Systematic Theology (Volume 3 of 3)
by Augustus Hopkins Strong · English · Gutenberg #45283 · 1,780,987 chars · public domain (US)
The Project Gutenberg eBook of Systematic Theology (Volume 3 of 3)
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and
most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online
at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States,
you will have to check the laws of the country where you are located
before using this eBook.
Title: Systematic Theology (Volume 3 of 3)
Author: Augustus Hopkins Strong
Release date: March 31, 2014 [eBook #45283]
Most recently updated: June 15, 2020
Language: English
Other information and formats: www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/45283
*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY (VOLUME 3 OF 3) ***
Systematic Theology
A Compendium and Commonplace‐Book
Designed For The Use Of Theological Students
By
Augustus Hopkins Strong, D.D., LL.D.
President and Professor of Biblical Theology in the Rochester Theological
Seminary
Revised and Enlarged
In Three Volumes
Volume 3
The Doctrine of Salvation
The Griffith & Rowland Press
Philadelphia
1909
CONTENTS
Part VI. Soteriology, Or The Doctrine Of Salvation Through The Work Of
Christ And Of The Holy Spirit.
Chapter II. The Reconciliation Of Man To God, Or The Application Of
Redemption Through The Work Of The Holy Spirit.
Section I.—The Application Of Christ’s Redemption In Its
Preparation.
I. Election.
1. Proof of the Doctrine of Election.
2. Objections to the Doctrine of Election.
II. Calling.
A. Is God’s general call sincere?
B. Is God’s special call irresistible?
Section II.—The Application Of Christ’s Redemption In Its Actual
Beginning.
I. Union with Christ.
1. Scripture Representations of this Union.
2. Nature of this Union.
3. Consequences of this Union as respects the Believer.
II. Regeneration.
1. Scripture Representations.
2. Necessity of Regeneration.
3. The Efficient Cause of Regeneration.
4. The Instrumentality used in Regeneration.
5. The Nature of the Change wrought in Regeneration.
III. Conversion.
1. Repentance.
2. Faith.
IV. Justification.
1. Definition of Justification.
2. Proof of the Doctrine of Justification.
3. Elements of Justification.
4. Relation of Justification to God’s Law and Holiness.
5. Relation of Justification to Union with Christ and the Work
of the Spirit.
6. Relation of Justification to Faith.
7. Advice to Inquirers demanded by a Scriptural View of
Justification.
Section III.—The Application Of Christ’s Redemption In Its
Continuation.
I. Sanctification.
1. Definition of Sanctification.
2. Explanations and Scripture Proof.
3. Erroneous Views refuted by these Scripture Passages.
II. Perseverance.
1. Proof of the Doctrine of Perseverance.
2. Objections to the Doctrine of Perseverance.
Part VII. Ecclesiology, Or The Doctrine Of The Church.
Chapter I. The Constitution Of The Church. Or Church Polity.
I. Definition of the Church.
A. The church, like the family and the state, is an institution
of divine appointment.
B. The church, unlike the family and the state, is a voluntary
society.
II. Organization of the Church.
1. The fact of organization.
2. The nature of this organization.
3. The genesis of this organization.
III. Government of the Church.
1. Nature of this government in general.
A. Proof that the government of the church is democratic or
congregational.
B. Erroneous views as to church government refuted by the
foregoing passages.
2. Officers of the Church.
A. The number of offices in the church is two:—first, the
office of bishop, presbyter, or pastor; and, secondly, the
office of deacon.
B. The duties belonging to these offices.
C. Ordination of officers.
(a) What is ordination?
(b) Who are to ordain?
3. Discipline of the Church.
IV. Relation of Local Churches to one another.
1. The general nature of this relation is that of fellowship
between equals.
2. This fellowship involves the duty of special consultation with
regard to matters affecting the common interest.
3. This fellowship may be broken by manifest departures from the
faith or practice of the Scriptures, on the part of any church.
Chapter II. The Ordinances Of The Church.
I. Baptism.
1. Baptism an Ordinance of Christ.
2. The Mode of Baptism.
A. The command to baptize is a command to immerse.
B. No church has the right to modify or dispense with this
command of Christ.
3. The Symbolism of Baptism.
A. Expansion of this statement as to the symbolism of baptism.
B. Inferences from the passages referred to.
4. The Subjects of Baptism.
A. Proof that only persons giving evidence of being
regenerated are proper subjects of baptism.
B. Inferences from the fact that only persons giving evidence
of being regenerate are proper subjects of baptism.
C. Infant Baptism.
(a) Infant baptism is without warrant, either express or
implied, in the Scripture.
(b) Infant baptism is expressly contradicted.
(c) The rise of infant baptism in the history of the
church.
(d) The reasoning by which it is supported is unscriptural,
unsound, and dangerous in its tendency.
(e) The lack of agreement among pedobaptists.
(f) The evil effects of infant baptism.
II. The Lord’s Supper.
1. The Lord’s Supper an ordinance instituted by Christ.
2. The Mode of administering the Lord’s Supper.
3. The Symbolism of the Lord’s Supper.
A. Expansion of this statement.
B. Inferences from this statement.
4. Erroneous views of the Lord’s Supper.
A. The Romanist view.
B. The Lutheran and High Church view.
5. Prerequisites to Participation in the Lord’s Supper.
A. There are prerequisites.
B. The prerequisites are those only which are expressly or
implicitly laid down by Christ and his apostles.
C. On examining the New Testament, we find that the
prerequisites to participation in the Lord’s Supper are four.
First,—Regeneration.
Secondly,—Baptism.
Thirdly,—Church membership.
Fourthly,—An orderly walk.
D. The local church is the judge whether these prerequisites
are fulfilled.
E. Special objections to open communion.
Part VIII. Eschatology, Or The Doctrine Of Final Things.
I. Physical Death.
1. Upon rational grounds.
2. Upon scriptural grounds.
II. The Intermediate State.
1. Of the righteous.
2. Of the wicked.
III. The Second Coming of Christ.
1. The nature of this coming.
2. The time of Christ’s coming.
3. The precursors of Christ’s coming.
4. Relation of Christ’s second coming to the millennium.
IV. The Resurrection.
1. The exegetical objection.
2. The scientific object.
V. The Last Judgment.
1. The nature of the final judgment.
2. The object of the final judgment.
3. The Judge in the final judgment.
4. The subjects of the final judgment.
5. The grounds of the final judgment.
VI. The Final States of the Righteous and of the Wicked.
1. Of the righteous.
(a) Is heaven a place, as well as a state?
(b) Is this earth to be the heaven of the saints?
