked up to as examples in teaching and practice! The Lord pity the
people, and have mercy on them when such men as these rule. Thick darkness was
over their minds; their hearts were hardened; their minds were perverted; the
way of righteousness they knew not. Little they knew of the wrath they were
treasuring up against the day of wrath. Little did they know of the desolation
that was hanging over their people, city, and temple. Little did they think that
the God of Abraham would cast them off for their unbelief and hardness of heart.
Yet these awful realities were before them. They took him and led him away,
"bearing his cross." Imagine that you see him, as he leaves the court, bearing
his cross along the streets, crowned with thorns, and robed in purple, meekly
and uncomplainingly. Rough and uncultivated men are thronging the way near by
him, offering insult at every corner. Thousands of idle and thoughtless boys and
girls throng the streets. Women are seen on the streets, sidewalks, in the doors
and windows, uniting in the general popular current, clamoring, "Crucify him!
crucify him!" A little to one side, are seen the priests, the rabbis, the
doctors, lawyers, and scribes, in low tones, uttering words of wrath and
bitterness. What a scene was this for men and angels to view! Is it not
wonderful that the Lord did not smite the earth with a curse? As the tradition
goes, owing to his fasting, his wonderful agonies in the garden, and the
suffering of his soul, in view of all the indignities he endured, his bodily
strength gave way, and he sank beneath the weight of the cross; and they
compelled one Simon, a Cyrenian, from the country, to bear his cross. The latter
part of this is clearly stated, Luk 23:26. They ascend the mount, and reach the
appointed place. They extend his arms, and drive nails through his hands into
the wood of the cross, lift it rudely from the ground, and plant it so that it
will stand. There he hangs, on the rough iron spikes, through the thick part of
his hands, all his muscles in a quiver, writhing in the most excruciating
sufferings! The blood is seen tracing down over his temples as he hangs
struggling for breath. Wicked, hard-hearted, and cruel men mock him. Even the
thieves crucified, one on each side of him, revile him. One calls out, "If you
are the Christ, come down from the cross." Three long hours he hung there, a
spectacle to men and angels, in the midst of blasphemies, scoffs, and mockings!
When the fever of death was on his lips, he called for a sip of water. What a
small favor! only a sip of water, to cool the feverish, parched dips of the
dying Savior! Did you ever, as you sat by the bed of the dying friend, hear the
soft and gentle request for a sip of water? Do you remember with what
inexpressible delight you gave the water? The dying Lord was not even afforded
that relief! A man fastened a sponge on a reed, dipped it in vinegar, mingled
with myrrh, and held it up to the lips of the suffering Redeemer. He turned
away, refusing to drink it. He suffers on a few minutes longer; and, looking
back in the crowd, he saw a circle of women, a little more refined and elevated
than the cruel masses. At all events, they had hearts that could be moved. They
had common feelings of humanity. They, at least, to some extent, were sensible
of his sufferings, and were weeping. Jesus lifted his eyes, and called out to
them: "Weep not for me, but weep for yourselves and for your children." He saw
not only the present, but the future, both of these women and their children. He
saw that awful calamity which hung over their nation, city, and temple, and had
predicted their overthrow. The words he uttered were not merely for those women,
but for the millions to come, showing that he fully comprehended all that was to
come. Again, he looked over the multitude, and saw the woman that gave him
birth, the blessed Mary, the mother of Jesus. He called to her, "Woman, behold
your Son!" What a scene was there for a mother to look on! Her Son, whom she had
a thousand times, in his childhood, pressed to her heart, and whom she still
loved as her Son, though he was her Lord and Redeemer, in the hands of most
cruel and heartless enemies, hanging on an ignominious Roman cross; robed in
purple and crowned with thorns, and his face all covered with blood, struggling
for breath! Mothers, in the kingdom of Jesus, think of looking on your lonely
son, in such sufferings and ignominy, in the midst of cruel enemies! Death is
hard in its mildest form, but how hard and terrible in the midst of heartless
and bitter enemies! Turning his eye to the beloved disciple, John, the apostle,
he exclaims, "Son, behold your mother!" This appears to have been the only
temporal arrangement he had to make. Every good man loves his mother. Jesus
loved his mother, and made provision for her temporal wants when he was dying.
He gave her the richest legacy he had, of an earthly nature, in giving John the
beloved, one of the kindest and best of men, to be her son. He, at the same
time, gave John a precious gift, in giving Mary, the mother of Jesus, to be his
mother. John understood it, and took her to his own house, and cared for her
till the day of her death. What an example this is to all men in reference to
their mothers! In the midst of all this, how does he act in reference to his
enemies? Here is an example. Come, O you professed followers of Jesus, and view
this example, and then determine whether know him, who was the chief among all
the ten thousands, and altogether lovely. How did he feel toward his enemies and
persecutors, in the midst of his most excruciating pains, being aggravated every
moment by their perversity and malignity? Hear his words: "O, my Father, forgive
them: they know not what they do." Blessed be his holy name! Well may we tremble
when we come here, and hear this entreaty to his Father for them, and the
extenuation offered, "they know not what they do." Do you say "It is not
possible for man to be elevated to this degree?" It is possible, and was
actually exemplified in the death of Stephen. When he was covered with bruises,
was bleeding, and almost fainting in death, he cried, with a loud voice, "Lay
not this sin to their charge." Well might such an one as he, in the last
moments, say, "Lord Jesus, receive my spirit." This is truly rising above the
world and above unaided human nature; by the grace of God, attaining to the
divine nature; triumphing over the first Adam, by the power of the second, the
Lord from heaven. While we were enemies, Christ died for the ungodly; and, while
he was dying, he prayed for these enemies, "O, my Father, forgive them: they
know not what they do!" In view of this, how can there be a human being that
does not love Jesus? How can hardness of heart and impenitence turn away from
this unbounded love? Before he expires, he cries again: "Eli, Eli, lama
sabachthani?" which, translated, is, "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken
me?" In the midst of bitter and most unrelenting enemies, in his awful
sufferings, he is left alone. No friend on earth attempts to comfort him. Not
one even attempts to wipe the blood, mingled with the sweat of death, from his
face! Not an angel comes near to offer the last comfort! The Father’s face is
turned away! His enemies are left to themselves to show what they will do. They
reach the climax of enormity, and show what the race would come to left in their
hands. They lift their eyes once more, and view him. He cries with a loud voice,
breathes the last time, gives the last struggle; his head falls on his breast;
he hangs in a quiver for a moment, and is gone. Jesus died! All stand in painful
silence! There was a great earthquake! The rocks were rent! The vail in the
temple is split in two from the top to the bottom. Darkness spreads down over
the whole land from the sixth till the ninth hour. The centurion, witnessing all
these things, exclaims, "Certainly, this man was the Son of God." His friends
are disheartened. In disappointment and gloom, they turn away, saying, "We
thought it was he who was to have redeemed Israel." They gave up all as lost,
and turned away to their former avocations. The enemies were exultant and in
triumph. All the powers of sin, darkness, and rebellion against God, of earth
and hell, are in triumphant array. As they view it, they have ended his work and
defeated his plan. He is cold and silent in death, and his body quietly lays in
Joseph’s new tomb. Little did they comprehend his plans. Little did they think
of his founding a kingdom on his own death. They thought all was secure. All
remained quiet till the dawn of the third day. The mighty question, involving
the foundation of the kingdom, is in debate. Will he rise? His enemies on earth,
and all those in the vast abyss of perdition, say no. Even his few and
discouraged friends on earth are not expecting it. But all the principalities of
the upper world, the mighty hierarchs about the throne, affirm he will rise. The
time has come for the trial of the question--the final decision. An angel of God
descends, and rolls away the stone from the entrance of the tomb. The Roman
soldiers, on guard, fall prostrate as dead men. The earth trembles! Jesus rose
from the dead! The Lord is alive! A great number of the old saints, whose bodies
rested in their graves about Jerusalem--as some have supposed about one hundred
and forty-four thousand--rose, and were seen by many in the holy city after
Jesus rose; as if the Lord intended giving a grander and fuller demonstration
than his own resurrection, by itself, would have been of the resurrection from
the dead. A resurrection for the human race is secured and now demonstrated.
This grand transaction settles the question. The Lord was condemned by men. They
inflicted their penalty. He appealed the case to the high court of heaven--to
God, the Judge of all. He reversed the decision, and removed the penalty, which
was death, raising him from the dead. He was justified by the Spirit--declared
innocent. After about forty days he ascended to heaven; was coronated, crowned
Lord of all; received a name which is above every name--that at the name of
Jesus every knee should bow, and every tongue confess, both of things in heaven
and things on earth. On the great Pentecost, the brightest day for this world
the Lord ever made, the Holy Spirit descended, and made an open vindication
before his persecutors, the Jews, out of every nation under heaven, declaring
that God had raised him from the dead, and exalted him to his own right hand.
The patriarchal dispensation had been given, and lasted about twenty-five
hundred years. The Mosaic dispensation, exclusively to the Jews, then followed,
and extended over about fifteen hundred years more. During this period, the
nations, apart from the seed of Abraham, were left to themselves, to work out
the great problem touching what man can do, unaided by any system from God. In
the end of the ages, God sent his only Son to make his last appeal, in the
dispensation of mercy and grace, to the human race; and, so to speak, the Gospel
is the last effort of divine benevolence to reclaim and save fallen and sinful
humanity. It comes, in its mighty truths and facts, surrounded by the most
stupendous and grand displays of supernatural powers, signs, wonders, and mighty
miracles, confirming its claims to divine authority, appealing to the human
understanding. It thus appeals to the reason of man to convince him of its
supreme authority. It points him to the inevitable ruin to which he is
hastening, the eternal perdition before him, and the devouring flames that shall
lash him forever if he obeys not the Gospel of the grace of God. But its last
appeal is to the affections. It tells him that while he was yet in his sins,
without God, and without hope in the world, God loved him--so loved him, that he
gave his only-begotten Son, that whoever believes on him might not perish, but
have everlasting life that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for the
ungodly; and that he now is not willing that any should perish, but that all
should come to repentance--that, in infinite kindness and compassion, the Lord
stands all the day long stretching forth his hand to a gainsaying people,
exclaiming, "What more could I have done that I have not done?" He has made a
full and perfect atonement for sin. In the end of the ages, he has made one
sin-offering to purge us forever from our sins. He bore our sins in his own body
on the tree. He suffered, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to
God. He is the propitiation for our sins; and not for our sins only, but also
for the sins of the whole world. He now makes his last appeal to our affections.
Can we not, and will we not love him, who first loved us? Shall any man be found
so hardened and abandoned that he cannot love him who withheld not his own Son,
but gave him up freely for us all? Can any man, who has the heart of a man in
him, look at this l last appeal to the affections of man as he hung, suspended
between the heavens and the earth on that ignominious tree of the cross, crowned
with thorns and robed in purple, till he breathed the last breath, gave the last
struggle, and expired, and not love him? Can any human being, not perfectly
callous and under the influence of total apathy--any one not wholly past
feeling--view him, as the Roman spear pierces his side, and his warm heart’s
blood streams down like water on the ground, and not love him? How can any human
being turn away from our Lord and refuse to love him? This is God’s last
exhibition of mercy; the last offer of divine compassion. The man who closes his
eyes to it, hardens his heart against it, and finally resists it; turns his back
on it, spurns it, and dashes it from him, resists God’s last and greatest
exhibition of love, of kindness, and compassion, and is beyond the reach of
redemption. The power of truth cannot penetrate his heart. The power of reason
cannot move his understanding, and the most affectionate, merciful, and
compassionate appeal cannot move his heart. The resources of infinite mercy and
grace have been expended and lost on him, and failed to reclaim him. Divine
goodness cannot impress his soul. Love cannot move his heart. Tenderness and
kindness are wasted on him. He is like a prodigal son, whose father has wasted a
fortune on him; who despises his mother’s tears and his father’s prayers; turns
away from all the love and affection of a kind father and mother; despises all
their entreaties, and rushes on in his folly. His end is utter ruin. So the man
who resists the truth of God, the grace, mercy, and compassion of his beneficent
Creator and Benefactor, is an abandoned man. He has passed the Rubicon. To him
the door is closed. The voice of mercy is shut. No more appeals of love and
compassion forever to his soul. He is becoming worse and worse, and is given
over to work all uncleanness with greediness. He is left to continue his folly
to his heart’s content, and then lament it forever. Soon the canvas will be
changed. His folly will all lay open before him, and he will see the utter ruin
he has invoked on his own head. He will then exclaim, God loved me; Jesus died
for me; the Gospel was preached to me; holy men exhorted me, prayed for me, and
wept over me, and tried to induce me to turn to the Lord--tried to save me. They
portrayed the sufferings of the Savior before me, and made their best appeals to
me. The sick and the dying warned me, and plead with me, but I would not hear.
The harvest is now past; the summer is now ended, and I am not saved. I am left
to deplore my waywardness forever. The Lord has turned away his lovely face. The
voice of mercy has ceased. The door of grace is closed. No more kind and
compassionate invitations will be given. Adieu to all that is good, and pure,
and holy forever. O man, whoever you are, standing aloof from God, turn, turn;
why will you die? While it is an acceptable time, and a day of salvation, turn
and live forever.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 18: GP1 - 17-THE CHURCH�ITS PURITY
========================================================================

SERMON, No. XVII.

THEME.--THE CHURCH--ITS PURITY.

TEXT.--"Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not love,
I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal."--1Co 13:1.

THIS brief expression is selected from a lengthy letter of the apostle Paul to
the Church in Corinth, because it contains a chief point in an important
epistle, aimed to correct certain evils already existing among the Corinthians.
No one can comprehend a lengthy letter like this from an isolated section, much
less from a short text, like the one just read. To comprehend a letter like this
it is necessary to take into view some of the manners and customs of the people
in Corinth, but more especially the condition of the Church. To do this with
anything like clearness, the general scope of the letter must first be briefly
sketched and considered. This is necessary on two accounts:

To get an understanding of the main scope of the letter.

To bring the Church in Corinth fully into view--evils and all--as it existed at
the time when the letter was written.

The apostolic letters were all written to Christians; to those in Christ, to
teach them how to live as such, serve God, and make their escape from a world of
sin and wretchedness to the everlasting rest. No one need expect, then, sermons
in these letters to the men of the world, leading them to believe on the Savior
of the world, repent, and turn to God. Those to whom these letters were written
were all in Christ, in the one body, the heavenly family. They needed
instructions as Christians, encouragements, admonitions, reproofs, exhortations;
in one word, they needed the whole of what related to the continuance in the
faith and practice of Christians. The apostle, under the miraculous influence of
the Divine Spirit of all wisdom and revelation, continually exhibited the same
affectionate care and solicitude for the congregations of the saints, as a
parent for children, remembering them with tears in his prayers, night and day,
when absent from them, and continually writing them letters, caring for them,
comforting, and warning them. In the first chapter of this letter, as now
divided into chapters, and not as it was at first, the apostle introduces an
evil existing among the disciples. Division was germinating in their midst;
parties were forming factious heresies. These were arising, not from
misunderstanding the Scriptures, nor from disagreement on the meaning of
Scripture, nor yet from difference in regard to any fundamental principle in the
new covenant, nor any important point of teaching, but from something far less
than any of these--from preferences for their public men. This was their subject
of difference, their bone of contention, their apple of discord. Some among them
said they were of Paul, for Paul, or, in modern style, Paulites. Others were for
Cephas, or Peter; they were Cephasites. Others were for Apollos, or they were
Apollosites. At least, the apostle uses these names to bring out the principle
involved among them, and expose the evil. It is, however, most likely that these
were not really the names involved in the partyisms originating in their midst,
but names of persons of much less importance; for he says, 1Co 4:6, "These
things, brethren, I have, in a figure, transferred to myself and Apollos, for
your sakes; that you might learn in us not to think of men above what is
written, that no one of you be puffed up for one against another." He did not
desire to mention the names of the men who were really involved, and who, most
probably, had taken pleasure in having their names used by a party in the
Church. Paul, Peter, and the eloquent Apollos, evidently stood higher in the
affections of the brethren than the men really involved in the faction. Paul
knew this, and wisely, as well as prudently, did not mention their names, but
transferred the matter to himself and Apollos, showing that even their names
might not be thus used as the head of and to designate a party, and certainly no
other names. He puts the question to them: Who, then, is Paul, and who is
Apollos, but ministers by whom you believe? Does he regard it as "a wise
providence of God" that they were preparing the way for division, and excuse it
on the ground that it was not about anything fundamental, but merely
non-essentials? By no means. That only renders the matter the more inexcusable.
Hear him: "And I, brethren, could not speak to you as to spiritual, but as to
carnal, even as to babes in Christ. I have fed you with milk, and not with meat;
for hitherto you were not able to bear it, neither yet now are you able. For you
are yet carnal: for, whereas, there is among you envying, and strife, and
divisions, are you not carnal, and walk as men? For while one says, I am of
Paul; and another, I am of Apollos; are you not carnal? Who, then, is Paul, and
who is Apollos, but ministers by whom you believed, even as the Lord gave to
every man?" To take the vanity more fully out of these men who were desiring
preferences, he says: "So, then, neither is he that plants anything, neither he
that waters, but God who gives the increase." See 1Co 3:1-7. Touching their
divisions, he puts the question to them directly: "Is Christ divided?" Their
dividing would indicate to the world that Christ was divided; but he knew that
they would all be compelled to say the Lord is not divided, but one. This he
follows up with the pointed question: "Was Paul crucified for you?" If you are
to be called after men, they should have been crucified for you. Pressing the
matter still more closely, he says: "Were you immersed into the name of Paul?"
As if he had said, If you are to be Paulites, you should have been immersed into
the name of Paul; but if you are Christians, or followers of Christ, then were
you rightly immersed into the name of Christ. But he says, "I thank God that I
immersed none of you, but Crispus and Gaius; lest any should say I had immersed
into my own name." They, therefore, had not even the ground for saying they were
of Paul, that he had immersed them, except a few of them. Now for his remedy.
What is his remedy for this evil? He says: "Now I beseech you, brethren, by the
name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all speak the same thing, and that there
be no divisions among you; but that you be perfectly joined together in the same
mind and in the same judgment." See 1Co 1:10. In the fifth chapter, he calls
their attention to a species of corruption, such, as he says, had not been named
among the Gentiles. They had in their midst a low, degraded, and corrupt
creature, in the form of a man, who had his father’s wife. A more disgraceful
specimen of humanity could not have been found. Yet they were puffed up instead
of mourning that this degraded and disgraced man "might be taken away from among
them." He proposes summary dealing with this flagrant and degraded transgressor.
He commands them: "In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when you are gathered
together, and my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, to deliver
such an one to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be
saved in the day of the Lord Jesus." There were those among the Corinthian
disciples who went to law, brother with brother, before unbelievers. To this he
alludes, 1Co 6:1-7. He says: "Dare any of you, having a matter against another,
go to law before the unjust, and not before the saints? Do you not know that the
saints shall judge the world? Know you not that we shall judge angels? how much
more, things that pertain to this life?" He says: "I speak to your shame. Is it
so, that there is not a wise man among you? no, not one that shall be able to
judge between his brethren?" He proceeds to charge them: "There is utterly a
fault among you, because you go to law with one another;" and inquires of them,
"Why do you not rather suffer yourselves to be defrauded?" He proceeds further
sharply to rebuke them: "Know you not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the
kingdom of God?" What a warning this ought to be to all those groveling lovers
of money or property, who will disgrace themselves and their brethren by going
to law before unbelievers, in adjudicating pecuniary differences, rather than to
refer it to their brethren! Another disorder among them consisted in desecrating
the worship, by substituting a pagan feast for the communion; and, instead of
coming together on the first day of the week to break the loaf in commemoration
of the Lord’s death, they came together to participate in a bacchanalian feast.
They did not even wait one for another, but rushed together in the utmost
disorder, ate and drank to gluttony and drunkenness in the house of the Lord. To
this you will find reference in the eleventh chapter. In speaking of the manner
in which they came together, he says: "When you come together, therefore, in one
place, it is not to eat the Lord’s supper. For, in eating, every one takes
before other his own supper: and one is hungry and another is drunken What! have
you not houses to eat and drink in? or despise you the Church of God, and shame
them that have not?" What a standing warning this is to those who desecrate the
worship of God, by feasts in the church, or any other means! He proceeds: "What
shall I say to you? shall I praise you in this? I praise you not." He proceeds
to lay before them what he had received of the Lord Jesus, and what he had
delivered to them. Alluding to what he had delivered and commanded them to do,
he adds: "For as often as you eat of this loaf, and drink of this cup, you do
show the Lord’s death till he comes." But he presently proceeds with that which
is more solemn: "Whoever shall eat of this loaf, or drink of this cup of the
Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord." Many
conscientious and well-meaning people have taken this passage wrong. They have,
in many instances, so far mistaken the intention of this language as to refuse
to do precisely what he commanded. They have supposed that eating and drinking
unworthily was eating and drinking when they were oppressed in spirits or cast
down, a little desponding, and when the pathway did not appear as bright as at
other times. They then refused to partake, for fear of eating and drinking
condemnation. But this is not what the apostle means. They who eat and drink to
gluttony and drunkenness in the Lord’s house, as the Corinthians did, not
discerning the Lord’s body and blood, eat and drink condemnation, and not the
meek and humble, the cast down and timid, ever fearful of doing wrong. The vain
and proud, the puffed up and conceited, who rushed together thoughtlessly, with
light and frivolous hearts, ate and drank, laughed and talked, not discerning
the Lord’s body and blood, ate and drank condemnation. These the apostle
rebukes. "What!" says he, "have you not houses to eat and to drink in? or
despise you the Church of God, and shame them that have not? What shall I say to
you? shall I praise you in this? I praise you not." On account of this
desecration of the Lord’s worship--this feasting, instead of partaking of the
simple emblems of the Lord’s body and blood, the loaf and cup--many among them
were weak and sickly, and some had died. It was during miracles, and in the
midst of their numerous gifts of prophecy, tongues, healing, etc., the Lord sent
visible judgments on them as divine attestations of his disapprobation of their
procedure. During this period there were two classes of miracles--one class
evincing the Lord’s approval of the right, and the other his disapproval of the
wrong. The miraculous judgment sent on Ananias and his wife, as recorded Acts
5:1-10, was a visible divine demonstration of God’s disapprobation of their
conduct, in their lying pretense that they were giving the whole proceeds of the
sale of the possession sold, when they were keeping back a part of it. This
awful divine demonstration was given that it might be recorded and read by the
children of God till the end of time, as a warning. No matter if we do live
beyond the age of miracles, and no such judgment would fall on us now if we
should do such a deed, still this would stand as a warning of God’s disapproval
and the eternal judgment he will finally pronounce. On the other hand, the
miracle at the death of Stephen--of the heavens opening, and his seeing Jesus
standing on the right hand of God--was a divine manifestation of God’s approval
of his good action, in preaching Jesus and withstanding the Jews. This, also, is
now a matter of record, showing, to all who read the account, God’s approval of
that righteous man, and all like him, for standing for the Gospel of Christ till
the end of time. So, also, the judgments sent on the Corinthians, on account of
the desecration of the divinely appointed worship, has been committed to the
record, that it may be read by all the children of God till the end of time. In
the fifteenth chapter, the apostle refers to certain teachers, who probably had
been proselyted from the sect of the Sadducees who denied the resurrection of
the dead. These men were creating dissension and subverting the very foundation
of the faith, as the apostle clearly shows. For if there is no resurrection,
then Christ has not risen. If Christ has not risen, then the apostolic preaching
is vain or useless, for it is all false; for they preached that Christ had risen
and become the first fruits of them that slept. Then their faith was vain, for
it was only the belief of a falsehood, and could not justify the sinner. In that
case they were yet in their sins, and those who had fallen asleep in Christ had
perished. The apostles, in that case, were of all men most miserable, for they
had given up this world, and, without the resurrection of the dead, they were
stripped of all hope in the world to come. Now, the way is clear to take a look
at the Church in Corinth, as it was at the time when this letter was written.
Try and bring it before the mind as it was then, with schism at work in it,
almost divided into three or four parts on account of their preferences and
partialities for their preachers--some of them for Paul, some for Apollos, and
some for Cephas, or Peter, a debased and corrupt creature in human form, who had
his father’s wife in it; brethren going to law with brethren before unbelievers;
the communion turned into a pagan feast; members eating and drinking to gluttony
and drunkenness in the Church of God; public teachers among them denying the
resurrection of the dead. Besides these great evils, there were other
irregularities of a very grievous and disorderly nature. Their prophets were in
the habit of speaking two or three at a time, in as many different tongues, with
a class of women, inquiring into things that did not belong to them, or at least
was not their place to inquire into in public worship. Now, several things here
are of great practical importance to us. In the first place, suppose you had
come up just as Paul had completed this letter, and seen that he was writing all
these things down in it, would you not have begged him to leave them out? Would
you not have inquired, Brother Paul, where is this letter to be read, and by
whom? He would have informed you, In all the world, by all Christians and
civilized people till the end of time. Would you not have expostulated with him,
by all means to leave some of those unpleasant and even disgraceful things out
of his letter? Would you not have feared that it would be an injury to the
Church and the cause to have this published thus among all people and in all
time? Precisely the opposite would have been the result. The leaving of these
things out would have shown an utter unfaithfulness on the part of the apostle,
the disposition of a mere pretender and hypocrite, in passing over corruptions
and keeping them from the world. The Lord makes faithful record, and there is
but one way to keep bad things out of his record concerning us. That way is to
keep these bad things out of our lives. The Lord, in the holy history, would not
turn aside from faithful record to leave out the flaws in the life of Noah, the
life of Abraham, or of David. Nor would he obscure from the view of the world
the faults even of the apostles themselves. They are faithfully put down, not as
anything chargeable to the cause of righteousness, but chargeable to the
weakness and imperfections of men--even the greatest and best of men. But is it
not an advantage to us that these things are in the record? Is it not of
incalculable value that Paul has been thus faithful in reference to these evils?
Surely it is. It is of importance, in several respects, to us now. We should
know fully the mind of the Lord in reference to all these evils, and how to deal
with them. In addition to this, all men of extended experience in these matters
have found the utter impossibility of attaining to anything like absolute purity
and perfection as churches; that when the best efforts are made by the best men
to bring humanity up to the standard of absolute purity and perfection, they
fall short; that all is not love, harmony, unity, and peace. There will still be
evils found. When men have the experience to know this, and to become fully
satisfied that, after the best efforts are made for humanity, it is found to be
utterly unavoidable, they need another part of the programme to give them relief
If all these things had been left out of the apostolic letters, and no allusion
had been made to anything but absolute purity and perfection, love and harmony,
peace and prosperity, they would have become discouraged, and concluded that
they never could bring a church up to the example set us by the first churches.
But now, sit down and read the letter under consideration; bring the Church in
Corinth before you with as full a comprehension of all there was in it as
possible, and inquire whether we have not succeeded in bringing many churches to
a higher degree of perfection, a greater unity and harmony, more love and peace
than existed in the Church in Corinth. You will find that, without any flattery,
deception, or conceit, you can conscientiously say we have. There is not a doubt
that we have many churches now much better in all that pertains to the kingdom
of God and the name of Christ than the churches in the time of the apostles
were. How, then, did Paul address this church and look on it with all these
evils in it? Did he denounce it, declare it no church, and turn his back on it?
By no means, but addressed it affectionately as "the Church of God which is in
Corinth, those sanctified in Christ Jesus, called saints." Hear him: "I thank my
God always on your behalf, for the grace of God which was given to me in Christ
Jesus." This shows that he recognized it as "the Church of God in Corinth,"
knowing all the evils in it. Nor is there any apology for sin in this, or any
excuse for disorders or delinquencies; but there is in it an encouragement for
good men who labor for purity, love, and harmony, but cannot bring the Church up
to the standard as fully as they desire. They can see that, under the very eyes
of the apostles, and in spite of all their prayers and tears, their solemn
solicitudes and anxieties, their holy teaching and exhortations, these wonderful
evils and disorders existed. Then they need not be discouraged, despondent, or
cast down if they encounter similar things in their own experience. In this
there is no excuse for indifference, inefficiency, or carelessness in keeping
the Church in order, purging out the old leaven or maintaining purity, but an
encouragement to those who labor for the highest degree of purity and perfection
but cannot reach it. In the same way, if there was a sharp difference between
these two great and good men, Paul and Barnabas, so that they parted asunder,
one going one way and the other another, or a difference between such men as
Peter and Paul, while it is no excuse for good men to differ now or
encouragement for them to do so, there is this encouragement in it--that nothing
serious happened to the kingdom of God on account of it, an evidence that the
common weaknesses of humanity existed in the best men in the world then the same
as they do now. There is no need, therefore, of the childish alarm so frequently
evinced among brethren when any dispute comes up among good men. These
differences never sundered their fellowship or sent one man off with one faction
and the other with another; but while one man went one way and the other went
another, they both preached the same Gospel, maintained and advocated the same
cause, and remained in the same body. They did not rend the Church and scatter
the disciples with their differences. So it is now. Differences come up between
good men; they discuss them, and go on in the same body, preaching the same
Gospel, and maintaining the same faith. They stand in the same fellowship--the
same communion. But now another practical point must be made. What would you do
if you belonged to such a church as the one in Corinth? "I would call for a
letter," says a man. "I would not remain in such a church." Why would you want a
letter? "I would not fellowship such a church." What kind of a letter would you
have the church give you? Would you have the church give you a letter commending
their "dear brother, in good standing and full fellowship," while you are going
away because you cannot fellowship the church? No, sir; they cannot, in good
faith, give you a letter. If you cannot, in good faith, recognize and fellowship
the church, it certainly cannot, in good faith, recognize you. "I would then
leave without a letter." No, dear brother; that is neither manly nor Christian.
When danger comes, the hour of trouble, every good member is needed. Every man
that deserts his post then, and retires from the field, shows his want of
integrity to the cause. The Lord’s plan is to retain the good, the pure, and the
holy, and put away the evil, the corrupt. This is one clear difference between
the true Church and Antichrist: the true Church puts away the corrupt and
vicious and retains the good. The Romish Church, the apostate Church, or man of
sin, cuts off the good and retains the corrupt within. Bishop Purcell admitted,
in the discussion with Alexander Campbell, that he had no doubt that some of the
wicked Popes were suffering the penal fires of hell at the time he spoke. Still
these corrupt men, whom even he would not defend, were not only retained in the
Church, but at the head of the Church, while such men as Luther were cut off.
The commandment of God is to "purge out the old leaven." "Put away the wicked
person from among you." "But I can live a Christian out of the Church." Are you
sure of that? Why, then, did the Lord establish the Church? But suppose all the
members would adopt your plan of living out of the Church; where would the
Church be? It would destroy the Church from the face of the earth. Can a man
live a Christian life and take such a course as would result in sweeping the
Church from the face of the earth? Certainly not. Where would the ordinances be,
then? Where would the preaching of the Gospel be? Where would the Bible itself
be in that case? No; no one can live a Christian life out of the Church. Leave
all the good out of the Church, and the Church is swept from the earth. The
light from God is extinguished, and the world is left in ruins. The man who acts
in such a way as would destroy the Church entirely from the earth if all should
follow him, whether he intended it or not, is the enemy of the Church. But we
need no such reasoning to show the importance of the Church. The Lord ordained
it. That settles the question of its necessity. The man that proposes to live
out of the Church, whether he means precisely that or not, substantially
declares that he can do as well, and not follow the wisdom of God, as to follow
it; that the Church which the Lord founded is an unimportant affair, and he can
get along very well without it. This is utterly reckless. Suppose you could
possibly live a Christian out of the Church. An old brick, lying in the street,
is a brick as certainly as a brick in a good building; but what good is it
doing, first knocked to this side, and then to that side of the street, liable
to be run over by every old cart that comes along? It is doing about as much
good as the man is doing who claims to be a Christian but lives out of the
Church. But now, how did the Church in Corinth get into such a condition? This
is a matter of importance, and demands attention. The Church was proud and
boastful, with all the evils in it enumerated. Do you inquire how this could be?
It occurred in this way: It abounded with supernatural gifts, having a great
number of gifts of healing, tongues, interpretation of tongues, prophecy, etc.
On account of these gifts, it was puffed up, boastful, and proud, when it had
reason for mourning and grief. The argument, on the part of the Church, was
brief. It amounted to this: We have more gifts of healing, prophecy, tongues,
etc., than any other church, and are, therefore, better, enjoying the divine
favor more largely. How humiliating to their pride it was to have the apostle
say to them, in view of all their pride, boasting, and conceit, based on the
abundance of their gifts, "Though I have the tongues of men and of angels, and
have not love, I am become as sounding brass or a tinkling cymbal." Some
versions have the word "charity" here; but any person can see that the apostle
does not mean charity, for he adds below, "though I give all my goods to feed
the poor, and have not love, I am nothing." He could not bestow all his goods to
feed the poor and not have charity. This would be the very, embodiment of
charity. But Paul’s climax is, that though a man give all his goods to feed the
poor, and even his body to be burned, and have not love, he is nothing. He still
strikes a more fatal blow: "Though I have all faith, so as to remove mountains,
and have not love, I am nothing." This is the best definition of a faith alone
man found in any book. A man may not only have faith, but all faith, so as to
remove mountains, and because he has not love with it, he is nothing. As if the
apostle had said: You have boasted of your supernatural gifts; your prophecies,
tongues, knowledge, etc., and been puffed up; but you may have all these gifts,
you may have the tongues of men and of angels, the gift of prophecy, all
knowledge, you may have faith so that you can remove mountains, give all your
goods to feed the poor and your bodies to be consumed, as martyrs in the flames,
but if you have not love, you are nothing. Why does he thus speak? Because, at
the very time when these miraculous gifts abounded in their midst, and they were
boasting of them and glorying in them, they had not love enough to maintain the
unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace; to restrain them from shouting for
their favorite man, "I am for Paul, I for Apollos, and I for Cephas;" not love
to God and the cause enough to put away a corrupt man from their midst; to
restrain them from going to law, brother with brother, before infidels; nor to
induce them to maintain, in its purity, the communion of the blood and body of
the Lord; nor to maintain the confidence that God will raise the dead; and, with
all your miraculous gifts, and without this love, you are an empty sound. Truly
was this withering on those proud and boastful men. The apostle then determines
to make them appreciate the importance of love, and proceeds to personify it,
and speak of it as if it were a member of the Church. In doing so, he tells what
love will do and what it will not do. He specifies seven things that love will
do, as follows: 1. "Suffers long." 2. "Is kind." 3. "Rejoices in the truth." 4.
"Bears all things." 5. "Believes all things." 6. "Hopes all things." 7. "Endures
all things." He also specifies nine things that love will not do, as follows: 1.
"Envies not." 2. "Vaunts not itself." 3. "Is not puffed up." 4. "Does not behave
itself unseemly." 5. "Seeks not its own." 6. "Is not easily provoked." 7.
"Imputes no evil." 8. "Rejoices not in unrighteousness." 9. "Never fails." If
you fear that you have not this love, look over this list, and if you can say,
honestly, I will do each of the seven things which the apostle says love will
do, and will not do each of the nine things he says love will not do, you have
the love of which he speaks. Here is a beautiful chance for self-examination.
All pious persons exercise much self-examination. In this they can use great
freedom. They can enter into the very motives, the very thoughts and intents of
the heart; make the examination most rigorous and scrutinizing. What a beautiful
exercise it would be for a disciple of the Lord to retire to some quiet
seclusion, with the New Testament open at this passage, and, after a fervent
prayer for the Lord’s help in obtaining a clear understanding of the whole
matter and practical application, commence and go over, item by item, the seven
things which love will do, and the nine which it will not do! This would be
communing with and learning of God. This is piety. A careful comment on each one
of these items is not to be expected here; but since so much is said about what
is needful in keeping churches in order and making them successful, etc., a few
words in a general way will not come amiss here. Some think we need some special
kind of a preacher in order to success. Others think we need better qualified
overseers, and others are proposing some improvement in deacons. Some are for
more rigorous discipline. No doubt there may be improvement in all these
departments. In many instances the main improvement is needed on the part of the
members. In some instances, they turn off a preacher and get a new one with
profit. Still, there are some other instances in which they need about as much
to turn off the church and get a new one. In deliberative bodies they sometimes
form themselves into a committee of the whole, in the consideration of an
important matter. If any one would see how easily a church ought to be managed,
suppose the church would appoint each member a committee of one to oversee, look
after, and take care of one member; this would reach and provide for all the
members. Then, many talented and influential members would think this too
little; that their talents and influence would not find scope in such a narrow
circle. But, then, the proposition is to have the work done well. In order to do
this you only need oversee one, if all the members do their part of the work, to
oversee the whole church. Do you say that you desire the one you are appointed
to look after and oversee shall be near by, so that you can attend to the work
faithfully without unnecessary loss of time or labor? That is well thought of,
and should, by all means, be taken into the account in appointing. It would be a
matter of great convenience to have it arranged so that you could be present in
the business department at every meal you eat, in the domestic circle, and,
indeed, all the time, that you may exercise the most careful oversight. It
should be some one whom you love dearly, and for whose salvation you have a deep
interest. To accommodate you in all these respects, the church should appoint
you to oversee and look after yourself. You can then always be present to
witness every impropriety, idle word, and foolish thought; offer rebukes,
interpose restraints, administer corrections, etc. You can then always
administer reproofs in kindness, love, and affection, so that they may give no
offense, but bring forth the fruits of righteousness. This is not intended to
set aside all necessity for preachers, overseers, and deacons, but to assist
them and render their work much more light and less difficult than it would
otherwise be. Love is the all-prevailing element for maintaining order, peace,
and harmony in the Church. Where it does not abound, all is dull, formal, and
lifeless. There may be a mechanical management according to rule--a kind of
conformity without it, but the enjoyment is not there without it.