2. Of the wicked.
A. The future punishment of the wicked is not annihilation.
B. Punishment after death excludes new probation and ultimate
restoration of the wicked.
C. Scripture declares this future punishment of the wicked to be
eternal.
D. This everlasting punishment of the wicked is not inconsistent
with God’s justice, but is rather a revelation of that justice.
E. This everlasting punishment of the wicked is not inconsistent
with God’s benevolence.
F. The proper preaching of the doctrine of everlasting punishment
is not a hindrance to the success of the gospel.
Indexes.
Index Of Subjects.
Index Of Authors.
Index Of Scripture Texts.
Index Of Apocryphal Texts.
Index Of Greek Words.
Index Of Hebrew Words.
[Cover Art]
[Transcriber’s Note: The above cover image was produced by the submitter
at Distributed Proofreaders, and is being placed into the public domain.]
“THE EYE SEES ONLY THAT WHICH IT BRINGS WITH IT THE POWER OF
SEEING.”—_Cicero._
“OPEN THOU MINE EYES, THAT I MAY BEHOLD WONDROUS THINGS OUT OF THY
LAW.”—_Psalm 119:18._
“FOR WITH THEE IS THE FOUNTAIN OF LIFE: IN THY LIGHT SHALL WE SEE
LIGHT.”—_Psalm 36:9._
“FOR WE KNOW IN PART, AND WE PROPHESY IN PART; BUT WHEN THAT WHICH IS
PERFECT IS COME, THAT WHICH IS IN PART SHALL BE DONE AWAY.”—_1 Cor. 13:9,
10._
PART VI. SOTERIOLOGY, OR THE DOCTRINE OF SALVATION THROUGH THE WORK OF
CHRIST AND OF THE HOLY SPIRIT.
[Transcriber’s Note: This Volume begins with “Chapter II”, because
“Chapter I” of “Part VI” was printed in Volume II.]
Chapter II. The Reconciliation Of Man To God, Or The Application Of
Redemption Through The Work Of The Holy Spirit.
Section I.—The Application Of Christ’s Redemption In Its Preparation.
(_a_) In this Section we treat of Election and Calling; Section Second
being devoted to the Application of Christ’s Redemption in its Actual
Beginning,—namely, in Union with Christ, Regeneration, Conversion, and
Justification; while Section Third has for its subject the Application of
Christ’s Redemption in its Continuation,—namely, in Sanctification and
Perseverance.
The arrangement of topics, in the treatment of the reconciliation
of man to God, is taken from Julius Müller, Proof‐texts, 35.
“Revelation _to_ us aims to bring about revelation _in_ us. In any
being absolutely perfect, God’s intercourse with us by _faculty_,
and by direct _teaching_, would absolutely coalesce, and the
former be just as much God’s voice as the latter” (Hutton,
Essays).
(_b_) In treating Election and Calling as applications of Christ’s
redemption, we imply that they are, in God’s decree, logically subsequent
to that redemption. In this we hold the Sublapsarian view, as
distinguished from the Supralapsarianism of Beza and other hyper‐
Calvinists, which regarded the decree of individual salvation as
preceding, in the order of thought, the decree to permit the Fall. In this
latter scheme, the order of decrees is as follows: 1. the decree to save
certain, and to reprobate others; 2. the decree to create both those who
are to be saved and those who are to be reprobated; 3. the decree to
permit both the former and the latter to fall; 4. the decree to provide
salvation only for the former, that is, for the elect.
Richards, Theology, 302‐307, shows that Calvin, while in his early
work, the Institutes, he avoided definite statements of his
position with regard to the extent of the atonement, yet in his
latter works, the Commentaries, acceded to the theory of universal
atonement. Supralapsarianism is therefore hyper‐Calvinistic,
rather than Calvinistic. Sublapsarianism was adopted by the Synod
of Dort (1618, 1619). By Supralapsarian is meant that form of
doctrine which holds the decree of individual salvation as
preceding the decree to permit the Fall; Sublapsarian designates
that form of doctrine which holds that the decree of individual
salvation is subsequent to the decree to permit the Fall.
The progress in Calvin’s thought may be seen by comparing some of
his earlier with his later utterances. Institutes, 2:23:5—“I say,
with Augustine, that the Lord created those who, as he certainly
foreknew, were to go to destruction, and he did so because he so
willed.” But even then in the Institutes, 3:23:8, he affirms that
“the perdition of the wicked depends upon the divine
predestination in such a manner that the cause and matter of it
are found in themselves. Man falls by the appointment of divine
providence, but he falls by his own fault.” God’s blinding,
hardening, turning the sinner he describes as the consequence of
the divine _desertion_, not the divine _causation_. The relation
of God to the origin of sin is not efficient, but permissive. In
later days Calvin wrote in his Commentary on _1 John 2:2_—“_he is
the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for
the whole world_”—as follows: “Christ suffered for the sins of the
whole world, and in the goodness of God is offered unto all men
without distinction, his blood being shed not for a part of the
world only, but for the whole human race; for although in the
world nothing is found worthy of the favor of God, yet he holds
out the propitiation to the whole world, since without exception
he summons all to the faith of Christ, which is nothing else than
the door unto hope.”
Although other passages, such as Institutes, 3:21:5, and 3:23:1,
assert the harsher view, we must give Calvin credit for modifying
his doctrine with maturer reflection and advancing years. Much
that is called Calvinism would have been repudiated by Calvin
himself even at the beginning of his career, and is really the
exaggeration of his teaching by more scholastic and less religious
successors. Renan calls Calvin “the most Christian man of his
generation.” Dorner describes him as “equally great in intellect
and character, lovely in social life, full of tender sympathy and
faithfulness to his friends, yielding and forgiving toward
personal offences.” The device upon his seal is a flaming heart
from which is stretched forth a helping hand.
Calvin’s share in the burning of Servetus must be explained by his
mistaken zeal for God’s truth and by the universal belief of his
time that this truth was to be defended by the civil power. The
following is the inscription on the expiatory monument which
European Calvinists raised to Servetus: “On October 27, 1553, died
at the stake at Champel, Michael Servetus, of Villeneuve d’Aragon,
born September 29, 1511. Reverent and grateful sons of Calvin, our
great Reformer, but condemning an error which was that of his age,
and steadfastly adhering to liberty of conscience according to the
true principles of the Reformation and of the gospel, we have
erected this expiatory monument, on the 27th of October, 1903.”