"It is the golden chain that binds The happy souls above; And he’s an heir of
heaven that finds His bosom glow with love."

One of its chief glories is, that "it never fails." "Whether there shall be
prophecies, they shall cease; whether there be tongues, they shall fail; whether
there be knowledge, it shall vanish away." But love never fails. As if the
apostle had said: You Corinthians are boastful, conceited, and puffed up on
account of your abundance of spiritual gifts, but all this belongs to the
infancy of Christianity, the creative and formative period; but when the stature
of manhood shall come; when this creative and formative period shall cease; when
the revelation shall be complete, and a state of maturity shall be reached,
these gifts, employed in the incipiency of things, shall all pass away. Then I
will show you a more excellent way. Every thing in this universe had its
beginning in miracle. The first human pair were brought into existence by a
miracle. The human race begun by direct supernatural power, but has been
perpetuated by the natural; began by direct extraordinary power, but has been
perpetuated by the indirect and ordinary power. It required a miracle to bring
the first man and woman into existence, but no miracle for all other men and
women to descend from these. It required a direct exertion of supernatural power
to bring into existence the first oak-tree, but it is only the operation of
natural power for an oak-tree to produce an acorn, and for another oak-tree to
spring from that acorn, and so on down through all the generations of oak-trees
to the last one that shall ever grow. God created man, and breathed into his
nostrils the breath of life. This was a miracle. From the flesh and bone of this
man the Lord formed the first woman. This was a miracle also. But he never
brought into existence another human pair by a miracle. The race have all
descended from this first pair without a miracle. They originated in
supernatural power, but have been perpetuated by natural power. They came into
existence by extraordinary means, but the race has been perpetuated from them
down by ordinary means. Every species of the creation of God had its origin in
extraordinary power or means, but has been perpetuated by ordinary means. In the
same way the Church of the living God was a new creation. It was brought into
existence by a miracle, but has been perpetuated without miracle. It was
created, and the breath of life breathed into it by miracle, but no church is
now created and life breathed into it in the same way, but the Church has been
perpetuated from the original Church. It originated in extraordinary power, but
has been perpetuated by ordinary power. Miracles were, therefore, necessary in
bringing the Church into existence, establishing and confirming it, but not
necessary in perpetuating it. The bringing it into existence, establishing and
confirming it among men, required extraordinary means, but not required in
perpetuating it. The supernatural gifts were, therefore, demanded in the
creative period, but belonged to the infancy of the Church; hence the apostle,
in allusion to this, says: "When I was a child I spoke as a child, I thought as
a child, I had the understanding of a child; but when I became a man, I put away
childish things." These gifts pertained to the infancy of the Church; but when
the Church and revelation came to maturity, those things that pertained to the
incipient state were taken away. The more excellent way was introduced, and
prophecies failed, tongues ceased, and the supernatural gift of knowledge was
done away. Now faith, hope, and love remain; but the greatest of these is love.
How weak and foolish it was, then, for the disciples in Corinth to be carried
away by their abundance of spiritual gifts; to become proud and boastful on
account of these gifts, while they had not the love to maintain the purity of
the Church. In the same way, how vain and foolish it is for any church to be
puffed up by fine gifts of an ordinary character, now that the extraordinary is
done away, and not be under the influence of the love of Christ! Some have
vainly imagined that these gifts ceased through unbelief; but that cannot be so,
for in the same connection, where he says these miraculous gifts shall cease, he
says: "Now abide faith, hope, love; but the greatest of these is love." This way
when these gifts shall cease, and faith, hope, and love abide, he calls "a more
excellent way," in the close of the chapter preceding this. The first public
instructors in the Church were made such, or qualified for their work, in an
extraordinary manner, but since these gifts ceased, men are qualified for the
same work in an ordinary manner. The Lord said, in the great intercessory
prayer, John 17:8, "The words which thou gavest me I have given them;" that is,
the apostles. They were qualified for making a revelation by miracle. The Lord
gave them the word which the Father gave him. This same word they gave to
others. Hence, Paul says to Timothy, "The things which you have heard of me, in
the presence of many witnesses, the same do you commit to faithful men, who
shall be able to teach others also." The Lord, by inspiration, or by
extraordinary means, made the revelation to the apostles; but without any
miracle, in the ordinary way of teaching, the same things were communicated to
Timothy and others like him. Timothy and other evangelists were qualified in the
ordinary way, by hearing and receiving the things the apostles taught; and, in
the same manner, qualified others. Hence, the command of the apostle to Timothy,
to give himself to reading, to meditation, etc., and not to look for immediate
revelation. Such men as Timothy, reared up under the apostles, and qualified by
ordinary instruction, were required to devote themselves to study, reading, and
meditation, to prepare them for their great work. But the Lord expressly
commanded the apostles not to meditate beforehand what they should say, and
required them to depend wholly on supernatural aid, or inspiration, for what
they were to utter; and that, too, in the most perilous and critical trials
through which they should be called to pass, especially when they should be
called to stand before kings and governors on trial for preaching Jesus. They
depended, not on the amount they knew, any human talent, learning, or ability,
in making their defense, or in opening up the will of God to man, but on the
supernatural power that was in them, the miraculous inspiration of the Spirit of
God. What they uttered was revelation from God. They did not prove their
teaching by argument or Scripture, as a general rule, but proved by divine and
indisputable demonstrations of supernatural power that they were divinely called
and sent--that the words spoken by them were not their words, but the words of
the Spirit of God; not the words spoken by man’s wisdom, but the words spoken by
the wisdom of the Spirit of God. When such men as Timothy, Titus, Barnabas,
Apollos, Mark, Luke, etc., spoke, they uttered the things which they had heard
and learned of the apostles. It was, therefore necessary that they should have
given themselves to reading, meditation, study, that they might show themselves
approved of God, workmen who need not be ashamed, rightly setting forth the word
of truth. But the proof they gave that what they uttered was from God, was that
they had obtained it from the apostles, and not that they were inspired men, as
the apostles were, and spoke by authority, as the apostles did. No man in our
time can reach a higher position than this. We have no embassadors of Christ
now, no apostles of Christ, no inspired men. None now are miraculously called
and sent. There are no proofs to show that what we preach is from God, if they
are not the things taught by the apostles. We prove nothing now by claiming to
be specially called and sent, as the apostles were; that we speak by
inspiration, as they did, except that we are impostors. We receive all the
apostles taught implicitly, being assured that they were under the influence of
the infallible inspiration of God, their divine claims being continually
confirmed by the most grand, imposing, and stupendous displays of miraculous
power. The promise of Jesus, "Lo, I am with you always," was verified to them in
the continual performance of miracles. But if it was weak and childish for the
Corinthian disciples to be proud of those sublime spiritual gifts, such as
prophecies, tongues, wisdom, etc., of a miraculous character, what shall be said
of the man now, or the church, proud of ordinary gifts, as learning, talent,
influence, etc., and puffed up, conceited, and inflated? These ordinary gifts
are from God. What has any man that he did not receive? Yet there are men and
churches proud, puffed up, and conceited on account of these ordinary gifts, and
not possessing love enough for Christ, the children of God, and the cause, to
maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace; not love enough to stand
for purity, the harmony, and the advancement of the cause; not love enough for
Christ to put away corrupt persons from their midst; to prevent them from
litigations before the civil courts--having pagan feasts in the church, or the
denial of the resurrection of the dead. What an abandonment of all that is pure
and lovely--of all that is holy, just, and good! The supernatural gifts of the
original Church have long since all passed away; They served the purpose for
which they were intended, and, according to the will of God, ceased. So, also,
shall the finest ordinary gifts possessed by man all cease. They shall all fail.
In the same way, all that we possess shall fail. Houses, lands, moneys, goods,
and chattels of every sort, shall all be nothing to us in a short time. All
earthly friends must also fail us. Even faith itself shall culminate in actual
knowledge. The things that we now enjoy by faith we shall then enjoy by sight.
Hope shall also be swallowed up in real possession. That which we now hope for
we shall then actually possess. What, then, have we now that we shall carry with
us? We have that wonderful love of which the apostle speaks, and shall have it
forever. It is stronger than death. It first moved our hearts to turn to God. We
love God because he first loved us. The same love that first moved us to turn to
the Lord, has moved us in every righteous effort, every holy impulse, every
prayer, every song, every time we have gone to the house of God, from the day we
confessed the Savior till now; and shall move our hearts in all that is holy,
just, and good till we die. In the hour of death it shall dwell in us richly, in
joy and peace inexpressible. It shall dwell in us forever and ever. It binds in
holy union and oneness all the heavenly hosts. Its years are the years of God.
It shall last co-existent with the Infinite One himself. Let it, then, rule in
our hearts, reign over us, and abide forever and ever. Love is the golden link
connecting the good on earth with the heavenly hosts, binding the whole family,
in heaven and on earth, in one pure and holy union, communion, and
fellowship--in the same spirit, the same mind, and the same judgment. It shall
never fail. When health fails, when earthly friends fail, when property fails,
when life fails, when we shall cross the cold and chilly river of death, and
sink into the grave, love shall not fail. Beyond the rolling river it shall live
and abound forever and ever. Happy are the saints under its hallowed influence.
Happy are all the heavenly hosts, animated and bound together by it. Happy shall
be all the pure in heart forever and ever, for it shall never fail them. But
what is the prospect of the human being not under the influence of this love?
Truly, it is gloomy for such. They are without the greatest comfort now in
existence for man; in a cold and cheerless world, with death before them, the
judgment and eternity--not a ray of light nor a gleam of day. No heart animated
by love! No hope, and without God in the world! Eternal night lies away in the
wonderful future! Can any intelligent man or woman live in such a state of
gloom--not a promise, not a hope--all dark and threatening? Come, be entreated
by all that is kind and lovely, to turn away from the vanities and follies of a
world of sin, and give yourselves to him who is the way, the truth, and the
life, and be happy forever. "He is the chief among all the ten thousands, and
altogether lovely."


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 19: GP1 - 18-THE SECOND COMING OF CHRIST AND THE DESTRUCTION OF THE WORLD
========================================================================

SERMON, No. XVIII.

THEME.--THE SECOND COMING OF CHRIST AND THE DESTRUCTION OF THE WORLD.

TEXT.--"But the day of the Lord will come as a thief, in which the heavens shall
pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, and
the earth, and the works that are in it, shall be burned up."--2Pe 3:10.

THE first thing to which the attention of the hearer is invited, is the
description given by the apostle of the men who should come in the last
days--false teachers. He says, "There will come in the last days scoffers." "The
last days," here, cannot be the last days of the Jewish dispensation, for these
had passed away some thirty or thirty-five years before the apostle wrote. They
are evidently the "last days" of the Christian dispensation. But what kind of a
description does he give of these men? He deliberately writes them down as
"scoffers," and gives us a specimen of their logic. They shall insincerely,
scoffingly, and in derision say, "Where is the promise of his coming?" They will
argue that there can be no promise of his coming, "for since the fathers fell
asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation."
These men walk after their own lusts or their own desires. They receive nothing,
because the Lord has said it, but are led by their own carnal desires, believing
simply what they desire to believe. But the apostle says "They are willingly
ignorant of this, that by the word of God the heavens of old had their being, as
also the earth, consisting of water and subsisting by water: by which things the
world that then was, having been overflowed with water, perished." These grand
events in the world’s history willfully escape their attention, and they
stupidly and blindly assert that "all things continue as they were from the
beginning of the creation." This is not only blindness, but willful blindness.
They have lost sight of the overthrow of the monarch of Egypt, the "vessel of
wrath," raised up that God’s power might be known in all the earth, the
destruction of the antediluvian world, of Sodom, Tyre, and Sidon, and the
overthrow of the Jews, and their dispersion among all nations, till the times of
the Gentiles be fulfilled. All these wonderful events have escaped their
attention, and they are the blind and willing slaves of passion and bigotry.
They can see no promise of his coming. True, the threatenings of God had been
fulfilled to the letter; his divine judgments executed, with the most stupendous
displays of his wrath and vengeance on the nations and peoples who despised his
authority; but the coming of the Lord, to raise the dead and judge the world;
"to take vengeance on them who know not God, and obey not the Gospel of our Lord
Jesus Christ;" to "punish them with an everlasting destruction from the presence
of the Lord and the glory of his power," they maintain can never occur. With the
scoffers of the last days it avails nothing if the angels did say, "This Jesus,
who has been taken up from you into heaven, shall come in the same manner in
which you saw him go into heaven." See Acts 1:11. Nor does it amount to anything
with them that Paul speaks of "the revelation of our Lord Jesus from heaven,
with his mighty angels, in flaming fire, to take vengeance on them who know not
God, and obey not the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ," as we read, 2Th 1:7; nor
yet does it avail anything with them that the Lord himself has said, as we read,
Mat 25:31, that "the Son of Man shall come in his own glory, and all the holy
angels with him," and that "he will sit on the throne of his own glory, and all
nations shall be gathered before him; and he shall separate them, one from
another, as a shepherd separates his sheep from the goats." All these
scriptures, and numerous others, go for nothing with the hardened scoffer. How
different the spirit of the holy John, when he penned the last words of the New
Testament, "Come, Lord Jesus!" But there is another class of scoffers that this
discourse has to do with. They say the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ has long
since occurred--that he came the second time at the destruction of Jerusalem;
that he there judged the world; separated the righteous from the wicked, and,
consequently, argue that the coming of Christ, the judgment, and punishment of
the wicked are all long since gone by. This fallacy must now be refuted. It must
be shown that the coming of the Lord is yet future. 1. The first scripture to
which reference is made for this purpose is foundActs 3:19: "Repent, therefore,
and turn, in order that your sins may be blotted out, so that season of
refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord; and that he may send Jesus
Christ, who was destined for you: whom heaven must retain till the times of
restitution of all things, which God has spoken by the mouth of all his holy
prophets, since the beginning of time." Those who say the coming of Christ is
passed, say that "restitution" in this passage means salvation, and that
"restitution of all things" is salvation of all men, for, they say, "all things"
certainly includes all men. Take them first on their own ground, that
"restitution of all things" means salvation of all men, or that it at least
includes the salvation of all. How long, then, is the heaven to retain Jesus
Christ? "Till the restitution of all things," or the salvation of all men? Is
their salvation of all men past or future? Did their salvation of all men occur
before the destruction of Jerusalem? Peter said, some forty years before the
destruction of Jerusalem, of Christ: "Whom the heaven must retain till the times
of restitution of all things." If, then, the "restitution of all things "means
or includes the salvation of all men, and if the heaven must retain Jesus Christ
till the restitution of all things, Jesus Christ did not come at the destruction
of Jerusalem, or at any other time between then and now, for it is
incontrovertibly certain that the salvation of all men has not come. But the
Universalist says that no man shall stand on his own ground and argue. Then look
at the case from the true ground. What, then, is the meaning of "restitution of
all things?" It is evident that "restitution" does not mean salvation by the
following part of the connection. You readily inquire, "Restitution of what?"
The Universalist replies, "Restitution of all things." All what things? Does the
apostle mean absolutely all things, or "all things" of a certain class which he
describes? "All things" of a described class. You must not quote the passage in
the popular style, as follows: "All things," etc., but you must follow up, with
inquiry, All what things? The apostle answers: "All things which God has spoken
by the mouth of his holy prophets since the beginning of time." This shows that
restitution does not mean salvation. It makes no sense to talk of the salvation
of all things which God has spoken by the mouth of his holy prophets, for the
"things which God has spoken" have never been lost, and there is no sense in
speaking of the salvation of that which was never lost. There are but two ways
in which the language can be taken with intelligence: 1. "Whom the heaven must
retain till the times of accomplishment or fulfillment of all things which God
has spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets." 2. "Whom the heaven must
receive till the times of restoration of all things which God has promised by
the mouth of all his holy prophets since time began." This latter is most
probably the true meaning. The apostle then says of Jesus Christ, "Whom the
heaven must receive till the times of restoration of all things promised by all
the holy prophets." This proves, beyond doubt, that he did not come at the
destruction of Jerusalem, and that he has not come at any time between that time
and the present; for the heaven must retain him till the restoration of all
things promised by all his holy prophets, and certainly the restoration of all
things promised by all his holy prophets has never yet come. 2. Please hear the
great apostle to the Gentiles: "But we beseech you, brethren, concerning the
coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and our coming together to him, that you be not
hastily shaken from the persuasion of your mind, nor be troubled, neither by
spirit, nor by report, nor by letter as written by us, as though the day of the
Lord is at hand."2Th 2:1-2. Now, at what period did the apostle stand when he
wrote this? Certainly not more than sixteen years before the destruction of
Jerusalem. If, then, the destruction of Jerusalem was only sixteen years off,
and the coming of the Lord was to be at the same time, was it not proper to say
"The day of the Lord is at hand?" Certainly when an event of that kind is within
sixteen years of us, it is at hand. But it was false then to say "the day of the
Lord is at hand;" and in view of some saying this, Paul said: "Let no man
deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, unless the apostasy come
first, and the man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; who opposes and
exalts himself above every one that is called God, or that is worshiped; so that
he sits as God in the temple of God, openly showing himself that he is God." 2Th
2:3-4. This puts an end to all idea of the Lord coming at the destruction of
Jerusalem, for the apostle asserts roundly that "that day shall not come unless
the apostasy comes first." The apostasy, or "mystery of iniquity," was only
beginning to work when Paul wrote this letter. This "apostasy," described in the
same connection as the "man of sin," the "son of perdition," was to be fully
revealed before the coming of the Lord, but the proper time for his full
development had not come when Paul wrote. The restraining power was in the way,
and would continue to restrain till he would be taken out of the way. This "man
of sin," "son of perdition," "lawless one," is unquestionably the great Romish
apostasy, "whom the Lord Jesus will destroy by the spirit of his mouth, and will
utterly overthrow by the brightness of his coming." See 2Th 2:8. This shows that
the Lord has not yet come, for he "will destroy by the spirit of his mouth, and
utterly overthrow by the brightness of his coming" this great "apostasy," or
"man of sin." So long, then, as Popery is not utterly overthrown, destroyed, the
Lord has not come. 3. InLuk 21:24is found one of the most remarkable predictions
in the whole Bible. It reads as follows: "And they shall fall by the edge of the
sword, and be led away captives among all nations; and Jerusalem shall be
trodden down by the Gentiles, till the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled." Who
were to fall by the edge of the sword? The Jews. This is the destruction of
Jerusalem. "They, the Jews, shall be led away captive among all nations." This
captivity of the Jews, beyond all doubt, extends till the present time. "And
Jerusalem shall be trodden down by the Gentiles, till the times of the Gentiles
be fulfilled." This unquestionably extends down to the present time. Jerusalem
is still trodden down by the Gentiles, and the times of the Gentiles are not yet
fulfilled. What, then, shall occur after this captivity of the Jews, this
treading down of Jerusalem and the fulfillment of the times of the Gentiles?
After all this, the Lord says, "And then shall they see the Son of Man coming in
a cloud, with power and great glory." This puts the coming of Christ after the
captivity of the Jewish nation among all nations, after the treading of
Jerusalem by the Gentiles, and after the fulfillment of the times of the
Gentiles, and puts it in the future to us, beyond all doubt. 4. 1Co 15:22, Paul
says: "As by Adam all die, so also by Christ shall all be made alive. But each
in his own order: Christ the first-fruits; afterward those who are Christ’s at
his coming." This "making alive" will be in the resurrection from the dead. The
language is very elliptical. Filling the ellipsis, it will read as follows: "As
by Adam all die, so also by Christ shall all be made alive. But each shall be
made alive in his own order: Christ the first-fruits shall be made alive;
afterward those who are Christ’s shall be made alive at his coming." When are
those who are Christ’s to be made alive? In the resurrection from the dead, at
his coming. This settles the question of his coming, showing that it is yet
future, and will be at the resurrection of the dead. In eighteen hundred and
forty-three, many had set the time for the coming of Christ to the very day, if
not the very hour. On the set day they were sitting about, gazing up into
heaven. Some poor deluded creatures had prepared themselves ascension
robes--white robes, in which to ascend and meet the Lord in the air, so carnal
and materialistic were their views. Many good and true men, however, maintained
that the time could be determined when the Lord would come, and were so
confident about it that they used to say, "If the Bible is true the Lord will
come" on the set day. Some went so far, that they declared that they would not
believe the Bible if the Lord did not come at the set time. Others, with much
pertinency, would reply: "If the Lord does not come on your set day, I shall not
conclude that the Bible is not true, but that your interpretation of the Bible
is not true." While there was no doubt about the Bible being true, there was
much doubt about their understanding the Bible. Men of intelligence had so much
confidence in the truth of the Bible, and so little confidence in their
interpretation of it concerning the time of the coming of the Lord, that their
failure by no means shook their faith. It was nothing but a mistake in men; a
failure in understanding the Bible, and no failure in the Bible itself. One
grand plea, made by the Adventists then, and also made by the much less
conscientious Adventists now, for determining the precise time of the coming of
the Lord, was, and now is, that men will repent if convinced that the Lord will
come at a certain set time. But there are several things to be considered about
this matter: 1. If you prove to be mistaken about the time, and the Lord should
not come at your appointed time after you have declared so confidently that he
will come at that time,if the Bible is true,who will then be led to repentance
by your plea? Will you not rather lead men to disbelieve the Bible? The process
of reasoning will then be short and easy. The preacher said, "If the Bible is
true, the Lord will come at the set time." The Lord did not come at the set
time, therefore the Bible is not true. If you fail, so far as the people had
confidence in you their faith will be shaken. 2. But you miss the Lord’s
argument. His argument is that we must bealways ready,because weknow not the
timewhen the Lord will come. Your argument is, that we should know the time, and
make known the time, that we and the people may repent and prepare for his
coming, because we and they know the time. You remind one of children, who want
to know the precise time when their parents will return home, that they may
straighten up and set themselves in order against the time when the parents will
get home. It is evident that the children would conduct themselves better if
they knew that the parents would return, but knew not when. In that case they
must be ready all the time, because they know not when their parents will
return. So the Lord intends us to be always ready, because we know not the time.
3. It was certainly no part of the Lord’s teaching, nor that of his apostles, to
set the time, or show the time the Lord had set, and it is equally certain that
the Lord declared that no man knows the time. The man of faith believes him who
has assured us that no man knows the time, and not those who claim to know the
time. The true exhortation of the Lord is, to be always ready, because you know
not when you, Lord shall appear. 4. It has been right to look for the coming of
the Lord, and stand in readiness for it, from the apostolic day to the present
time, because the time is not revealed--no man knows when he will appear. It
would not have been right to have looked for the coming of the Lord in the
apostles’ day, if they had known that he would not come till some time now
future. It is unequivocally certain that they looked for the coming of the Lord,
not because they knew when he would come, but because they did not know when he
would come. It is right to look for the coming of the Lord now, as it has been
right all the time since he ascended to heaven, simply because he has not
revealed the time, but exhorted us to be always ready. It was right to look for
and hasten to the coming of the day of the Lord in the time of the apostles; but
it was not right then, and is not right now, to say "the Lord delays his coming
and makes the delay an excuse to do evil. The Lord will certainly come, and will
not disappoint his true followers, not because they know when he will come, but
because they are always ready and looking for him. If he should come
immediately, they will not be disappointed, for they are always looking for him;
if he should not come immediately, they will not be disappointed, for they know
not when he will appear. They are prepared for his coming, or not coming, at any
time. If he should defer his coming till the fortunes of the future of the
Church would be vastly greater than all the fortunes of the past of the Church;
or if he should defer his coming till the number of all who have been redeemed
by his blood, in the whole history of the past, would not be as a drop to the
bucket compared with the innumerable company which shall yet be redeemed and
brought to God through our Lord Jesus Christ, they will not be disappointed.
They will still look for him, and continue to look for him till he comes. Their
faith and hope are not in the certain knowledge they have of the precise time
when he will come, but the certainty that he will come and take his ransomed
people home. This faith is in the certainty that he will come, and not in their
certain knowledge when he will come. Their hope is in the full assurance that he
will come, and the grand events that shall occur at his coming, and not in any
certain knowledge about the precise time when he will come. Let his saints
constantly live in the blessed hope that he will come; that they shall see him,
and be like him, for they shall see him as he is, and live in the Spirit that
John was in when he wrote the words "Come, Lord Jesus." But more special
attention must now be given to the destiny of this world. It has undergone
innumerable changes during the six thousand years since the Mosaic creation.
Among these changes there is the one grand change produced by the flood, the
most wonderful connected with the entire history of the human race. Concerning
this event, blind unbelief has blundered and stumbled. Some of the things that
infidels have said about the flood would be as miraculous as the Mosaic account
of the flood. A few infidel speculations must receive a brief notice here. 1.
One infidel theory advocated about one hundred years ago, was to the effect
that, by accurate scientific experiment, it had been determined how much water
was in the air, the earth, lakes, seas, and oceans, and that there was not
enough belonging to the globe, all combined, to make such a flood as that of
which Moses gives us an account. Hence the account given by Moses must be
discarded. Many infidels laughed over this, and maintained that the light of
science would soon sweep away the traditions and superstitions of the Bible. To
this, however, reply was made by men of science, sweeping away the infidel
theory by the developments of true science. But that you may see how much
confidence may be reposed in the infidel theories arrayed against the Bible,
turn to a modern theory, advocated and received by infidels of the present time.
They, as geologists and philosophers, undertake to solve the following
difficulty: In Western Pennsylvania, across Central Ohio, Indiana, Illinois,
Southern Missouri, and, perhaps, as far west as Kansas, round, hard, flinty
rocks are found, varying in size from a pebble to many tons’ weight. They
commence theorizing about these rocks. As geologists and philosophers, it would
not do to admit that they do not know all about them. They, therefore, decide,
in the first place, that these rocks are not natives of the countries referred
to where they are found. The next thing is to determine where they are from.
They decide that they are natives of the Arctic region. Then the tough question
comes up, how they were transferred to this country. Recollect, these are men
who have no credulity; who cannot believe the Mosaic account of a flood, nor the
Bible in general! They tell us that in the Arctic regions there are immense
ranges of mountains, extending many thousands of miles east and west, of
enormous height, almost perpendicular on the side facing the south; that during
their six months’ night the freezing is immense on these mountain sides, and
during their six months’ day it thaws, and thus, thawing and freezing for ages,
these rocks are thrown out and roll down the mountain sides and into the immense
ocean of ice below. Thus, they argue, they had been loading into this ocean of
ice for ages, and that there was then a vast inundation of water that hove up
this vast ocean of ice, with all those rocks on it, and that the shape of the