John DeWitt, in Princeton Theol. Rev., Jan. 1904:95—“Take John
Calvin. That fruitful conception—more fruitful in church and state
than any other conception which has held the English speaking
world—of the absolute and universal sovereignty of the holy God,
as a revolt from the conception then prevailing of the sovereignty
of the human head of an earthly church, was historically the
mediator and instaurator of his spiritual career.” On Calvin’s
theological position, see Shedd, Dogm. Theol., 1:409, note.
(_c_) But the Scriptures teach that men as sinners, and not men
irrespective of their sins, are the objects of God’s saving grace in
Christ (John 15:9; Rom. 11:5, 7; Eph. 1:4‐6; 1 Pet. 1:2). Condemnation,
moreover, is an act, not of sovereignty, but of justice, and is grounded
in the guilt of the condemned (Rom. 2:6‐11; 2 Thess. 1:5‐10). The true
order of the decrees is therefore as follows: 1. the decree to create; 2.
the decree to permit the Fall; 3. the decree to provide a salvation in
Christ sufficient for the needs of all; 4. the decree to secure the actual
acceptance of this salvation on the part of some,—or, in other words, the
decree of Election.
That saving grace presupposes the Fall, and that men as sinners
are the objects of it, appears from _John 15:19_—“_If ye were of
the world, the world would love its own: but because ye are not of
the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world
hateth you_”; _Rom. 11:5‐7_—“_Even so then at this present time
also there is a remnant according to the election of grace. But if
it is by grace, it is no more of works: otherwise grace is no more
grace. What then? That which Israel seeketh for, that he obtained
not; but the election obtained it, and the rest were hardened._”
_Eph. 1:4‐6_—“_even as he chose us in him before the foundation of
the world, that we should be holy and without blemish before him
in love: having foreordained us unto adoption as sons through
Jesus Christ unto himself, according to the good pleasure of his
will, to the praise of the glory of his grace, which he freely
bestowed on us in the Beloved_”; _1 Pet. 1:2_—elect, “_according
to the foreknowledge of God the Father, in sanctification of the
Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus: Grace
to you and peace be multiplied._”
That condemnation is not an act of sovereignty, but of justice,
appears from _Rom. 2:6‐9_—“_who will render to every man according
to his works ... wrath and indignation ... upon every soul of man
that worketh evil_”; _2 Thess. 1:6‐9_—“_a righteous thing with God
to recompense affliction to them that afflict you ... rendering
vengeance to them that know not God and to them that obey not the
gospel of our Lord Jesus: who shall suffer punishment._”
Particular persons are elected, not to have Christ die for them,
but to have special influences of the Spirit bestowed upon them.
(_d_) Those Sublapsarians who hold to the Anselmic view of a limited
Atonement, make the decrees 3. and 4., just mentioned, exchange
places,—the decree of election thus preceding the decree to provide
redemption. The Scriptural reasons for preferring the order here given
have been already indicated in our treatment of the extent of the
Atonement (pages 771‐773).
When “3” and “4” thus change places, “3” should be made to read:
“The decree to provide in Christ a salvation sufficient for the
elect”; and “4” should read: “The decree that a certain number
should be saved,—or, in other words, the decree of Election.”
Sublapsarianism of the first sort may be found in Turretin, loc.
4, quæs. 9; Cunningham, Hist. Theol., 416‐439. A. J. F. Behrends:
“The divine decree is our last word in theology, not our first
word. It represents the _terminus ad quem_, not the _terminus a
quo_. Whatever comes about in the exercise of human freedom and of
divine grace—that God has decreed.” Yet we must grant that
Calvinism needs to be supplemented by a more express statement of
God’s love for the world. Herrick Johnson: “Across the Westminster
Confession could justly be written: ‘The Gospel for the elect
only.’ That Confession was written under the absolute dominion of
one idea, the doctrine of predestination. It does not contain one
of three truths: God’s love for a lost world; Christ’s compassion
for a lost world, and the gospel universal for a lost world.”
I. Election.
Election is that eternal act of God, by which in his sovereign pleasure,
and on account of no foreseen merit in them, he chooses certain out of the
number of sinful men to be the recipients of the special grace of his
Spirit, and so to be made voluntary partakers of Christ’s salvation.
1. Proof of the Doctrine of Election.
A. From Scripture.
We here adopt the words of Dr. Hovey: “The Scriptures forbid us to find
the reasons for election in the moral action of man before the new birth,
and refer us merely to the sovereign will and mercy of God; that is, they
teach the doctrine of personal election.” Before advancing to the proof of
the doctrine itself, we may claim Scriptural warrant for three preliminary
statements (which we also quote from Dr. Hovey), namely:
First, that “God has a sovereign right to bestow more grace upon one
subject than upon another,—grace being unmerited favor to sinners.”
_Mat. 20:12‐15_—“_These last have spent but one hour, and thou
hast made them equal unto us.... Friend, I do thee no wrong.... Is
it not lawful for me to do what I will with mine own?_” _Rom.
9:20, 21_—“_Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why
didst thou make me thus? Or hath not the potter a right over the
clay, from the same lump to make one part a vessel unto honor, and
another unto dishonor?_”
Secondly, that “God has been pleased to exercise this right in dealing
with men.”
_Ps. 147:20_—“_He hath not dealt so with any nation; And as for
his ordinances, they have not known them_”. _Rom. 3:1, 2_—“_What
advantage then hath the Jew? or what is the profit of
circumcision? Much every way: first of all, that they were
intrusted with the oracles of God_”; _John 15:16_—“_Ye did not
choose me, but I chose you, and appointed you, that ye should go
and bear fruit_”; _Acts 9:15_—“_he is a chosen vessel unto me, to
bear my name before the Gentiles and kings, and the children of
Israel._”
Thirdly, that “God has some other reason than that of saving as many as
possible for the way in which he distributes his grace.”
n
_Mat. 11:21_—Tyre and Sidon “_would have repented,_” if they had
had the grace bestowed upon Chorazin and Bethsaida; _Rom.
9:22‐25_—“_What if God, willing to show his wrath, and to make his
power known, endured with much longsuffering vessels of wrath
fitted unto destruction: and that he might make known the riches
of his glory upon vessels of mercy, which he afore prepared unto
glory?_”
The Scripture passages which directly or indirectly support the doctrine
of a particular election of individual men to salvation may be arranged as
follows:
(_a_) Direct statements of God’s purpose to save certain individuals:
Jesus speaks of God’s elect, as for example in _Mark 13:27_—“_then
shall he send forth the angels, and shall gather together his
elect_”; _Luke 18:7_—“_shall not God avenge his elect, that cry to
him day and night?_”
_Acts 13:48_—“_as many as were ordained_ (τεταγμένοι) _to eternal
life believed_”—here Whedon translates: “disposed unto eternal
life,” referring to κατηρτισμένα in _verse 23_, where “_fitted_” =
“fitted themselves.” The only instance, however, where τάσσω is
used in a middle sense is in _1 Cor. 16:15_—“_set themselves_”;
but there the object, ἑαυτούς, is expressed. Here we must compare
_Rom. 13:1_—“_the powers that be are ordained_ (τεταγμέναι) _of
God_”; see also _Acts 10:42_—“_this is he who is ordained_
(ὡρισμένος) _of God to be the Judge of the living and the dead._”
_Rom. 9:11‐16_—“_for the children being not yet born, neither
having done anything good or bad, that the purpose of God
according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that
calleth.... I will have mercy upon whom I have mercy.... So then
it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God
that hath mercy_”; _Eph. 1:4, 5, 9, 11_—“_chose us in him before
the foundation of the world,_ [not _because_ we were, or were to
be, holy, but] _that we should be holy and without blemish before
him in love: having foreordained us unto adoption as sons through
Jesus Christ unto himself, according to the good pleasure of his
will ... the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure
... in whom also we were made a heritage, having been foreordained
according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the
counsel of his will_”; _Col. 3:12_—“_God’s elect_”; _2 Thess.
2:13_—“_God chose you from the beginning unto salvation in
sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth._”
(_b_) In connection with the declaration of God’s foreknowledge of these
persons, or choice to make them objects of his special attention and care;
_Rom. 8:27‐30_—“_called according to his purpose. For whom he
foreknew, he also foreordained to be conformed to the image of his
Son_”; _1 Pet. 1:1, 2_—“_elect ... according to the foreknowledge
of God the Father, in sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience
and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ._” On the passage in
Romans, Shedd, in his Commentary, remarks that “_foreknew,_” in
the Hebraistic use, “is more than simple prescience, and something
more also than simply ‘to fix the eye upon,’ or to ‘select.’ It is
this latter, but with the additional notion of a benignant and
kindly feeling toward the object.” In _Rom. 8:27‐30_, Paul is
emphasizing the divine sovereignty. The Christian life is
considered from the side of the divine care and ordering, and not
from the side of human choice and volition. Alexander, Theories of
the Will, 87, 88—“If Paul is here advocating indeterminism, it is
strange that in _chapter 9_ he should be at pains to answer
objections to determinism. The apostle’s protest in _chapter 9_ is
not against predestination and determination, but against the man
who regards such a theory as impugning the righteousness of God.”
That the word “_know,_” in Scripture, frequently means not merely
to “apprehend intellectually,” but to “regard with favor,” to
“make an object of care,” is evident from _Gen. 18:19_—“_I have
known him, to the end that he may command his children and his
household after him, that they may keep the way of Jehovah, to do
righteousness and justice_”; _Ex. 2:25_—“_And God saw the children
of Israel, and God took knowledge of them_”; _cf._ _verse
24_—“_God heard their groaning, and God remembered his covenant
with Abraham, with Isaac, and with Jacob_”; _Ps. 1:6_—“_For
Jehovah knoweth the way of the righteous; But the way of the
wicked shall perish_”; _101:4,_ marg.—“_I will know no evil
person_”; _Hosea 13:5_—“_I did know thee in the wilderness, in the
land of great drought. According to their pasture, so were they
filled_”; _Nahum 1:7_—“_he knoweth them that take refuge in him_”;
_Amos 3:2_—“_You only have I known of all the families of the
earth_”; _Mat. 7:23_—“_then will I profess unto them, I never knew
you_”; _Rom. 7:15_—“_For that which I do I know not_”; _1 Cor.
8:3_—“_if any man loveth God, the same is known by him_”; _Gal.
4:9_—“_now that ye have come to know God, or rather, to be known
by God_”; _1 Thess. 5:12, 13_—“_we beseech you, brethren, to know
them that labor among you, and are over you in the Lord, and
admonish you; and to esteem them exceeding highly in love for
their work’s sake._” So the word “foreknow”: _Rom. 11:2_—“_God did
not cast off his people whom he foreknew_”; _1 Pet. 1:20_—Christ,
“_who was foreknown indeed before the foundation of the world._”
Broadus on _Mat. 7:23_—“_I never knew you_”—says; “Not in all the
passages quoted above, nor elsewhere, is there occasion for the
oft‐repeated arbitrary notion, derived from the Fathers, that
‘know’ conveys the additional idea of approve or regard. It
denotes acquaintance, with all its pleasures and advantages;
‘_knew,_’ _i. e._, as mine, as my people.”
But this last admission seems to grant what Broadus had before
denied. See Thayer, Lex. N. T., on γινώσκω: “With acc. of person,
to recognize as worthy of intimacy and love; so those whom God has
judged worthy of the blessings of the gospel are said ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ
γινώσκεσθαι (_1 Cor. 8:3; Gal. 4:9_); negatively in the sentence
of Christ: οὐδἐποτε ἔγνων ὑμᾶς, ‘_I never knew you,_’ never had
any acquaintance with you.” On προγινώσκω, _Rom. 8:29_—οὒς
προέγνω, “_whom he foreknew,_” see Denney, in Expositor’s Greek
Testament, _in loco_: “Those whom he foreknew—in what sense? as
persons who would answer his love with love? This is at least
irrelevant, and alien to Paul’s general method of thought. That
salvation begins with God, and begins in eternity, are fundamental
ideas with him, which he here applies to Christians, without
raising any of the problems involved in the relation of the human
will to the divine. Yet we may be sure that προέγνω has the
pregnant sense that γινώσκω often has in Scripture, _e. g._, in
_Ps. 1:6; Amos 3:2;_ hence we may render: ‘those of whom God took
knowledge from eternity’ (_Eph. 1:4_).”
In _Rom. 8:28‐30_, quoted above, “_foreknew_” = elected—that is,
made certain individuals, in the future, the objects of his love
and care; “_foreordained_” describes God’s designation of these
same individuals to receive the special gift of salvation. In
other words, “foreknowledge” is of persons: “foreordination” is of
blessings to be bestowed upon them. Hooker, Eccl. Pol., appendix
to book v. (vol. 2:751)—“ ‘_whom he did foreknow_’ (know before as
his own, with determination to be forever merciful to them) ‘_he
also predestinated to be conformed to the image of his
Son_’—predestinated, not to opportunity of conformation, but to
conformation itself.” So, for substance, Calvin, Rückert, DeWette,
Stuart, Jowett, Vaughan. On _1 Pet. 1:1, 2,_ see Com. of Plumptre.