glacier is such that it floated across this valley, and, as the ice melted away,
deposited these rocks where they are found in this great valley. Thus it is seen
that the infidels, one hundred years ago, determined that there was not water
enough belonging to the globe to make a flood. Now they find water enough to
float an ocean of ice across a continent, freighted with rocks, depositing them
over an expanse of country extending a thousand miles in length! Which infidel
Bible shall we believe--the one a hundred years ago, that found no water
sufficient for a flood, or the one now finding water enough to float an ocean of
ice across a continent, freighted with rock? Some one is ready to say that the
land has been raised in the country where these rocks are deposited, and that it
did not take the same amount of water before it was raised to float an ocean of
ice over it that it would now since it has been raised. Then may it not be that
other parts of the earth have also been raised since the flood, and that it did
not require the same amount of water to extend over the earth before it was
raised than it would now? One thing is certain, and that is, that whether the
greatest elevations of the earth have raised or not, the waters of the ocean
have, at some period, been over them. As Hugh Miller would say, "The testimony
is in the rocks." The inhabitants of the ocean are found petrified in the rocks,
bearing testimony, to be read and known of all men, corroborating the Mosaic
history of the flood. 2. The same men who could not believe the history of the
flood one hundred years ago, maintained, also, that the prophetic Scriptures,
that speak of the world being destroyed by fire, could not be fulfilled. They
argued that the world could not be "burned up," as Peter says, for three-fourths
of its surface are covered with water, and the earth itself is not inflammable
or combustible matter, and could not burn--that such a thing is impossible. This
is the way their Bible--the book of nature--read to them a hundred years ago.
How does it read to them now? They are now telling us that, after passing a
comparatively thin crust over the surface of the earth, of some sixty miles in
thickness, there is nothing but one vast lake of fire in the interior of the
earth, equal, in the intensity of its heat, to the hottest metal that ever
flowed from a smelter’s furnace! The testimony they give of this is chiefly in
the fearful material that issues from volcanoes, the earthquakes, and the
diameter of the earth being greater at the equator than at the poles, which they
suppose to be occasioned by its centrifugal force. It is not necessary now to
stop to inquire whether this is all so. It is enough to know that this is the
way they are now reading the book of nature, or, at least, a large class of the
men who say they cannot believe the Bible. Taking it, then, that they are
correct, what shall be said of their brethren who lived one hundred years ago?
With their view of it, the wonder was how the world could be burned up; but,
with the view of the modern men to whom reference has been here made, the wonder
is how it is preserved and kept from burning up! If the entire mass of the
globe, saving what geologists call "the crust," is nothing but a vast ocean of
melted lava--a "lake of fire"--whirling over once in twenty-four hours, or
carrying us one thousand miles an hour on its surface as it revolves on its
axis, traveling at the same time with inconceivable velocity as it courses its
vast circuit of near six hundred millions of miles in its annual journey around
the sun, is not the wonder how the Almighty can preserve it and keep it from
destruction? The wonder with men of intelligence is, how it has been preserved,
in its mighty movements among the innumerable bodies, in vast, incomprehensible,
and illimitable space, for six thousand years. Yet it has been thus preserved,
managed, and kept in its regular motions for six thousand years without a single
collision or accident! Is this all chance? But the matter in hand is to look at
the possibility and probability of the world being burned up. Scientific men
have long since demonstrated that even water, which we use to extinguish fire,
may be placed under such conditions as to cause it to burn with a fury and
intensity surpassing all human imagination. The same is true, also, of the
atmosphere itself. As easy, then, as you move the regulator of your watch, he
who created the heavens and the earth, the sea and land, and all things, and
upholds them by the word of his power, can place the water under such
conditions, as well as the air, as would convert it into the most inflammable
material, and thus wrap this globe in flame--immerse it in fire. It is not
argued here that the world will certainly be destroyed in this way, but surely
this is a very possible way. But stop and look from another angle. See the smith
bring a heated iron in contact with one drop of water, sufficient to evaporate
it instantly, and the result is equal to the firing of a pistol. Suppose you
could bring a heated mass of any sort in contact with one pint of water,
sufficient to evaporate it instantly, what would be the result? A concussion
more terrible than the explosion of the greatest shell ever fired from a mortar!
Suppose, then, that power, such as lifts continents from the bed of the ocean,
and rears mountains five miles above the level of the ocean, should instantly
make an opening some three or four thousand miles in length under the depths of
the ocean, through the crust of the earth, thus instantly letting the great
waters into the boiling lava, what kind of a result might be expected? Certainly
not a mere earthquake, jarring the earth for thousands of miles, as is
occasioned by volcanic eruptions, but an explosion that would hurl atoms of the
earth thousands of miles out from the globe, when, by attraction or gravitation,
they would be drawn back to the center, forming a universal chaos. Please take
one more look. Man has not been able to penetrate but a short distance into the
earth, probably not three thousand feet. What has been found in the little space
so far penetrated? Most fearful material. Gas has been found, which has rushed
out of the small hole made in boring sufficient to charge the air for hundreds
of yards round, which has caught on fire, and, in a few instances, burned men to
death before they could escape. This is a mere index to what may be treasured up
deeper down. Who knows what engines of destruction the Lord may have still below
the limited space penetrated by man? There may be vast reservoirs of this
wonderful gas, sufficient to charge the entire atmosphere belonging to the globe
and supply the fuel, after one universal flame shall spread and extend as far as
the atmosphere itself, as long as the flood prevailed on the earth, thus
devouring every living creature on the face of the earth. Who knows what the
Almighty has locked up deep down, far below where man has never penetrated?
There may be vast oceans of this fearful gas lying far below even the bed of the
sea, and nothing but the fiat of the Infinite One is required to bring it to the
surface and spread universal flame all over the great waters and the dry lands.
Shall ignorant men, then, in the hardness of their hearts and their determined
perversity, dare to question the possibility of the destruction of the world by
fire? Even looking at it in view of what little man knows of its structure, and
the wonderful resources and engines the Lord has in it and on it, and
contemplating the natural causes and effects, the wonder, as has been before
stated, is not how it can be destroyed by fire, but how the Lord has kept it
from destruction and made it a safe habitation for man for six thousand years!
It is not maintained here that the Lord will destroy the world by means of this
gas, or by means of the vast lake of fire supposed to be within the bowels of
the earth; nor is it claimed that any man can tell, or even knows, what means
the Lord will employ, what engines or resources he will use in fulfilling the
word of prophecy; nor is such a reference, as has been here made, necessary for
any man that believes his Bible. It is only made for the sake of men who do not
believe the Bible, to show them that, aside from all revelation on the subject,
such an event as the Bible predicts is as probable as anything. Instead of its
being unreasonable or impossible for the world to be destroyed by fire, it is as
probable and reasonable as anything. But for the man who believes the Bible, or
that believes that God is the self-existent and unoriginated cause of all
things, or that he created all things, no such reasoning is necessary, for
certainly he who created all things, actually brought them into existence, can
immerse the world in water or flame at his pleasure. It will require a miracle,
and no man need inquire how a miracle is done, or can be done. How the Almighty
created man--brought into existence the human race--how he created heaven, and
earth, and all things--how he put in motion the immense bodies in the heavens
and governs them in their vast orbits, no man of intelligence will attempt to
explain. So no man of intelligence ought to think of explaining how the Almighty
produced the flood, or how he will produce the fire that shall destroy the
world. The man of faith doubts not because he sees not how it will be performed.
He has no doubt that God will raise the dead, though he sees not how it will be
done. If a man can be born, grow up, and become a full-grown man in twenty-one
years, under the power of God vested in the laws of nature, it will be no more
wonderful for the same power of God, put forth in another way, to instantly
raise a man from the dead. It is, then, good for us occasionally to think of the
vast resources in the hands of the Almighty Father of heaven and earth for
overflowing the world with water, immersing it in fire, or doing whatever he may
please to do with the world or man, to bring us to a realization of our
nothingness, our insignificance, and the feebleness of our reasonings, that we
may stand off and admire the stupendous proportions and immeasurable dimensions
of the "wonderful works of God." In view of all this, how men should sink in the
depths of humility before God and exclaim, with David, "Lord, what then is man,
that thou art mindful of him, or the son of man, that thou visitest him?" Come,
then, you men of faith, men of the Bible, men of God, and hear the destiny of
the world. What does the Bible say? Hear a few words from the Old Testament:
"Behold the day comes, that shall burn as an oven; and all the proud, yea, and
all that do wickedly, shall be stubble: and the day that comes shall burn them
up, saith the Lord of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch."
Mal 4:1. "To you who are troubled, rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be
revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, in flaming fire taking vengeance on
them that know not God, and obey not the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ; who
shall be punished with everlasting destruction from presence of the Lord, and
the glory of his power, when he shall come to be glorified in his saints, and to
be admired by all them that believe." 2Th 1:7-10. "The day of the Lord will come
as a thief in the night, in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great
noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the
works that are therein shall be burned up. Seeing, then, that all these things
shall be dissolved, what manner of persons you ought to be in all holy behavior
and godliness; looking for and hasting to the day of God, wherein the heavens,
being on fire, shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent
heat?" 2Pe 3:10-12. Let no unbelief come nigh thy dwelling, nor stagger at the
wonderful prophetic statements of these Scriptures, but tremble before the
Majesty of heaven and earth. Do you inquire for the power to accomplish all
this? Peter says, of our Lord Jesus the Christ, that he "has gone into heaven,
and is on the right hand of God; angels, authorities, and powers being made
subject to him." See 1Pe 3:22. The angels, authorities, and powers are subject
to our Lord. Paul says, 2Th 1:7, that "he shall be revealed with his mighty
angels." We read, Mat 25:31, that "the Son of Man shall come in his glory, and
all the holy angels with him." He will literally have at his command the "armies
in heaven." Look, then, for one moment, at the august messages executed these
wonderful beings, "greater in power and might" than man. One of them in a single
hour--the hour of midnight--struck down in death the first-born in every house
in all Egypt where the blood was not sprinkled on the door-posts. An angel
descended on the morning of the resurrection of Jesus, rolled back the stone
from the door of the sepulcher, and sat on it, while the Roman guard "fell on
the ground as dead men." Two angels visited Sodom, warned Lot to leave the
place, and spread down one vast sheet of fire, and swept away the cities of the
plains to rise no more forever. These samples are sufficient to indicate the
wonderful power of these swift messengers of Jehovah, when dispatched to execute
the terrible judgments of God. What, then, may we expect when the Lord shall
"come, with all the holy angels," to execute judgment on all them who obey not
the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ? But if this world is to be immersed in
fire--to "be burned up," where will the saints be during the general
conflagration? The Lord has not left them in the dark on this subject, but has
revealed a way of escape. "The Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a
shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trumpet of God: and the
dead in Christ shall rise first: then we, who are alive and remain, shall be
caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air; and so
shall we ever be with the Lord." 1Th 4:14-16. The expression "the dead in Christ
shall rise first" has, doubtless, in many instances, been taken wrong. It has
generally been taken to mean that "the dead in Christ shall rise first," or
before the wicked. But this is not the meaning of it. The two classes of which
he is speaking are not the righteous and wicked, but "the dead in Christ," or,
figuratively, "those who sleep in Jesus," and those who "are alive and remain at
the coming of the Lord." This latter class shall not anticipate or go before
those who have died in Christ, but those who sleep in Jesus shall rise first,
before the living saints shall be changed, and ascend to meet him in the air;
and, together, the two classes shall go up to meet the Lord, and forever be with
him. This, then, obviates all difficulty as to the safety of the saints when the
general destruction shall come. The Lord will take care of them--take them up to
be forever with him. What a scene must have been witnessed when the flood came,
and "the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished;" when "the
waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth, and all the high hills that were
under the whole heaven were covered," "and the mountains were covered," "and all
flesh died that moved upon the earth, both of fowl, and of cattle, and of beast,
and of every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth, and every man: all in
whose nostrils was the breath of life, of all that was on the dry land, died.
And every living substance was destroyed which was upon the face of the ground,
both man, and the cattle, and the creeping things, and the fowl of the heaven;
and they were destroyed from the earth; and Noah only remained alive, and they
that were with him in the ark!" The Lord--Mat 24:37-39 --describes them as
follows: "But as the days of Noah were, shall also the coming of the Son of Man
be. For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking,
marrying and giving in marriage, till the day that Noah entered into the ark,
and knew not till the flood came and took them all away: so shall also the
coming of the Son of Man be." When "all the fountains of the great deep were
broken up" and "the windows of heaven were opened," and the waters prevailed and
commenced overspreading the dry land; when dwellings and all kinds of property,
with man and beast, were being swept away, what awful terror was sent forth into
the hearts of wicked and rebellious men! The long-suffering of God had been
waiting. For one hundred and twenty years the solemn warnings of the preacher of
righteousness had been despised, his honest pleadings and exhortations
contemned, and he had been rejected. The wickedness of man was very great on the
earth. Unbelief, blindness, and hardness of heart prevailed to such an extent
that reformation was impossible. The goodness of God was despised, his
forbearance and long-suffering had been construed into evidence that his
judgments lingered. Some were seeking fame and renown; others were in the
general scramble for riches; some seeking revenge, and gratifying their hate on
their enemies; others in general debauchery and the depths of corruption. They
had long been filling up the cup of iniquity. It was now full. They had been
treasuring up wrath against the day of wrath. The day of vengeance had been long
coming, but no less sure. It had now come, and the threatened destruction came.
A race that had been multiplying for sixteen long centuries was swept away in
fury and wrath, excepting eight souls, on account of their rebellion against
God, and the account of it is entered on the sacred records as a warning to the
generations to come. The apostle says: "By the same word, the heavens and the
earth which are now kept in store, reserved to fire against the day of judgment
and perdition of ungodly men." For eighteen long centuries has the wrath of God
been kindling and treasuring up against the day of wrath, and the righteous
judgment of God against them who know not God and obey not the Gospel. His
transcendent forbearance, compassion, and mercy are now, by hardened men, being
construed to mean that he will never come; that judgment will never overtake the
disobedient, and the world will never be destroyed. Be not deceived, blinded,
nor deluded. The Lord is not slack concerning his promises or threatenings. The
day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, and retribution will be
awarded. How utterly wonderful, when the waywardness of the human race in all
the past generations is considered, that the forbearance and long-suffering of
God should have extended six thousand years; that the love of God to man, as
displayed through our Lord Jesus the Christ, should have been extended for
eighteen long centuries, while our God has been all the time extending his hands
in mercy and in infinite compassion, in gracious invitations to return and live.
Though the love of God has been despised, the agonies of the Savior in the
garden of Gethsemane have been contemned, the sufferings of Jesus on the cross
have been unheeded by millions on millions of our ungrateful and wayward race,
his streaming blood to cleanse us from sin has been set at naught for many long
centuries, the wonderful forbearance of God is still extended, and the nations
are still invited to the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world! In
infinite compassion, he still stands all the day long, in most lovely strains,
inviting the children of men to return. Who can appreciate, much less express
his appreciation of the mercy, the grace, and compassion of the Almighty Father,
in bearing with the waywardness, the transgressions, and the corruptions of the
children of men down through all the generations of the past, or the everlasting
debt of gratitude that we owe? But we are not to infer, from the long
forbearance of God, that the day of wrath will never come, or that the judgment
of God will never overtake the ungodly. The day of wrath overtook the ungodly in
the time of Noah. The flood came and swept them all away. The Egyptians, with
their hardened and blinded monarch, were hurled down, in terrible wrath and
fury, in the Red Sea. The Sodomites were destroyed from the face of the earth by
the devouring flames. One million and a half of Jews fell in the siege in
Jerusalem, and their blood ran ankle-deep in the streets of the devoted city.
Shall all these displays in the judgments of God go unheeded by the people of
our time, and shall they join in the stupid delusion that "all things continue
as they were from the beginning of the creation?" Shall their eyes be closed
against the calamities that have been brought on the ungodly in past ages, not
knowing that the most terrible judgment of all is approaching? Be warned and
entreated, then, to turn to the Lord before the day of vengeance shall
come--before the terrible announcement shall be made that "time shall be no
longer," but eternity, with all its solemnities and realities, shall be ushered
in. May we find mercy of the Lord in that day! "To Him that loved us, and washed
us from our sins in His own blood," be honor and power everlasting!