The Arminian interpretation of “_whom he foreknew_” (_Rom. 8:29_)
would require the phrase “as conformed to the image of his Son” to
be conjoined with it. Paul, however, makes conformity to Christ to
be the result, not the foreseen condition, of God’s
foreordination; see Commentaries of Hodge and Lange.
(_c_) With assertions that this choice is matter of grace, or unmerited
favor, bestowed in eternity past:
_Eph. 1:5‐8_—“_foreordained ... according to the good pleasure of
his will, to the praise of the glory of his grace, which he freely
bestowed on us in the Beloved ... according to the riches of his
grace_”; _2:8_—“_by grace have ye been saved through faith; and
that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God_”—here “_and that_”
(neuter τοῦτο, _verse 8_) refers, not to “faith” but to
“salvation.” But faith is elsewhere represented as having its
source in God,—see page 782, (_k_). _2 Tim. 1:9_—“_his own purpose
and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before times
eternal._” Election is not because of our merit. McLaren: “God’s
own mercy, spontaneous, undeserved, condescending, moved him. God
is his own motive. His love is not drawn out by our loveableness,
but wells up, like an artesian spring, from the depths of his
nature.”
(_d_) That the Father has given certain persons to the Son, to be his
peculiar possession:
_John 6:37_—“_All that which the Father giveth me shall come unto
me_”; _17:2_—“_that whatsoever thou hast given him, to them he
should give eternal life_”; _6_—“_I manifested thy name unto the
men whom thou gavest me out of the world: thine they were, and
thou gavest them to me_”; _9_—“_I pray not for the world, but for
those whom thou hast given me_”; _Eph. 1:14_—“_unto the redemption
of God’s own possession_”; _1 Pet. 2:9_—“_a people for God’s own
possession._”
(_e_) That the fact of believers being united thus to Christ is due wholly
to God:
_John 6:44_—“_No man can come to me, except the Father that sent
me draw him_”; _10:26_—“_ye believe not, because ye are not of my
sheep_”; _1 Cor. 1:30_—“_of him_ [God] _are ye in Christ Jesus_” =
your being, as Christians, in union with Christ, is due wholly to
God.
(_f_) That those who are written in the Lamb’s book of life, and they
only, shall be saved:
_Phil. 4:3_—“_the rest of my fellow‐workers, whose names are in
the book of life_”; _Rev. 20:15_—“_And if any was not found
written in the book of life, he was cast into the lake of fire_”;
_21:27_—“_there shall in no wise enter into it anything unclean
... but only they that are written in the Lamb’s book of life_” =
God’s decrees of electing grace in Christ.
(_g_) That these are allotted, as disciples, to certain of God’s servants:
_Acts 17:4_—(literally)—“_some of them were persuaded, and were
allotted_ [by God] _to Paul and Silas_”—as disciples (so Meyer and
Grimm); _18:9, 10_—“_Be not afraid, but speak and hold not thy
peace: for I am with thee, and no man shall set on thee to harm
thee: for I have much people in this city._”
(_h_) Are made the recipients of a special call of God:
_Rom. 8:28, 30_—“_called according to his purpose ... whom he
foreordained, them he also called_”; _9:23, 24_—“_vessels of
mercy, which he afore prepared unto glory, even us, whom he also
called, not from the Jews only, but also from the Gentiles_”;
_11:29_—“_for the gifts and the calling of God are not repented
of_”; _1 Cor. 1:24‐29_—“_unto them that are called ... Christ the
power of God, and the wisdom of God.... For behold your calling,
brethren, ... the things that are despised, did God choose, yea
and the things that are not, that he might bring to naught the
things that are: that no flesh should glory before God_”; _Gal.
1:15, 16_—“_when it was the good pleasure of God, who separated
me, even from my mother’s womb, and called me through his grace,
to reveal his Son in me_”; _cf._ _James 2:23_—“_and he_ [Abraham]
_was called_ [to be] _the friend of God_.”
(_i_) Are born into God’s kingdom, not by virtue of man’s will, but of
God’s will:
_John 1:13_—“_born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh,
nor of the will of man, but of God_”; _James 1:18_—“_Of his own
will he brought us forth by the word of truth_”; _1 John
4:10_—“_Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved
us._” S. S. Times, Oct. 14, 1899—“The law of love is the
expression of God’s loving nature, and it is only by our
participation of the divine nature that we are enabled to render
it obedience. ‘Loving God,’ says Bushnell, ‘is but letting God
love us.’ So John’s great saying may be rendered in the present
tense: ‘not that we love God, but that he loves us.’ Or, as Madame
Guyon sings: ‘I love my God, but with no love of mine, For I have
none to give; I love thee, Lord, but all the love is thine, For by
thy life I live’.”
(_j_) Receiving repentance, as the gift of God:
_Acts 5:31_—“_Him did God exalt with his right hand to be a Prince
and a Savior, to give repentance to Israel, and remission of
sins_”; _11:18_—“_Then to the Gentiles also hath God granted
repentance unto life_”; _2 Tim. 2:25_—“_correcting them that
oppose themselves; if peradventure God may give them repentance
unto the knowledge of the truth._” Of course it is true that God
might give repentance simply by inducing man to repent by the
agency of his word, his providence and his Spirit. But more than
this seems to be meant when the Psalmist prays: “_Create in me a
clean heart, O God; And renew a right spirit within me_” (_Ps.
51:10_).
(_k_) Faith, as the gift of God:
_John 6:65_—“_no man can come unto me, except it be given unto him
of the Father_”; _Acts 15:8, 9_—“_God ... giving them the Holy
Spirit ... cleansing their hearts by faith_”; _Rom.
12:3_—“_according as God hath dealt to each man a measure of
faith_”; _1 Cor. 12:9_—“_to another faith, in the same Spirit_”;
_Gal. 5:22_—“_the fruit of the Spirit is ... faith_” (A. V.);
_Phil. 2:13_—In all faith, “_it is God who worketh in you both to
will and to work, for his good pleasure_”; _Eph. 6:23_—“_Peace be
to the brethren, and love with faith, from God the Father and the
Lord Jesus Christ_”; _John 3:8_—“_The Spirit breatheth where he
wills, and thou_ [as a consequence] _hearest his voice_” (so
Bengel); see A. J. Gordon, Ministry of the Spirit, 166; _1 Cor.
12:3_—“_No man can say, Jesus is Lord, but in the Holy
Spirit_”—but calling Jesus “_Lord_” is an essential part of
faith,—faith therefore is the work of the Holy Spirit; _Tit.
1:1_—“_the faith of God’s elect_”—election is not in consequence
of faith, but faith is in consequence of election (Ellicott). If
they get their faith of themselves, then salvation is not due to
grace. If God gave the faith, then it was in his purpose, and this
is election.