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 20: GP1 - 19-THE THREE STATES OF MAN � THE FLESHLY, THE INTERMEDIATE, AND THE ETERNAL
========================================================================

SERMON, No. XIX.

THEME.--THE THREE STATES OF MAN--THE FLESHLY, THE INTERMEDIATE, AND THE ETERNAL.

TEXT.--"What is man, that thou art mindful of him? or the son of man, that thou
visitest him?"--Heb 2:6.

THIS language is quoted by Paul from David, Psa 8:4. We have our grand questions
in agriculture, commerce, and politics; in arts, sciences, and improvements, all
having their comparative importance, interest, and consequences; but all these
questions sink into insignificance, emptiness, and nothingness in view of the
momentous question, "What is man?" David says: "When I consider thy heavens, the
work of thy fingers; the moon and the stars, which thou hast ordained; what is
man, that thou art mindful of him? or the son of man, that thou visitest him?"
This shows that he had just been viewing the heavens, considering the vastness,
stupendous proportions, and magnitude of the wonderful works of God that appear
in the heavens above us; and, in contrast with all that appeared to him, his
mind reverts to man, and he bursts forth in the inquiry, "What is man?" In view,
too, of all these wonderful works that he considered in the heavens, from the
hand of God, he is overwhelmed that God should stoop to be mindful of man, or
the son of man, to visit him! This is wonderful, beyond all human comprehension;
but that our heavenly Father should number even the hairs of the heads of his
saints, as the Lord assures us he does, is superlatively encouraging, consoling,
and comforting, and is sufficient to call out everlasting gratitude and
thanksgiving from the children of men. Is it so, that he who made all
things--who made and upholds the worlds by the word of his mighty power,
condescends to number even the hairs on the heads of his saints, and that not
even a sparrow falls to the ground without his notice? This is all true. Our
heavenly Father is, then, infinitely good, and man is of much more value than
many sparrows. This, then, opens the way to inquire into the question, "What is
man?" in three states: 1. What is man in the present or fleshly state? 2. What
is man in the intermediate state, or between death and the resurrection? 3. What
is man in the eternal or resurrection state? These are questions to be settled
by revelation. All science, philosophy, and reasoning, aside from revelation,
must forever fail to answer these great questions concerning man. Men of the
world--some of them scientific men--have talked much of the "light of nature"
and "the book of nature," but no "light of nature" nor "book of nature" can
answer any one of these questions. There is no light in nature even to reveal
God to man, or man to himself, much less to tell what man is in any one of the
three states in question. To proceed, then, at once to the matter in hand, let
it be distinctly understood what is in view, and what is to be accomplished in
the examination of the subject in hand. The system, plan, or scheme of
redemption is unique, there being a complete and perfect symmetry in all its
parts. The man who humanizes the Savior of the world, as some Unitarians and
Humanitarians do, lets down the whole system, in all its parts, to the same
level. In precisely the same way, the man who lowers down man to a mere animal,
a material being, a thinking lump of matter, lowers down the whole system in the
same proportion all round. It is a matter to be deeply regretted, that any human
being of ordinary intelligence should degrade himself, and try to degrade his
race so far as to maintain that man is composed wholly of matter; that when a
man dies, as one expresses it, "he dies all over;" or, as another expresses it,
"he is unmade;" or, as another has it, "he is decomposed," and no more exists as
a man than he did a thousand years before he was created. Still, we have the men
in our day who have thus degraded themselves, and are thus carnalizing the
gracious system which God has ordained for our salvation. These maintain that
man has no conscious existence between death and the resurrection; that after
the resurrection all, both good and bad, will appear in the final judgment, when
the wicked will be killed again, or decomposed, and have no conscious existence
forever. In other words, they maintain that the entire man is mortal, and assume
that, at death, his conscious existence terminates till raised from the dead;
and after the last judgment, the conscious existence of the wicked will be
terminated forever, and the righteous will be immortalized. Reference is here
made to this theory that all may see what becomes of it, when the light of
revelation is opened out on it. Without further preliminary, turn your attention
to the matters in hand. What is man in the present or fleshly state? Paul says,
"And may your spirit, and soul, and body be preserved whole without blame at the
coming of our Lord Jesus Christ." 1Th 5:23. This is the Bible Union reading. To
get the passage fully into view, read the verse from the beginning from the
common version: "And the very God of peace sanctify you fully; and I pray God
your whole spirit, and soul, and body be preserved blameless to the coming of
our Lord Jesus Christ." From this passage it is clear that the man wholly
consists of a "whole spirit, and soul, and body." It matters not whether we can
clearly and perfectly distinguish between the "whole spirit, and soul, and body"
or not, nor whether we can fully understand the union of a "whole spirit, and
soul, and body" in one person; nor whether we can understand all about what
pertains to the whole spirit, the whole soul, or the whole body, still there is
the fact that the Divine Spirit of all wisdom and all revelation recognized in
man a "whole spirit, and soul, and body," or recognized in man a triune being, a
trinity, a being consisting of a "whole spirit, and soul, and body." This
threefold or triune nature of man is never lost sight of in the entire
revelation from God to man. It is useless to stop and stumble ourselves because
we cannot understand all about this triune nature. We cannot understand all
about anything. We only understand in part; but the Lord understands, and when
he speaks of a "whole spirit, and soul, and body," he means something. There is
a clear intimation of the same kind in the Mosaic account of the creation: "And
the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his
nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul." Gen 2:7. The word
"man" here is used metonymically; the whole is evidently used for a part. It was
only the body that was "formed of the dust," a perfect corporeal human
structure, or a perfect human body; but it was lifeless, motionless, and
powerless. This is clear from what follows: "And breathed into his nostrils the
breath of life." The body was formed, but before the Lord breathed into it the
breath of life it did not breathe nor live. But after he breathed into it the
breath of life, it lived and breathed. He became, what he was not before, a
living soul, or a living being or person. But that we may see more fully what
man is, hear the Lord: "Be not afraid of them that kill the body, but are not
able to kill the soul; but rather fear him who is able to destroy both soul and
body in hell." Mat 10:28. Here the Lord, alluding to the persecutors, says they
"kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul." Here is not only a
distinction made between the soul and body, but two different things are
stated--one of the soul and the other of the body. 1. Man can kill the body. 2.
Man cannot kill the soul. The following is clear from this: 1. There is a clear
distinction between the soul and the body. 2. That the death of the body is not
the death of the whole man--is not the death of the soul. 3. That the soul does
not die when the body dies. 4. That man can kill the body. 5. That man cannot
kill the soul. There is no far-fetched reasoning here. As certainly as the Lord
spoke truth, man is "not able to kill the soul." Man is able to kill the body.
The body, then, dies, while the soul does not. The material man can be killed by
man, but the soul, or "inner man"--the immaterial man--cannot be killed by man.
The Sadducees did not believe in the existence of angels or spirits, and, to be
consistent, denied the resurrection of the dead. They believed they were
invincible in argument. They were ever ready for debate with their opposers, the
Pharisees. They learned that the Lord had indorsed the Pharisees, so far as the
question of the resurrection was concerned. The Sadducees regarded this as a
fine opening for them. They considered themselves invulnerable on this question.
Accordingly, they prepared to meet Jesus on their favorite point of discussion.
They studied out one of their greatest difficulties, and presented it to him.
Probably they had puzzled their former antagonists with it many times. They
selected the puzzling case of the woman who had married seven men in succession,
who had all died, and the woman also had died, and inquired which one of the
seven should have her in the resurrection. This was as difficult as any of the
subtleties produced by the caviling and captious from that time to the present.
But the Lord solved their difficult problem in a single sentence, as follows:
"In that world they neither marry nor are given in marriage." In that respect
"they are as the angels of God." So much for their puzzling question; but now he
proceeds to give them a further lesson: "Now that the dead are raised, even
Moses showed at the bush, when he calls the Lord the God of Abraham, and the God
of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. For he is not a God of the dead, but of the
living: for all live to him." Luk 20:37-38. Here we have an argument from our
Lord, showing that the dead shall be raised. What is the argument? It is as
follows: God is the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. He is not the God of the
dead, but of the living. How is he, then, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob,
seeing that they are dead? They are dead to us, but alive to him: for all live
to him. Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, though dead to us, live to God. This proves
the existence of human spirits, and that they live to God after death, which was
denied by the Sadducees; and which, if proved to him, settled the question of
the resurrection of the dead. The Lord affirms that the dead shall rise, and
maintains that Moses showed this in declaring that God is the God of Abraham,
and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob; which, as he is not the God of the
dead, proves that Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob live to him, for, says Jesus, "all
live to him;" and thus settles the question of human existence after death, or
spiritual existence after death, which proved the resurrection to the Sadducee.
This settles the main question in this discourse, as it shows that Abraham, and
Isaac, and Jacob, who had died to this world and all that is in it many ages
before, still lived to God--were still in conscious existence; thus showing that
there is a conscious existence between death and the resurrection--that during
this period persons live to God. Please turn to that grand and sublime event
called "the transfiguration." What did the transfiguration consist of? The Lord
appeared in divine majesty, as he would if we could see him now, glorified,
highly exalted, and crowned Lord of all, as he sits on the throne in heaven.
There were three representatives there, or eye-witnesses in the flesh or from
the fleshly state, viz., Peter, James; and John. There was one representative
there from the intermediate state, or the state between death and the
resurrection, viz., Moses. There was also one representative there from the
eternal state, or from the resurrection state, viz., Elijah. This was the most
august and sublime scene that ever appeared to mortal eyes. Peter, James, and
John were there as witnesses. The Almighty Father there showed their Lord and
King as he would appear to us if we could see him as he is now in heaven, thus
enabling them to say, "We were eyewitnesses of his majesty. For he received from
God the Father honor and glory, when such a voice came to him from the excellent
glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. And this voice we
heard from heaven, being with him in the holy mount." 2Pe 1:17. They saw the
glorified and highly exalted Lord, and heard the wonderful voice from the
excellent glory. But they saw another distinguished personage there. Moses was
there. Yes, Moses, the mediator of the First Testament was there; the man Moses,
after he had died, been absent from this world fifteen hundred years, and his
body had been mingled with the dust. Moses appears, is identified, and spoken of
by name. He is there, separate from the body, for Christ was the first-born from
the dead, of every creature, and he was not born from the dead then. What a
grand matter! A man who had disappeared from this world for fifteen centuries,
re-appears, is identified, his former life and character identified with him;
separate from the body, but in a conscious state, and holds a conversation with
our Lord in regard to his sufferings to be accomplished at Jerusalem! The
mediator of the Old Testament in a conversation with the Mediator of the New
Testament, as if coming to him to resign his authority as lawgiver, and hand all
over into the hands of the new Lawgiver. What a grand occasion! He represented
the intermediate state. But there was yet another distinguished personage there.
The ancient prophet Elijah was there, a representative of the eternal or
resurrection state. He did not suffer death. Many long centuries before,
standing on the east side of the Jordan, surrounded by the multitude, he entered
the chariot of God, and, as the hosts of Israel stood gazing after him, he
ascended to God. As he was wafted triumphantly toward heaven, he threw off-his
mantle, and it fell on Elisha. He was changed, glorified, immortalized, and
happified, and thus shown to Peter, James, and John, a specimen of redeemed,
immortalized, and happified humanity. They saw him, too, participating in the
conversation touching the Lord’s sufferings to be accomplished in Jerusalem. We
have, then, the testimony of these witnesses of Jesus, who saw his Divine
Majesty, to the conscious existence of Moses, between death and the
resurrection, and to the conscious existence of Elijah, in the eternal state.
They were both present and participated in the conversation with our Lord. The
next scripture to which your attention is directed, is the case of the rich man
and Lazarus, Luk 16:19-31. It may be said, "That is only a parable." How do you
know that it is a parable? "It says," exclaims a man, "in my Bible, at the head
of the chapter, ’The Parable of the rich man and Lazarus.’" That is the case
with many Bibles; but how came that heading there? All know, or ought to know,
that that heading, and, indeed, all the headings are modern, and utterly without
Divine authority. The purpose of them is merely for convenience, in finding
passages of Scripture. There is not only no authority for heading this passage
as it is, or at all, but the heading alluded to is manifestly erroneous. It is
no parable at all, but a statement of an actual case. This is evident from the
wording of it. It is introduced by stating, "There was a certain rich man." This
is too particular for a parable, or a supposed or hypothetical case. It points
to a particular person. It is not "There was a rich man," but "There was a
certain rich man." And then, on the other hand, it is not merely "There was a
beggar," but "a certain beggar," pointing to a particular person. Then the Lord
adds, "whose name was Lazarus;" thus giving the proper name of the "certain"
person of whom he is speaking. Some have argued that "Lazarus" means poor. True,
it has that meaning now, but it had not then. The probability is that that
meaning was derived from this very case. But any one can see that the word is
not used in that sense. It is not "There was a certain beggar, who was Lazarus,"
but "whose name was Lazarus," or, more abbreviated, "named Lazarus." The
statement of the case has every appearance of a real case, or an actual case,
which the Lord knew to exist. But, not to argue the case, and for the sake of
any one who may not be convinced that it is an actual case, but a supposed or
hypothetical case, let it be observed that this will not in the least militate
against the argument. The Lord did not suppose a case that would never occur. If
he supposed a case, it was all founded in reality. This is the case with all
types and shadows. They all have their foundation in reality. There never was a
shadow without a substance. There never was a counterfeit without a genuine. All
counterfeits are imitations of the genuine. There never would have been a
counterfeit dollar if there had not been a genuine dollar. Even the false is
evidence of the true. Every false god is an evidence of the true God. There
never could have been a false god if there had not been a true God. There never
could have been a false or counterfeit priest, if there had not been a true or
genuine priest. The false is an imitation of the genuine. The false professor of
religion is an imitation of the genuine, and proof of the existence of the
genuine. The false professor is an attempted imitation of the genuine, but not
the genuine, but an indisputable proof of the genuine. All the parables of our
Lord are founded in reality. He never would have said "I am the vine; you are
the branches," if there had not been a real vine and branches. He never would
have said "The kingdom of God is like a fish-net," if there had not been a real
fish-net. But in the case in hand, he does not say that one thing is like
another, or something is like "a certain rich man," but "There was a certain
rich man, who was clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every
day." This "certain rich man" "died, and in hades he lifted up his eyes, being
in torments." Supposed, or a real case, the conscious existence after death is
found in it. He is in "torments" after death. The beggar died, and was borne
away by the angels to Abraham’s bosom, and is comforted. Here, again, we have
conscious existence after death. The rich man, after death, is in "torments,"
and Lazarus is "comforted." They are both in conscious existence. Their identity
is retained. The rich man sees Lazarus and recognizes him. They are not in the
same place. Lazarus is in Abraham’s bosom; the rich man is in another place,
"far off;" a "great gulf between them," so that they "cannot pass" from one
place to the other. The rich man is in "torments," and Lazarus is "comforted."
This is a wide difference and a wonderful change in situations from that which
existed before death. Much darkness exists touching the conditions and states
after death, on account of the obscurity in the translation in common use. The
three Greek words, gehenna, hades, and tartarus are represented by the one
English word hell. These three Greek words evidently do not mean the same thing.
In the sense of the Greeks, hades means the invisible, or, as the Bible Union
renders it, "under-world." It includes all the dead between death and the
resurrection. Paradise, or Abraham’s bosom, does not mean the same as hades. It
is included in hades, but only contains the righteous between death and the
resurrection. In the same way, tartarus does not mean the same as hades. It is
included in hades, but only contains the wicked between death and the
resurrection. The rich man, though in hades, was not in tartarus; and Lazarus,
though also in hades, was in Abraham’s bosom, or, literally, in paradise, and
there was a great gulf between them. But neither of them was in gehenna. Gehenna
is beyond the resurrection, the lake of fire prepared for the devil and his
angels. The wicked, after the eternal judgment, will be cast into the gehenna of
fire prepared for the devil and his angels, "where the worm dies not, and the
fire is not quenched." This is the final doom of the wicked. When the saints
die, they go to paradise, and enjoy a state of rest or comfort till the
resurrection. When the wicked die, they go to tartarus, to a "place of torment,"
where they remain till the resurrection. After the final judgment, the wicked go
into gehenna, and the righteous into heaven, to remain forever. This will be
discussed more fully further on. One other matter of importance appears here,
and that is, that the rich man desired that Lazarus should be sent to his five
brothers, "to testify to them that they come not also into this place of
torment." See Luk 16:28. Men are now maintaining that spirits are coming back
from the dead and converting people. The great apostle of infidelity, it is
claimed, was convinced of the existence of God by visitations from departed
spirits, after all the testimony of the apostles and prophets had failed to
convince him. Here, then, is a case in hand. The rich man applies, finding
himself, after death, in a "place of torment," and intercedes for one from the
dead, to be sent to testify to his five brothers, that they come not also to
this "place of torment." Is one sent from the dead to convince them who would
not believe Moses and the prophets? Certainly not. This would be to admit that
the testimony of Moses and the prophets was insufficient. "Abraham says to him:
They have Moses and the prophets: let them hear them." The rich man presses the
case: "Nay, father Abraham; if one shall go to them from the dead, they will
repent." Abraham replies: "If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will
they be persuaded though one should rise from the dead." Here, then, is the
clear proof that God does not permit the dead to return to convince the living.
Here, also, is the clear statement, that if they would not hear Moses and the
prophets, they would not be persuaded if one would rise from the dead. This
ought to be an everlasting quietus, and is with those who believe the Bible,
touching departed spirits returning and converting their surviving friends. The
very idea of our returning from the dead and converting persons who could not be
converted by all the divine testimonies of Moses and the prophets, Jesus and the
apostles, is supremely ridiculous. It is taking the position that departed human
spirits could achieve more in turning sinners to God and saving them, than Moses
and the prophets, and Jesus and the apostles. This is clothed with an
affrontery, an arrogance, and absurdity almost unequaled. A few "table-tippers,"
"spirit-rappers," "spirit-mediums," or, in other words, persons possessed by
unclean spirits, assuming to convince people who could not be convinced by
either the mediator of the first, or the Mediator of the second covenant, Moses
or Jesus, the prophets or apostles, is certainly the climax of absurdity! Then
the convinced people, under this new system of mediation, spirit-mediation,
human spirit-meditation, who could not be convinced by the divine mediation of
him who was with God, and who was God; in whom dwells all the fullness of the
Deity bodily, what a set of convinced people they are! What do they believe, now
that they are convinced? They believe nothing, and are nothing but wandering
stars, raging waves of the sea, clouds without rain, unstable souls--mere
subjects of duplicity. They have not a redeeming quality, not an element to
commend them or their teaching to a soul of our race. They have despised,
rejected, and turned away from the Mediator of the New Testament, and are now
seeking the mediation of human spirits of the dead! How transcendently
ridiculous and absurd! This is only equaled by king Saul, turning away from the
commandment of God, and seeking light from "the woman of Endor." Paul says: "For
we know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a
building of God, a house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens." Who is
this "we" that has our earthly house of the tabernacle"--or of the body, which
is the meaning of it--and who has "a building of God, a house not made with
hands, eternal in the heavens?" See 2Co 5:1. Is not this the being, the
personality? "For," says the apostle, "in this we groan, longing to be clothed
upon with our house which is from heaven: seeing that we should be found
clothed, not naked." The person or the "we" in the tabernacle, is not the
tabernacle or the body, but the tenant in the body. He proceeds: "Now he who has
wrought us for this very thing is God, who also gave to us the earnest of the
Spirit. Being, therefore, always confident, and knowing that while at home in
the body we are absent from the Lord, (for we walk by faith, not by sight,) we
are confident, and are well pleased rather to leave our home in the body, and to
be at home with the Lord." "We," the person, the being, may be "at home in the
body," or "may leave our home in the body, and be at home with the Lord;" or, as
it is in the common version, present with the Lord. When we die, we leave home
in the body; are absent from the body, and at home, or present with the Lord.
Shall we hear the apostle again? "I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years
ago, (whether in the body, I know not; or whether out of the body, I know not:
God knows,) such a one caught up even to the third heaven. And I knew such a
man, (whether in the body or without the body, I know not: God knows,) that he
was caught up into paradise, and heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful
for a man to utter." 2Co 12:2-4. The apostle here states what he knew as a
matter of fact, and what he did not know. What did he know? 1. He knew a man in
Christ. 2. That such an one, above fourteen years ago (when Paul wrote), was
caught up to the third heaven--to paradise. 3. That he heard unspeakable things,
not lawful to utter. These things he knew. What, then, did he not know? He did
not know whether the man was caught away to paradise in the body or out of the
body. Two things are clearly involved here: 1. That the man of whom Paul speaks
was not the body, but dwelt in the body. 2. That the man could have been caught
away to paradise in the body. 3. That the man could have been caught away to
paradise out of the body. Then it follows, also, that a man can see, hear, and
remember out of, or separate from, the body; or that a man may be separate from
the body and be conscious; or that a man may be cognizant of things transpiring
around him, separate from the body. This perfectly accords with another saying
of the apostle, found 2Co 4:16 : "For which cause we faint not; but though our
outward man perishes, yet the inward man is renewed day by day." The "outward
man" is the body. Though it perishes, the "inward man," who dwells in the body,
is renewed day by day. While the body is becoming enfeebled, weaker, and
decaying, the "inner man," the spiritual man, is continually being renewed,
invigorated, and sustained; and when the body dies, the "inner man" absents
himself from the body, leaves the home in the body, and is present, or at home
with the Lord. This shows that life and death does not mean merely existence and
non-existence, and that eternal life and the second death does not mean merely
eternal existence and eternal non-existence, but that life and death have
reference to two states of existence; so eternal life and the second death have
reference to two states of existence--the one a state of existence in happiness,
and the other a state of existence in punishment. This is clearly taught in
other scriptures. For instance: "These shall go away into everlasting
punishment, but the righteous into life eternal." Here is "eternal life" in
contrast with "everlasting punishment." The original Greek word aionion,
translated "eternal" on the one hand, is translated "everlasting" on the other.
At the same time the righteous enter into eternal life, the wicked enter into
everlasting punishment. Entering into "eternal life" here cannot be entering
into eternal existence, for they were already in existence; and if that
existence was to be continued eternally, still they were already in it, and
could not enter into that which they were already in. Nor could it mean entering
into eternal conscious existence; for they were already in conscious existence,
and could not enter into that which they were already in. If they were already
in conscious existence, and it was to be eternal, they could not enter into it.
To make "eternal life" there mean eternal existence, or eternal conscious
existence, is to do away with all idea of their entering into it; for they were
already in existence, and conscious existence; and if that existence is eternal,
they were already in eternal existence. Then there is no such thing as "going
away into everlasting non-existence." This would be utterly senseless. As we can
think of and understand the commencement of existence, so can we understand the
termination of existence; or, as we can understand bringing into existence, we
can understand going out of existence; or, as we can understand the Lord giving
existence, we can understand the taking existence. The Lord said to the thief on
the cross: "To-day, I say to you, shall you be with me in paradise." Paradise
never means the grave. Nor does it ever mean the state of the dead in general,
of all classes, but is limited exclusively to the saved. While it was true that
both our Lord and the thief were to die that day, it was not true that they were
going out of conscious existence, or that the entire beings were going into
their graves, but they were that day to be in paradise. King David, the Psalmist
of Israel, when his child died, said, "He cannot come to me: I shall go to him."
John says: "I saw under the altar the souls of them who were beheaded for the
word of God, and for the testimony of Jesus; and they cried and said, How long,
O Lord God Almighty, holy, just, and true, cost thou not avenge us of our blood
on them that dwell on the earth?" What did he see under the altar? Not the
bodies, but the souls of them who were beheaded for the word of God, and for the
testimony of Jesus. These were souls after death. Do you say this was only a
figurative representation shown to John in vision? A figurative representation
of what? Of something that had no existence? A figurative representation of
souls, visible, under the altar; conscious, and crying to heaven for vengeance
after death, when souls are to have no conscious existence after death? Would
God represent something figuratively that had no existence? No; such a thing is
absurd. It was in vision, representing not things that had no existence, but
grand and sublime realities that had existence. No matter, so far as the
argument is concerned, whether John literally saw the souls of them that were
beheaded, or the Lord represented them to him in vision. If he literally saw
souls under the altar, and heard them crying, and understood what they cried
after death, it settles the question of conscious existence between death and
the resurrection, or the conscious existence of the souls of men, separate from
the bodies, after death. From this there is no escape. If the Lord represented
this to John in vision, it settles the same thing, unless he represented
something that had no existence. To say this is infidelity. The Lord represented
realities, things that existed, and not myths, having no existence. Souls have
conscious existence separate from their bodies; and are waiting for the
adoption, to wit, the redemption of their bodies, or the resurrection of their
bodies from the dead. The stupendous works of the Almighty Father of heaven and
earth in creation were grand. So are his works wonderful, grand, and sublime in
providence. But what shall be said, and what shall be thought, of his stupendous
work in the ransom of the bodies of the children of men from the grave? What
shall we say or think, or what can we say of the grand transaction, when God, by
the Spirit of Christ that dwells in the saints, shall quicken their mortal
bodies, or make their mortal bodies alive and raise them up from the dead; when
the sea shall yield up the dead bodies that are in it; when the graves of all
the earth shall give up the dead bodies; when death itself shall be despoiled of
its power, and yield up all the dead so long held down under its awful grasp,
and hades shall release and deliver up all its subjects; when we shall see them
coming from the four quarters of the earth, and assembling in the eternal
judgment; when the books shall be opened, and another book shall be opened,
which is the book of life; and the dead shall be judged out of the things
written in the books, according to their works? This will be the last meeting,
and after it will follow the last separation. After the final judgment, the
separation shall take place: "He shall divide them one from another, as a
shepherd divides his sheep from the goats," as the Lord describes--Mat 25:32
--setting the one class on his right hand, and the other on his left. Those
whose names shall not be found in the book of life shall be cast into the lake
of fire, as described Rev 20:14; "into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil
and his angels," as described by the Lord himself, Mat 25:41; into the gehenna,
where the fire shall never be quenched, and the worm shall never die. This is
the second death. This is the last account of those who obey not the Gospel of
our Lord Jesus Christ; of those who cannot be won to Christ by all his love, his
compassion, his merciful entreaties; by all his agonies in the garden, his
wonderful sufferings on the cross, his streaming blood; by his holy life, his
prayers and tears; by the holy efforts of all the saints, their prayers and
tears; by the reasonings, persuasions, and warnings of their dying friends. This
is the last account, the last trace of those whom we cannot bring to God. We
have wept over them, prayed over them, and grieved over them. We have exhausted
our last resources, made our last efforts, and have been compelled to yield the
point. The last and best appeal of heaven has been made and failed. They have
turned away from it all, and dashed the cup of salvation from their lips, and
rejected the Savior of the world. On their part all is lost. They are ruined
forever. They are turned away from God, who loved them; from the Savior, who
died for them; from the angels, who waited to have ministered to them had they
come to God; from the saints, who prayed, wept over them, and tried to save
them; from all that is good, and pure, and holy, and are cast off forever. The
saints give them up, like they do their friends in death, because they can do no
more for them. They would not go with the children of God. They would not be
reconciled to God. They determined to have their own way. They chose the wicked
for their associates while in this world, and now are compelled to have them,
with the devil and his angels, for their associates forever. They are abandoned
forever. No saint in the whole kingdom desires to follow them any further, but
all lament that they could not save them. Turning to a more pleasing theme, what
account have we of the saints after the resurrection? Their Lord and Redeemer
shall say to them, "Come, blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for
you from the foundation of the world." "Well done, good and faithful; enter into
the joys of our Lord." Then will they be seen coming, in the immortal splendors
of the New Jerusalem, with crowns on their heads, palms of victory in their
hands, and songs of everlasting joys on their lips, in the grand procession,
which no man could number. Who can comprehend the stupendous procession when the
mighty hosts of Israel of old, the most formidable column of humanity ever seen
on the face of the earth, with Moses, the mediator of the first covenant, at
their head, moved forward in crossing the Red Sea, out of Egyptian bondage, and
the strains of praises that rose to heaven in view of a nation’s freedom from
most oppressive bondage? No one can comprehend this. What, then, must be our
best effort to comprehend the imposing, stupendous, and sublime scenes, when the
great assembly which John saw, which no man could number, from every nation,
kindred, tribe, tongue, and people, in one grand and imposing column shall move
forward to the gate of the everlasting city, and the doors shall fly wide, and
the everlasting gates shall be lifted up, and the King of glory shall again come
in and he welcomed by all the mighty hierarchs of the upper world? What must our
best efforts be to comprehend, much less describe, the mighty procession, as it
shall move forward, with the Mediator of the new covenant and their Redeemer in
front, and exclaiming, "Father, here am I, and here are the children thou hast
given me!" and when they shall chime in and unite in the grand song of
"Blessing, and glory, and honor, and power, and dominion, to the Lord our God?"
Then shall what was shown to John in vision appear in reality. He says: "And I
heard as it were the voice of a great multitude, and as the sound of many
waters, and as the sound of mighty thunders, saying: Alleluia; because the Lord
God the Almighty reigns. Let us rejoice and exalt, and we will give to him the
glory; because the marriage of the Lamb is come, and his wife made herself
ready. And it was given to her that she should be clothed in fine linen, pure
and shining; for the fine linen is the righteousness of the saints." "Behold,
the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall
be his people, and GOD WITH THEM himself shall be their God. And he shall wipe
away all tears from their eyes; and death shall be no more, nor shall mourning,
nor crying, nor pain, be any more: because the former things are passed away.
And he who sat on the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And he says,
Write; because these words are faithful and true." What a gloom was cast over
the earth when man sinned. The world was condemned, and the sentence of death
passed upon all! For six thousand years the executioner has been doing his work,
inflicting the death penalty. No way of escape has been found. The inflexible
law has gone forth: You shall surely die. There is no alternative. This penalty
cannot be revoked. But the Lord has come, and followed the condemned to the
execution, and beyond it: "I will ransom them from the grave." After the penalty
has been inflicted, I will raise man from the dead, and those whose names are
enrolled in the book of life shall be robed in white, and walk with me in the
streets of the New Jerusalem for they are worthy. What a grand triumph, when
they shall shout, "O, death, where now is thy sting? O, hades, where now is thy
victory?" They can then look back to death and shout the victory: We are free
from your darts and missiles forever! and look back to hades and exclaim, We are
free from your prison-house forever! Our great Deliverer has cleansed our souls
from sin, in his own blood, and, by his omnipotent power, raised us from the
dead and freed us from the fetters of the grave forever. He has lifted us up and
seated us at his own right hand in the holy city, and has given us riches, and
glories, and honors, transcending all human description. He has permitted us to
join the grand throng who shall walk the golden streets, and unite in the
celestial songs forever and ever. We shall never sin any more, and never have to
hang our heads in shame, confess and beg for pardon. But with the angels of God,
the pure and the holy, the just and the true; in the presence of our Father and
our God, with our most gracious Lord, who has redeemed us, dwell forever and
ever. The Lord Jesus, the stone rejected by the Jewish builders, but the chief,
or arch, in the foundation which God laid; the head over all things to the
Church; in whom all fullness dwells, who has been the grand center of attraction
of our afflictions; the chief among all the ten thousands and altogether lovely,
will then dwell in our midst, honored and admired by all the upper world. Those
who loved him here will love him there, and be like him; for they shall see him
as he is. They shall need no light of the sun, nor any artificial light; for the
Lord God and the Lamb shall be the light of the holy city. In ineffable bliss,
inexpressible happiness, and joys that shall never end, they shall bask forever
and ever. No want, no anxiety and solicitude; nor fear, nor gloom, nor dreary
forebodings; no more heart-aching, heart-burning, nor heart-bleeding; no more
doubts, uncertainties, and want of confidence; no more deceptions, delusions,
and impositions; no more coldness, lukewarmness, nor backsliding, forever. The
saints have reached their home, their everlasting rest, and all is well with
them forever. They are beyond the reach of trial, of temptation, and danger, on
"the other side of Jordan," in the eternal Canaan, the "rest remaining for the
people of God." The broken hearts are all healed, the wounded spirits all bound
up, and their griefs all gone. All their tears are wiped away forever. There
shall be no more crying nor sorrowing, no more pain nor suffering forever. To
the name of our God and our Lord Jesus the Christ, be honor and power
everlasting.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 21: GP1 - 20-THE PUNISHMENT AFTER DEATH OF THOSE WHO DIE IN THEIR SINS
========================================================================