(_l_) Holiness and good works, as the gift of God.
_Eph. 1:4_—“_chose us in him before the foundation of the world,
that we should be holy_”; _2:9, 10_—“_not of works, that no man
should glory. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus
for good works, which God afore prepared that we should walk in
them_”; _1 Pet. 1:2_—elect “_unto obedience._” On Scripture
testimony, see Hovey, Manual of Theol. and Ethics, 258‐261; also
art. on Predestination, by Warfield, in Hastings’ Dictionary of
the Bible.
These passages furnish an abundant and conclusive refutation, on the one
hand, of the Lutheran view that election is simply God’s determination
from eternity to provide an objective salvation for universal humanity;
and, on the other hand, of the Arminian view that election is God’s
determination from eternity to save certain individuals upon the ground of
their foreseen faith.
Roughly stated, we may say that Schleiermacher elects all men
subjectively; Lutherans all men objectively; Arminians all
believers; Augustinians all foreknown as God’s own. Schleiermacher
held that decree logically precedes foreknowledge, and that
election is individual, not national. But he made election to
include all men, the only difference between them being that of
earlier or of later conversion. Thus in his system Calvinism and
Restorationism go hand in hand. Murray, in Hastings’ Bible
Dictionary, seems to take this view.
Lutheranism is the assertion that original grace preceded original
sin, and that the _Quia Voluit_ of Tertullian and of Calvin was
based on wisdom, in Christ. The Lutheran holds that the believer
is simply the non‐resistant subject of common grace; while the
Arminian holds that the believer is the coöperant subject of
common grace. Lutheranism enters more fully than Calvinism into
the nature of faith. It thinks more of the human agency, while
Calvinism thinks more of the divine purpose. It thinks more of the
church, while Calvinism thinks more of Scripture. The Arminian
conception is that God has appointed men to salvation, just as he
has appointed them to condemnation, in view of their dispositions
and acts. As Justification is in view of _present_ faith, so the
Arminian regards Election as taking place in view of _future_
faith. Arminianism must reject the doctrine of regeneration as
well as that of election, and must in both cases make the act of
man precede the act of God.
All varieties of view may be found upon this subject among
theologians. John Milton, in his Christian Doctrine, holds that
“there is no particular predestination or election, but only
general.... There can be no reprobation of individuals from all
eternity.” Archbishop Sumner: “Election is predestination of
communities and nations to external knowledge and to the
privileges of the gospel.” Archbishop Whately: “Election is the
choice of individual men to membership in the external church and
the means of grace.” Gore, in Lux Mundi, 320—“The elect represent
not the special purpose of God for a few, but the universal
purpose which under the circumstances can only be realized through
a few.” R. V. Foster, a Cumberland Presbyterian, opposed to
absolute predestination, says in his Systematic Theology that the
divine decree “is unconditional in its origin and conditional in
its application.”
B. From Reason.
(_a_) What God does, he has eternally purposed to do. Since he bestows
special regenerating grace on some, he must have eternally purposed to
bestow it,—in other words, must have chosen them to eternal life. Thus the
doctrine of election is only a special application of the doctrine of
decrees.
The New Haven views are essentially Arminian. See Fitch, on
Predestination and Election, in Christian Spectator, 3:622—“God’s
foreknowledge of what would be the results of his present works of
grace _preceded_ in the order of nature the purpose to pursue
those works, and presented the _grounds_ of that purpose. Whom he
foreknew—as the people who would be guided to his kingdom by his
present works of grace, in which result lay the whole objective
motive for undertaking those works—he did also, by resolving on
those works, predestinate.” Here God is very erroneously said to
_foreknow_ what is as yet included in a merely _possible_ plan. As
we have seen in our discussion of Decrees, there can be no
foreknowledge, unless there is something fixed, in the future, to
be foreknown; and this fixity can be due only to God’s
predetermination. So, in the present case, election must precede
prescience.
The New Haven views are also given in N. W. Taylor, Revealed
Theology, 373‐444; for criticism upon them, see Tyler, Letters on
New Haven Theology, 172‐180. If God desired the salvation of Judas
as much as of Peter, how was Peter elected in distinction from
Judas? To the question, “_Who made thee to differ?_” the answer
must be, “Not God, but my own will.” See Finney, in Bib. Sac.,
1877:711—“God must have foreknown whom he _could_ wisely save,
prior in the order of nature to his determining to save them. But
his knowing who _would_ be saved, must have been, in the order of
nature, subsequent to his election or determination to save them,
and dependent upon that determination.” Foster, Christian Life and
Theology, 70—“The doctrine of election is the consistent
formulation, _sub specie eternitatis_, of prevenient grace....
86—With the doctrine of prevenient grace, the evangelical doctrine
stands or falls.”
(_b_) This purpose cannot be conditioned upon any merit or faith of those
who are chosen, since there is no such merit,—faith itself being God’s
gift and foreordained by him. Since man’s faith is foreseen only as the
result of God’s work of grace, election proceeds rather upon foreseen
unbelief. Faith, as the effect of election, cannot at the same time be the
cause of election.
There is an analogy between prayer and its answer, on the one
hand, and faith and salvation on the other. God has decreed answer
in connection with prayer, and salvation in connection with faith.
But he does not change his mind when men pray, or when they
believe. As he fulfils his purpose by inspiring true prayer, so he
fulfils his purpose by giving faith. Augustine: “He chooses us,
not because we believe, but that we may believe: lest we should
say that we first chose him.” (_John 15:16_—“_Ye did not choose
me, but I chose you_”; _Rom. 9:21_—“_from the same lump_”;
_16_—“_not of him that willeth_”.)
Here see the valuable discussion of Wardlaw, Systematic Theol.,
2:485‐549—“Election and salvation on the ground of works foreseen
are not different in principle from election and salvation on the
ground of works performed.” _Cf._ _Prov. 21:1_—“_The king’s heart
is in the hand of Jehovah as the watercourses; He turneth it
whithersoever he will_”—as easily as the rivulets of the eastern
fields are turned by the slightest motion of the hand or the foot
of the husbandman; _Ps. 110:3_—“_Thy people offer themselves
willingly In the day of thy power._”
(_c_) The depravity of the human will is such that, without this decree to
bestow special divine influences upon some, all, without exception, would
have rejected Christ’s salvation after it was offered to them; and so all,
without exception, must have perished. Election, therefore, may be viewed
as a necessary consequence of God’s decree to provide an objective
redemption, if that redemption is to have any subjective result in human
salvation.
Before the prodigal son seeks the father, the father must first
seek him,—a truth brought out in the preceding parables of the
lost money and the lost sheep (_Luke 15_). Without election, all
are lost. Newman Smyth, Orthodox Theology of To‐day, 56—“The worst
doctrine of election, to‐day, is taught by our natural science.
The scientific doctrine of natural selection is the doctrine of
election, robbed of all hope, and without a single touch of human
pity in it.”
Hodge, Syst. Theol., 2:335—“Suppose the deistic view be true: God
created men and left them; surely no man could complain of the
results. But now suppose God, foreseeing these very results of
creation, should create. Would it make any difference, if God’s
purpose, as to the futurition of such a world, should precede it?
Augustine supposes that God did purpose such a world as the deist
supposes, with two exceptions: (1) he interposes to restrain evil;
(2) he intervenes, by providence, by Christ, and by the Holy
Spirit, to save some from destruction.” Election is simply God’s
determination that the sufferings of Christ shall not be in vain;
that all men shall not be lost; that some shall be led to accept
Christ; that to this end special influences of his Spirit shall be
given.
At first sight it might appear that God’s appointing men to
salvation was simply permissive, as was his appointment to
condemnation (_1 Pet. 2:8_), and that this appointment was merely
indirect by creating them with foresight of their faith or their
disobedience. But the decree of salvation is not simply
permissive,—it is efficient also. It is a decree to use special
means for the salvation of some. A. A. Hodge, Popular Lectures,
143—“The dead man cannot spontaneously originate his own
quickening, nor the creature his own creating, nor the infant his
own begetting. Whatever man may do after regeneration, the first
quickening of the dead must originate with God.”
Hovey, Manual of Theology, 287—“Calvinism, reduced to its lowest
terms, is election of believers, not on account of any foreseen
conduct of theirs, either before or in the act of conversion,
which would be spiritually better than that of others influenced
by the same grace, but on account of their foreseen greater
usefulness in manifesting the glory of God to moral beings and of
their foreseen non‐commission of the sin against the Holy Spirit.”
But even here we must attribute the greater usefulness and the
abstention from fatal sin, not to man’s unaided powers but to the
divine decree: see _Eph. 2:10_—“_For we are his workmanship,
created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God afore prepared
that we should walk in them._”
(_d_) The doctrine of election becomes more acceptable to reason when we
remember: first, that God’s decree is eternal, and in a certain sense is
contemporaneous with man’s belief in Christ; secondly, that God’s decree
to create involves the decree of all that in the exercise of man’s freedom
will follow; thirdly, that God’s decree is the decree of him who is all in
all, so that our willing and doing is at the same time the working of him
who decrees our willing and doing. The whole question turns upon the
initiative in human salvation: if this belongs to God, then in spite of
difficulties we must accept the doctrine of election.
The timeless existence of God may be the source of many of our
difficulties with regard to election, and with a proper view of
God’s eternity these difficulties might be removed. Mason, Faith
of the Gospel, 349‐351—“Eternity is commonly thought of as if it
were a state or series anterior to time and to be resumed again
when time comes to an end. This, however, only reduces eternity to
time again, and puts the life of God in the same line with our
own, only coming from further back.... At present we do not see
how time and eternity meet.”
Royce, World and Individual, 2:374—“God does not temporally
foreknow anything, except so far as he is expressed in us finite
beings. The knowledge that exists in time is the knowledge that
finite beings possess, in so far as they are finite. And no such
foreknowledge can predict the special features of individual deeds
precisely so far as they are unique. Foreknowledge in time is
possible only of the general, and of the causally predetermined,
and not of the unique and free. Hence neither God nor man can
foreknow perfectly, at any temporal moment, what a free will agent
is yet to do. On the other hand, the Absolute possesses a perfect
knowledge at one glance of the whole of the temporal order, past,
present and future. This knowledge is ill called foreknowledge. It
is eternal knowledge. And as there is an eternal knowledge of all
individuality and of all freedom, free acts are known as
occurring, like the chords in the musical succession, precisely
when and how they actually occur.” While we see much truth in the
preceding statement, we find in it no bar to our faith that God
can translate his eternal knowledge into finite knowledge and can
thus put it for special purposes in possession of his creatures.
E. H. Johnson, Theology, 2d ed., 250—“Foreknowing what his
creatures would do, God decreed their destiny when he decreed
their creation; and this would still be the case, although every
man had the partial control over his destiny that Arminians aver,
or even the complete control that Pelagians claim. The decree is
as absolute as if there were no freedom, but it leaves them as
free as if there were no decree.” A. H. Strong, Christ in
Creation, 40, 42—“As the Logos or divine Reason, Christ dwells in
humanity everywhere and constitutes the principle of its being.
Humanity shares with Christ in the image of God. That image is
never wholly lost. It is completely restored in sinners when the
Spirit of Christ secures control of their wills and leads them to
merge their life in his.... If Christ be the principle and life of
all things, then divine sovereignty and human freedom, if they are
not absolutely reconciled, at least lose their ancient antagonism,
and we can rationally ‘_work out our own salvation_,’ for the very
reason that ‘_it is God that worketh in us, both to will and to
work, for his good pleasure_’ (_Phil. 2:12, 13_).”
2. Objections to the Doctrine of Election.
(_a_) It is unjust to those who are not included in this purpose of
salvation.—Answer: Election deals, not simply with creatures, but with
sinful, guilty, and condemned creatures. That any should be saved, is
matter of pure grace, and those who are not included in this purpose of
salvation suffer only the due reward of their deeds. There is, therefore,
no injustice in God’s election. We may better praise God that he saves
any, than charge him with injustice because he saves so few.
God can say to all men, saved or unsaved, “_Friend, I do thee no
wrong.... Is it not lawful for me to do what I will with mine
own?_” (_Mat. 20:13, 15_). The question is not whether a father
will treat his children alike, but whether a sovereign must treat
condemned rebels alike. It is not true that, because the Governor
pardons one convict from the penitentiary, he must therefore
pardon all. When he pardons one, no injury is done to those who
are left. But, in God’s government, there is still less reason for
objection; for God offers pardon to all. Nothing prevents men from
being pardoned but their unwillingness to accept his pardon.
Election is simply God’s determination to make certain persons
willing to accept it. Because justice cannot save all, shall it
therefore save none?
Augustine, De Predest. Sanct., 8—“Why does not God teach all?