SERMON, No. XX.

THEME.--THE PUNISHMENT AFTER DEATH OF THOSE WHO DIE IN THEIR SINS.

TEXT.--"The Lord knows how to deliver the godly out of temptations, and to
reserve the unjust to the day of judgment, to be punished."--2Pe 2:9.

THE theme selected for this discourse is one of transcendent importance to every
accountable human being. All who have any respect for the Bible speak and think
of it as containing the law of God. The idea of law without a penalty is nothing
short of the most idle fiction. All law contains penalty. Indeed, the very idea
of law implies penalty. The law of God, the highest, the grandest, and most
sublime law known to mortal man, has not only a penalty, but the most terrible,
fearful, and awful penalty ever described by human tongue as its divine
sanction. Its salvation, therefore, means something. Its pardon, justification,
and deliverance of the soul from sin means something. It is not the empty
vaporings of a Universalist about salvation, who denies that any man is saved
from sin in this life, and maintains that all men, not excepting such a man as
Paul the apostle, are sinners as long as they live in this world; who also
denies that there will be any sin, lake of fire, hell, second death, or
punishment of any kind in the world to come, from which any human being can be
saved. Such a man knows not the meaning of the word salvation, and certainly
attaches no idea to it, except one the most vague and unintelligible. The
penalty of the Bible means something. Our glorious Lord did not ask "How can you
escape the condemnation of hell?" nor speak of "eternal condemnation" and
"everlasting punishment;" of men being "cast into hell, where the fire shall
never be quenched, and where the worm dies not;" or of "the false prophets"
being "tormented day and night forever and ever," to scare people, but to warn
them. "Knowing the terrors of the Lord, we persuade men," says Paul. "It is a
fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God." The Lord speaks of a
man for whom it would have been better not to have been born. None have ventured
to deny right out that the law of God, as recorded in the Bible, has any
penalty. None, till in very modern times, have had the temerity to deny that
those who die in their sins will be punished after death. In history there is
mention of a class of men, in comparatively ancient times, who were
restorationists. These held that there would be a punishment after death, but
maintained that it would terminate, and all its subjects would finally be saved.
But, among other queer and novel things in our own time, a class of religious
adventurers have made their appearance, who entertain the envious, credulous,
and gullible with harangues, both extemporaneous and written, exhibiting their
adroitness, shrewdness, and sharpness in explaining all the scriptures that
speak of the devil or Satan in some way so as to avoid the idea of any literal
or personal devil, or real being, or anything more than the personification of
evil or the evil principle; as also so explaining all those scriptures that
speak of, or in any way imply a judgment or punishment after death, so as to
accord with, or, at least, not refute their theory of ineffable bliss for all
beyond this life. The demoralizing tendency of such teaching and theorizing has
been immense, all going to strengthen unbelievers in their unbelief and harden
their hearts. As the prophet expresses it: "With lies you have made the heart of
the righteous sad, whom I have not made sad; and strengthened the hands of the
wicked, that he should not return from his wicked way, by promising him life."
Eze 13:22. Without detaining you, please turn at once to the consideration of
the following points: 1. An adequate punishment is not inflicted in this life.
2. There will be a judgment and punishment after death. 3. It is reasonable and
just that the punishment after death should be of great duration. 4. The
Scriptures clearly teach that the punishment after death will be unlimited in
its duration. Then, without delay or further preliminary, at once please give
attention to the first point to be considered: 1.An adequate punishment is not
inflicted in this life. That men receive not a full and adequate punishment for
their sins in this world, is clear from Scripture. This is more than intimated
in the text: "The Lord knows how to deliver the godly out of temptations, and to
reserve the unjust to the day of judgment to be punished." In this scripture the
teaching is, that the unjust are "reserved to the day of judgment to be
punished," and not that they are judged or punished as they go along in this
life. This one scripture ought to settle the matter with men who tremble at the
word of God. But hear the scripture again: "The heavens and the earth, which are
now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved to fire against the day of
judgment and perdition of ungodly men." 2Pe 3:7. Here, too, instead of fitting
out punishment to men as they pass along through this life, the very heavens and
earth, which are now, are kept in store, reserved to fire against the day of
judgment and perdition of ungodly men. This, beyond dispute, points forward to
the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men, and does not refer to it as
something now going on. Paul says, "He who despised the law of Moses died
without mercy, on the testimony of two or three witnesses;" and follows this
statement with the following question: "Of how much sorer punishment, do you
suppose, he shall be considered deserving, who has trodden under foot the Son of
God, and has accounted the blood of the covenant, with which he was sanctified,
an unholy thing, and has done despite to the Spirit of grace?" Heb 10:29. Here,
beyond all doubt, "a sorer punishment than death without mercy," or a severer
punishment, is threatened, which cannot be inflicted in this life. Death without
mercy is the severest punishment possible in this life; and yet the apostle, by
implication, brings to view a severer punishment than death without mercy, which
must be the punishment to which wicked men are reserved. Again, hear an apostle:
"Because the time is come that Judgment must begin at the house of God: and if
it first begin at us, what shall be the end of them that obey not the Gospel of
God?" 1Pe 4:17. The question here is not what shall be the punishment, as they
pass along through this life, of them who obey not the Gospel of God, but "what
shall be the end?" The punishment that the apostle looked to is not inflicted as
men pass along through this life, but in winding up; it is their end, last or
final state. Paul, Heb 6:8, does not speak of those whose lot is to be burned as
they pass along through this world; but, speaking of the final condition of the
wicked, he says, "Whose end is to be burned." That "end" is not the life of
wicked men, or something occurring as they pass along in life, but something
beyond life, the last state--the end. You cannot find a heaven for a man beyond
his last state or end. Many other scriptures could be referred to, showing,
beyond all doubt, that a full and complete punishment is not inflicted in this
world. But some men can regard what they see and hear, who will not regard the
Bible. What may be observed in this world, with people who think and reason for
themselves, ought to convince any man that a full and complete retribution is
not awarded in this life, either to the good or bad. On the one hand, some of
the purest and best of mankind suffer in mind and body in this life, almost
without mitigation. Their last days are filled up with troubles of mind, by the
transgressions of those allied to them by the ties of the flesh. They languish
for long months, and in some instances for years, in beds of affliction. In this
life, there appears to them to be but little else than bitterness, sorrow, and
suffering. On the other hand, there are those who never know want, sickness, or
suffering; whose relations bring no scandal on them, or cause them any grief,
but who are not simply ungodly, but blasphemers, drunkards, and lecherous
persons till the last; who give others trouble indescribable, but never have any
trouble themselves, and, at last, go out of this world without an hour’s
suffering. No one need talk of what such men suffer in their conscience. They
know not the meaning of the word conscience. Now, it is simply a matter of fact,
that in these two cases the award is not made in this life. To say that it is,
is to say that the reward of the righteous is so insignificant that persons
receive it, as they pass along through this life, without knowing that they had
received it at all, or knowing what it was; and that the punishment of the
wicked, or the hell threatened in the Bible, is so light, so exceedingly mild,
that thousands are actually passing through it, suffering its torments, without
knowing it at all! Is it the case that men may have all the rewards promised the
righteous in the Bible on the one hand, and suffer all the torments threatened
in the Bible on the other hand, and never know it? If the heaven of the
righteous is in this world, and the righteous enjoy it in this life; and if the
hell of the wicked is in this life, and they suffer its torments in this world,
then heaven and its happiness, as well as hell and its torments, are of much
less consequence than men have generally supposed. But this is not true, or the
apostle could not have said, "If in this life only we have hope, we are of all
men most miserable." Then the Lord could not have said, "Whoever denies me
before men, him will I also deny before my Father and the angels;" nor could any
one conceive how we could "lay up treasure in heaven," or "lay up a good
foundation against the time to come, in order to lay hold of eternal life."
Nothing can be more clear than that the first Christians did not receive their
reward in this world, and that they did not think they received it. All the
martyrs looked for a reward beyond this life, and refused to deny the Lord,
because they feared they would lose the eternal reward. But now your attention
will be called to a second proposition: 2.There will be a judgment and
punishment after death. An account of the case of the rich man and Lazarus is
recorded Luk 16:19-31. In verse 22 we are informed that "The rich man died, and
was buried; and in hell he lifted up his eyes, being in torment." This is the
Lord’s own statement. The rich man himself testified, as reported by the Lord,
saying, "I am tormented in this flame." Abraham testified, as the Savior reports
him, saying, "Thou art tormented." The only use here made of this case is to
show clearly that a man was in torment after death. This the case does show as
clearly as language can express anything. In connection with this case, see Luk
12:4-5 : "Be not afraid of those who kill the body, and after that have no more
that they can do; but I will forewarn you whom you shall fear: fear him who,
after he has killed, has power to cast into hell; yea, I say to you, fear him."
Here the Lord is admonishing his disciples to fear God, because he not only can
kill, but, after that, cast into hell. This could not be true if there were no
hell beyond this life, or beyond death; but "after that"--after the death of the
body--the Lord speaks of casting into hell. This Hinnom, or Gehenna, is after
death, and the soul may be cast into it as well as the body. It is useless to
speak of the ancient Valley of Hinnom, as its fires had been done away more than
four hundred years before the Lord uttered this language, and then souls after
death never were cast into it. But in the text, with which this discourse
commences, the apostle says, "The Lord knows how to deliver the godly out of
temptations, and to reserve the unjust to the day of judgment to be punished."
In the same letter, chapter iii, verse 7, the apostle says: "The heavens and the
earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved to fire
against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men." These passages are
both in the same spirit, setting forth the fact that the world is reserved to
the day of judgment. In connection with this, please hear Paul giving charge to
a young preacher: "I charge you, therefore, before God and the Lord Jesus
Christ, who shall judge the living and the dead at his appearing and kingdom."
2Ti 4:1. Here is a reference to the judgment of the dead at the appearing and
kingdom of Christ. This connects the coming of Christ and judgment together; and
shows, by the reference to the judgment of the dead as well as the living, that
the judgment will be after death. The apostle Peter--Acts 10:42 --teaches the
same in the following words: "And he commanded us to preach to the people, and
to testify that it is he who was ordained of God the Judge of the living and the
dead." Here again is a reference to the judgment of the dead. There must be
explicit light afforded on this point to show that the dead will be judged, as
some are slow to learn. This same apostle Peter, speaking of a certain class of
the dead, viz., the antediluvians, tells us the divine purpose in preaching the
Gospel to them in the days of Noah, in the following words: "That they might be
judged according to men in the flesh, but live according to God in the spirit."
1Pe 4:6. In the verse preceding this, speaking of other vile characters, "who
shall give account to him who is ready to judge the living and the dead," the
dead are included, showing that the Lord will judge the dead. If the foregoing
is not sufficient to satisfy any candid man that the Lord will judge the dead,
look at the following: "But I say to you, it shall be more tolerable for Tyre
and Sidon, in the day of judgment, than for you." Mat 11:22. Hear the Lord
again: "For I say to you, that it shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom,
in the day of judgment, than for you." Sodom had been buried in ruins ages
before the Lord uttered this language, and the cities of Tyre and Sidon had been
destroyed from the face of the earth many long centuries before the Lord uttered
these words; yet he declared that they should appear in the judgment of which he
was speaking, and that it should be more tolerable for their inhabitants than
for the Jews, to whom he spoke. No man ever made even a plausible show of
argument on the question under review, who denies that these passages clearly
show that there will be a judgment after death. But, if you please, attend to
our Lord’s teaching still further. He says: "The men of Nineveh shall rise in
judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: because they repented at
the preaching of Jonas; and behold, a greater than Jonas is here. The Queen of
the South shall rise up in the judgment with this generation, and shall condemn
it: for she came from the uttermost parts of the earth to hear the wisdom of
Solomon; and behold, a greater than Solomon is here." Mat 12:41-42. From the
Scriptures now quoted, it is clear that the antediluvians, those of Tyre and
Sidon, the Sodomites, the Ninevites, and the Queen of Sheba, all dead and gone
ages before the Lord uttered the words quoted, are all to appear in the judgment
of which he spoke. But this is not all; there are more than all these to be
there. Look at the following: "For God spared not the angels that sinned, but
cast them down to hell; and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be
reserved to judgment." Here is the clear teaching that the angels are reserved
to judgment. They will, then, be in the judgment. Please hear of these angels
that sinned once more: "And the angels who kept not their first estate, but left
their own habitation, he has reserved in everlasting chains under darkness to
the judgment of the great day." Jude 1:6. There has been no judgment in this
world, since the writing of the Scriptures, at which the citizens of Tyre and
Sidon, of the land of Sodom, of Nineveh, the Queen of Sheba, the antediluvians,
the angels who sinned, and those to whom the Savior, in his ministry, spoke, to
say nothing of all who have lived since, were present. The reason is, that "it
is appointed to men once to die, but after this the judgment." Heb 11:27.
"Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and to them who look for him
shall he appear the second time without sin (sin offering) to salvation." The
next thing shall be to show that the coming of Christ, the resurrection of the
dead, and the judgment, will all be connected together. Indeed, the passage just
quoted places the judgment after death and the coming of Christ at the same
period. Paul quotes Isa 45:23-25, and applies it to the resurrection state, Rom
14:10-11. Hear him: "But why do you judge your brother? or why do you set at
naught your brother? for we shall all stand before the judgment-seat of Christ."
Now hear him prove this last statement. "For," says he, "it is written, As I
live, says the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess
to God. So, then, every one of us shall give an account of himself to God."
Thus, you perceive, the very passage quoted thousands of times to prove that all
men will be saved, and applied to the resurrection state, from the forty-fifth
chapter of Isaiah, is quoted by Paul--Rom 14:10-11 --and also applied to the
resurrection state, to prove that we shall all stand before the judgment-seat of
Christ, and every one of us give an account of himself to God. This settles the
question about the judgment after death. But now turn to 1Co 15:22-23, and hear
Paul: "As by Adam all die, even so by Christ shall all be made alive. But every
man in his own proper band: Christ the first-fruits; afterward they that are
Christ’s at his coming." The making all alive mentioned here will be in the
resurrection of the dead. This passage is very elliptical, and, filling up the
ellipsis, will read as follows: "As by Adam all die, even so by Christ shall all
be made alive. But every one made alive in his own proper band: Christ the
first-fruits made alive; afterward they that are Christ’s made alive at his
coming." When shall this making alive be? The apostle says "at his coming." This
making alive will be in the resurrection and "at his coming." This, beyond
doubt, places the resurrection at the coming of Christ. But it does more than
this: it discriminates between those who are Christ’s and those who are not
Christ’s at the coming of Christ and the resurrection of the dead. The
expression "they that are Christ’s" implies that there are others who are not
Christ’s; and this discrimination between those who are Christ’s and those who
are not Christ’s is at the coming of Christ and the resurrection of the dead.
Paul makes the same kind of discrimination in his allusion to the resurrection
of the dead, in his reply to Tertullus, Acts 24:14. He says, "There shall be a
resurrection of the dead, both of the just and the unjust." The Lord himself
makes the same discrimination in the words, "You shall be recompensed at the
resurrection of the just." An intimation of the same discrimination is found Luk
20:35, in the following words: "They who shall be accounted worthy to obtain
that world and the resurrection from the dead." See, also, Dan 12:2 : "And many
of them that slept in the dust of the earth shall awake; some to everlasting
life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt." The prophet follows in the
same connection: "And they who are wise shall shine as the brightness of the
firmament; and they who turn many to righteousness as the stars forever and
ever." The same in substance is found in the Lord’s own words, John 5:28-29 :
"Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all those who are in
their graves shall hear his voice, and shall come forth; they who have done good
to the resurrection of life; and they who have done evil, to the resurrection of
condemnation." Thus it is clear that in all these grand allusions to the
resurrection of the dead, the grand and awful discriminations are kept up
between the righteous and the wicked. This part of the argument will be closed
with John’s account of the matter, as the whole was represented to him in the
island of Patmos. He appeared to have had passed before him, in grand pantomimic
view, the whole period called "time," the delivering up of the souls in the
unseen state, the raising and collecting of the bodies of the dead from sea and
land, and says: "I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God: and the
books were opened; and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and
the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books,
according to their works." Now turn your eye back, and take one candid look at
these wonderful expressions touching the resurrection, and see the continual
discriminations between the righteous and the wicked, such as "they who are
Christ’s," "they who shall be accounted worthy," "the resurrection of the just,"
"a resurrection both of the just and the unjust," "they who shall be wise,"
"they who shall turn many to righteousness," "they who have done good and they
who have done evil," "were judged every man according to his works," and then
tell what these continued and oft-repeated discriminations between the righteous
and the wicked mean, made in reference to men in the resurrection of the dead,
the coming of the Lord, and the day of judgment. Bear in mind, it is in
reference to the state of things after death, where the living and dead, as they
are now, shall be present. The antediluvians, those of Tyre, Sidon, of the land
of Sodom, Gomorrah, Nineveh, the Queen of Sheba, and the angels who sinned;
those to whom the Lord spoke while in his great mission on earth; all who are in
their graves, and all alive on earth, are to appear in that judgment, and be
judged according to their works. Those whose names are not found written in the
book of life shall be cast into the lake of fire. Here is the last state of the
disobedient, or those who die in their sins. But while grasping and condensing
as much as possible into a narrow space, that all may have a glance at it,
please turn your attention to another class of testimony touching the state of
those who die in their sins. The passages now to be introduced are negative
proofs, some of which have already been quoted. The Lord says, "He who believes
on the Son, has everlasting life: but he who believes not the Son, shall not see
life; but the wrath of God abides on him." John 3:36. This passage looks forward
as far as unbelievers can be found, and declares, in the most unequivocal terms,
that "he who believes not the Son shall not see life. In Jude 1:12-13, these are
described: "They are clouds without water, carried about by winds; trees whose
fruit withers, without fruit, twice dead, plucked up by the roots; raging waves
of the sea, foaming out their own shame; wandering stars, to whom is reserved
the blackness of darkness forever." This description certainly follows those to
their last state. Hear the apostle again: "For many walk, of whom I have told
often, and now tell you, even weeping, that they are the enemies of the cross of
Christ, whose end is destruction." Php 3:18-19. If the last state or the end of
these persons is destruction, it is certainly useless to speak of their ever
being saved. The same high and holy authority, comparing persons of corrupt
character to "thorns and briers," says they are "rejected and nigh to cursing,
whose end is to be burned." Heb 6:8. Here is the last state or the end of
persons whom the apostle declares it impossible to renew again to repentance;
they "are nigh to cursing, and their end is to be burned." Hear the Lord while
this momentous question is under investigation. He says, "If you believe not
that I am he, you shall die in your sins." John 8:24. Just before, he had said,
"You shall seek me and shall die in your sins: whither I go you cannot come."
One of these expressions declares that those who believe not shall die in their
sins, and the other that those who die in their sins shall not go where the Lord
is, or shall not enjoy him. These scriptures never were and never can be
harmonized with the theory that all will be saved. One man, like many idle and
speculative persons now, while the Lord was engaged in his public mission,
inquired of him, "Lord, are there few that be saved?" Had some religious guides
been there, they would have responded, Blessed Master, they will all be saved.
But our Lord gave that man a much more solemn lesson than that. He replied to
the man: "Strive to enter in at the straight gate: for many, I say to you, shall
seek to enter in, but shall not be able. When once the Master of the house is
risen up, and has shut the door, and you begin to stand without, and knock at
the door, saying, Lord, Lord, open to us; and he shall answer and say to you, I
know you not whence you are: then shall you begin to say, We have eat and drank
in thy presence, and thou has taught in our streets. But he shall say, I know
not whence you are; depart from me, all you workers of iniquity." Luk 13:23-27.
This language can never apply to men in this world. "Those who seek, shall
find;" "those who ask, shall receive;" to "those who knock, it shall be opened;"
"whoever will, let him come;" "he who comes to me, I will in nowise cast out,"
is the language of the Lord to men in this world. As we sing, "The doors of
Gospel grace stand open night and day." But the language of the Lord to the idle
man, inquiring "Are there few that be saved?" refers to a period of time when
the doors of grace shall be shut; when applicants for admission shall not gain
an entrance; when they shall seek to enter in, but shall not be able; when they
shall be thrust away, with the awful words, "Depart, you workers of iniquity: I
know you not." Here follows the Lord’s reason why he would not receive them:
"Because I have called, and you refused; I have stretched out my hand, and no
man regarded; but you have set at naught all my counsel, and would none of my
reproof. I also will laugh at your calamity; I will mock when your fear comes;
when your fear comes as desolation, and your destruction comes as a whirlwind;
when distress and anguish comes on you. Then shall you call on me, but I will
not answer; you shall seek me early, but shall not find me." Pro 1:24-28. This
reaches beyond time, beyond the day of grace, beyond this world, beyond all
Gospel invitation, beyond all space for repentance. To this list but one more
shall now be added. That one contains the closing words of the New Testament:
"If any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God
shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and
from the things that are written in this book." Rev 22:19. Please now glance
your eye over this list, and grasp as far as possible the amount contained in
it. What, then, shall be thought of the man who will try to prove that all will
be saved, when the Lord declares of some that they "shall not see life"--that
"the wrath of God abides on them"--who "die in their sins," of whom the Lord
said, "Whither I go you cannot come;" those whom he compares to "trees twice
dead, and plucked up by the roots;" "to whom is reserved the blackness of
darkness forever;" "whose end is destruction;" who are "rejected, nigh to
cursing; whose end is to be burned;" who shall "seek to enter in, but shall not
be able," but shall be thrust away, followed by the sentence, "Depart from me,
all you workers of iniquity;" whom the Lord shall "mock when their fear comes,"
and who shall have "their part taken away out of the book of life, and out of
the holy city?" Let it be repeated: what shall be thought of the man who shall
teach and try to prove that those to whom this language applies shall be saved?
Does he believe his Bible? Having now followed the punishment of those who die
in their sins, not only to the state after death, to hades, but to the day of
judgment; to the coming of the Lord, and beyond the resurrection of the dead; to
the period when those whose names are not written in the book of life shall be
cast into the lake of fire; as the Lord expressed it, "cast into hell, where the
worm dies not, and the fire shall never be quenched;" into the gehenna of fire.
The next point to consider is the duration of this punishment. This opens the
way for the third proposition, submitted at the commencement of this discourse.
3.It is reasonable that the punishment of those who die in their sins should be
of great duration. One fallacy common in reasoning on this subject must now be
exposed. Men are apt to speak of the shortness of the time the wicked are
engaged in sinning, and, with an air of triumph, exclaim, Can it be possible
that the sins committed in a finite state can have an infinite punishment? or
can it be possible that the sins committed in this limited space of time should
incur a punishment of unlimited duration? Those who put the matter in this way
maintain that it is unreasonable that sins committed in such a short space of
time shall incur a punishment of vast duration. But it is one thing to hear to
sophistry, and another and a very different thing to hear to sound reason and
common sense. The question then comes up in this form first: Does the time
employed in transgression, in any court, human or divine, have anything to do in
determining the duration of the punishment? Who is prepared to affirm on this
proposition? Who argues in court that the murderer must have only a very limited
punishment because he committed the crime in a very short space of time?
Certainly no man whose legal advice is worth anything. What jurist, in making
out and giving a legal opinion, ever mentions the short space of time employed
in the commission of crime as a reason for limited punishment? No one whose
opinion is of any weight. The duration of time employed in violating the law has
nothing to do in determining either the duration or the severity of the
punishment. It is nothing but a sophistry to gull the simple that refers to the
duration of the time occupied in the commission of crime, as having anything to
do in determining the duration or the severity of penalties. What, then, is it
that has to do in determining the term and severity of punishment? The greatness
of the crime. What do men reason from in considering and determining the
magnitude of transgression? From considerations such as the following: 1. The
greatness, goodness, and majesty of the authority violated by the transgressor.
2. The design of the transgressor. 3. The deliberation with which the offense is
committed. 4. The results of the transgression. It is no difference whether the
transgressor was a minute, an hour, a day, or a year engaged in committing the
offense, so far as determining the penalty is concerned. Questions come up
touching the greatness, goodness, and majesty of the law violated; the malignity
of the design of the transgressor; the coolness, deliberateness, and
premeditation with which the offense was committed; the nature, importance, and
duration of the results of the transgression. When a man is being tried for
murder, the attorneys do not dwell on the duration of time occupied in
committing the murder; they speak of the great authority and majesty of the law
violated, its importance in maintaining order, protecting property and life; of
the malignant design of the murderer; the coolness, deliberation, and
premeditation of the murderer; the terrible results of the crime, in striking
down the noble son of a father and mother, the affectionate husband, and support
of a wife; a kind and good father of children; the reckless and awful deed of
sending a man into eternity without a moment’s reflection or preparation, and
thus cutting him off from all that is dear to him on earth. These are the themes
dwelt on in making up a decision in regard to the penalty. In the government of
God, what proportion does the duration of time occupied in sin bear to the
results of the sin committed? How long was Paine employed in writing his infidel
book, falsely styled "The Age of Reason?" At most, only a short space of time.
But where will be the end of the results of that book? None but omniscience can
see. Shall men of sense maintain that the duration of the punishment for the sin
of writing such a book must be short because he did it in a short space of time?
Certainly not. The Lord, the righteous Judge, will look at the results of the
sin; the terrible nature of those results, and the duration of them. The results
of the sin of writing that book will last while time shall last, and extend into
eternity. The results of the sin will never disappear. So the results of the
works of a good man will last while time shall last, and be seen in eternity.
This is one reason why the world is not ready for final judgment. The works of
men have not wrought out their results yet. In the final judgment, all the works
of men will have run their course, and their results will all be open before an
assembled universe, while the Lord shall render to every man according to his
works. If a man, then, in a short life-time can set on foot schemes of sin that
shall continue their results, working ruin among men while time shall last, and
the consequences extend into eternity, is anything clearer than that the
punishment for such sins should be of great duration? The effects of a man’s
transgressions do not cease at death; but, in numerous instances, not only
continue after his death, but widen and abound vastly more after his death than
while he was living. The consequences of sin are by no means of short duration.
They will last till time shall end, nor will they then terminate. They will last
co-existent with the years of God. If the injury a man can do in a short space
of time has eternal results, is it any wonder that he should suffer eternal
punishment? But the closing proposition of this discourse is the following:
4.The Scriptures clearly teach that the punishment after death will be unlimited
in its duration. Many have been the idle things said by men who know neither the
Scriptures nor the power of God touching the duration of the final punishment.
Among these, it has been frequently said we never read of "an endless hell in
the Bible." To this it may be replied, that we do not. Hell is a place--not
time, either limited or unlimited. Of course, neither the Bible nor any book
from an intelligent source speaks of an endless place. The Bible does not speak
of the length nor the breadth of the place of punishment, but the Bible does
speak of the duration of the punishment of those in that place. This is the
matter in hand now. The Lord gives some pretty plain intimations on this
point--Mark 3:29 --in the words: "He who shall sin against the Holy Spirit has
never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal condemnation." There could be no
danger of "eternal condemnation," if there was no such thing in existence as
eternal condemnation; nor would the Lord have spoken of a person who shall never
be forgiven, unless a person might never be forgiven. A person never forgiven,
of course, remains under eternal condemnation. Here, the terms used to express
the duration of the condemnation are as strong as language can afford in both
the original and the English. The man who shall never be forgiven, and remains
under eternal condemnation, is unquestionably lost. The duration of his
condemnation is unlimited. How can you express the unlimited duration of a man’s
unpardoned state, if the words "has never forgiveness" do not do it? The same
wonderful language is used to express the fire of hell. The Lord says "it shall
never be quenched." What is the meaning of this, and what shall we think of him
who shall try to prove that the punishment in this fire, that "shall never be
quenched," shall terminate? This punishment can never terminate till that which
our Lord says "shall never be" shall come to pass, or till some man shall prove
these words of the Lord not true. Those who have argued most stoutly against all
punishment after death, have thousands of times quoted and applied the words
"The Lord God shall wipe off all tears," to the eternal state. In this they are
correct. John so applies this language of the prophet--Rev 21:4. But he soon
finishes his description of those in the holy city, New Jerusalem, and, just
four verses further on, gives an account of others not in the holy city, in the
following words: "But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and
murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolators, and all liars, shall
have their part in the lake which burns with fire and brimstone: which is the
second death." Notice, this is in the resurrection state, at the precise same
period when all tears shall be wiped away forever from those in the holy city.
Some have desired to know something of the object of this "lake of fire." It
would be well, probably, to furnish them a little light on that important
subject. Mat 25:41, the Lord says that it was "prepared for the devil and his
angels." This is the "everlasting fire," or fire that "shall never be quenched,"
where "the worm dies not," is "prepared for the devil and his angels," and is
the "lake of fire" into which the wicked shall be cast after the resurrection
and the last judgment. The angels who sinned, we are informed--Jude 1:6 --the
Lord has reserved in everlasting chains of darkness to the judgment of the great
day. "Chains," here, figuratively represent the power by which the angels who
sinned are bound. "Everlasting chains" is the everlasting power by which they
are bound. "Everlasting," here, does not come from the Greek aionion, as it does
usually, but from aidios, which occurs in but two places in the New Testament,
viz., Rom 1:20 and Jude 1:6. In the former place it expresses the unlimited
duration of the existence of the godhead, and the latter the duration of the
power by which the angels that sinned are bound. Mat 25:41, the Lord calls the
fire, into which the wicked shall be cast, "everlasting fire." Mat 25:46, he
says of the wicked, "These shall go away into everlasting punishment." The same
Greek word that the Lord uses to express the duration of the fire and the
punishment, he uses, in the same connection, to express the duration of the life
of the righteous or the state of glory. At the same time that the righteous
enter "life eternal," or the state of glory, the wicked "go away into
everlasting punishment"--"into everlasting fire;" and the same Greek word
aionion, that expresses the duration of the fire and punishment, in the same
connection expresses the duration of the life of the saints or the state of
glory; and it is as likely that the happiness of the righteous shall cease as
that this fire, which the Lord calls "everlasting fire," and which, he says,
shall "never be quenched," and this punishment which he calls "everlasting,"
shall terminate. As certain as "life eternal" is endless, or unlimited in its
duration, so certain the punishment of those who die in their sins will be
endless or unlimited in its duration. The expression, "forever and ever," occurs
some twenty-three times in the New Testament, and is not used in a limited sense
in a single instance. It expresses endless or unlimited duration in every
instance. It is used to express the duration of the existence of God, of Christ,
of the praises of God, and the punishment of the wicked. It occurs in such
expressions as the following: "Him that lives forever and ever;" "Blessing, and
honor, and glory, and power, to him who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb,
forever and ever." That this expression means unlimited duration in those
passages--in the one case the unlimited duration of the Deity, and, in the
other, the unlimited duration of the ascriptions of praises to him, no one
denies. This expression is found thirteen times in the book of Revelation. In
ten of those occurrences it expresses the duration of the life of God, the life
of Christ, and the duration of the ascending praises to heaven. In all those
places, that it means unlimited duration, all admit. The same expression
precisely is applied to the punishment of the wicked, three times, in the same
book. Twice it is said, "The smoke of their torment ascended forever and ever;"
and once it is said that "The devil who deceived them was cast into the lake of
fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be
tormented day and night forever and ever." Do you say the conclusion is
terrible? It is terrible. So is it terrible that intelligent men and women will
not listen to the voice of God--will not obey their Creator! Nothing but ruin
can befall them. Repent, then, turn to the Lord, and live forever.


========================================================================
Source: https://sermonindex.net/books/franklin-benjamin-the-gospel-preacher-volume-1/
========================================================================