Because it is in mercy that he teaches all whom he does teach,
while it is in judgment that he does not teach those whom he does
not teach.” In his Manual of Theology and Ethics, 260, Hovey
remarks that _Rom. 9:20_—“_who art thou that repliest against
God?_”—teaches, not that might makes right, but that God is
morally entitled to glorify either his righteousness or his mercy
in disposing of a guilty race. It is not that he chooses to save
only a few ship‐wrecked and drowning creatures, but that he
chooses to save only a part of a great company who are bent on
committing suicide. _Prov. 8:36_—“_he that sinneth against me
wrongeth his own soul: All they that hate me love death._” It is
best for the universe at large that some should be permitted to
have their own way and show how dreadful a thing is opposition to
God. See Shedd, Dogm. Theol., 1:455.
(_b_) It represents God as partial in his dealings and a respecter of
persons.—Answer: Since there is nothing in men that determines God’s
choice of one rather than another, the objection is invalid. It would
equally apply to God’s selection of certain nations, as Israel, and
certain individuals, as Cyrus, to be recipients of special temporal gifts.
If God is not to be regarded as partial in not providing a salvation for
fallen angels, he cannot be regarded as partial in not providing
regenerating influences of his Spirit for the whole race of fallen men.
_Ps. 44:3_—“_For they gat not the land in possession by their own
sword, Neither did their own arm save them; But thy right hand,
and thine arm, and the light of thy countenance, Because thou wast
favorable unto them_”; _Is. 45:1, 4, 5_—“_Thus saith Jehovah to
his anointed, to Cyrus, whose right hand I have holden, to subdue
nations before him.... For Jacob my servant’s sake, and Israel my
chosen, I have called thee by thy name: I have surnamed thee,
though thou hast not known me_”; _Luke 4:25‐27_—“_There were many
widows in Israel ... and unto none of them was Elijah sent, but
only to Zarephath, in the land of Sidon, unto a woman that was a
widow. And there were many lepers in Israel ... and none of them
was cleansed, but only Naaman the Syrian_”; _1 Cor. 4:7_—“_For who
maketh thee to differ? and what hast thou that thou didst not
receive? but if thou didst receive it, why dost thou glory, as if
thou hadst not received it?_” _2 Pet. 2:4_—“_God spared not angels
when they sinned, but cast them down to hell_”; _Heb. 2:16_—“_For
verily not to angels doth he give help, but he giveth help to the
seed of Abraham._”
Is God partial, in choosing Israel, Cyrus, Naaman? Is God partial,
in bestowing upon some of his servants special ministerial gifts?
Is God partial, in not providing a salvation for fallen angels? In
God’s providence, one man is born in a Christian land, the son of
a noble family, is endowed with beauty of person, splendid
talents, exalted opportunities, immense wealth. Another is born at
the Five Points, or among the Hottentots, amid the degradation and
depravity of actual, or practical, heathenism. We feel that it is
irreverent to complain of God’s dealings in providence. What right
have sinners to complain of God’s dealings in the distribution of
his grace? Hovey: “We have no reason to think that God treats all
moral beings alike. We should be glad to hear that other races are
treated better than we.”
Divine election is only the ethical side and interpretation of
natural selection. In the latter God chooses certain forms of the
vegetable and animal kingdom without merit of theirs. They are
preserved while others die. In the matter of individual health,
talent, property, one is taken and the other left. If we call all
this the result of system, the reply is that God chose the system,
knowing precisely what would come of it. Bruce, Apologetics,
201—“Election to distinction in philosophy or art is not
incomprehensible, for these are not matters of vital concern; but
election to holiness on the part of some, and to unholiness on the
part of others, would be inconsistent with God’s own holiness.”
But there is no such election to unholiness except on the part of
man himself. God’s election secures only the good. See (_c_)
below.
J. J. Murphy, Natural Selection and Spiritual Freedom, 73—“The
world is ordered on a basis of inequality; in the organic world,
as Darwin has shown, it is of inequality—of favored races—that all
progress comes; history shows the same to be true of the human and
spiritual world. All human progress is due to elect human
individuals, elect not only to be a blessing to themselves, but
still more to be a blessing to multitudes of others. Any
superiority, whether in the natural or in the mental and spiritual
world, becomes a vantage‐ground for gaining a greater
superiority.... It is the method of the divine government, acting
in the provinces both of nature and of grace, that all benefit
should come to the many through the elect few.”
(_c_) It represents God as arbitrary.—Answer: It represents God, not as
arbitrary, but as exercising the free choice of a wise and sovereign will,
in ways and for reasons which are inscrutable to us. To deny the
possibility of such a choice is to deny God’s personality. To deny that
God has reasons for his choice is to deny his wisdom. The doctrine of
election finds these reasons, not in men, but in God.
When a regiment is decimated for insubordination, the fact that
every tenth man is chosen for death is for reasons; but the
reasons are not in the men. In one case, the reason for God’s
choice seems revealed: _1 Tim. 1:16_—“_howbeit for this cause I
obtained mercy, that in me as chief might Jesus Christ show forth
all his longsuffering, for an ensample of them that should
thereafter believe on him unto eternal life_”—here Paul indicates
that the reason why God chose him was that he was so great a
sinner: _verse 15_—“_Christ Jesus came into the world to save
sinners; of whom I am chief._” Hovey remarks that “the uses to
which God can put men, as vessels of grace, may determine his
selection of them.” But since the naturally weak are saved, as
well as the naturally strong, we cannot draw any general
conclusion, or discern any general rule, in God’s dealings, unless
it be this, that in election God seeks to illustrate the greatness
and the variety of his grace,—the reasons lying, therefore, not in
men, but in God. We must remember that God’s _sovereignty_ is the
sovereignty of _God_—the infinitely wise, holy and loving God, in
whose hands the destinies of men can be left more safely than in
the hands of the wisest, most just, and most kind of his
creatures.
We must believe in the grace of sovereignty as well as in the
sovereignty of grace. Election and reprobation are not matters of
arbitrary will. God saves all whom he can wisely save. He will
show benevolence in the salvation of mankind just so far as he can
without prejudice to holiness. No man can be saved without God,
but it is also true that there is no man whom God is not willing
to save. H. B. Smith, System, 511—“It may be that many of the
finally impenitent resist more light than many of the saved.”
Harris, Moral Evolution, 401 (for substance)—“Sovereignty is not
lost in Fatherhood, but is recovered as the divine law of
righteous love. Doubtless thou art our Father, though Augustine be
ignorant of us, and Calvin acknowledge us not.” Hooker, Eccl.
Polity, 1:2—“They err who think that of God’s will there is no
reason except his will.” T. Erskine, The Brazen Serpent,
259—Sovereignty is “just a name for what is _unrevealed_ of God.”
We do not know _all_ of God’s reasons for saving particular men,
but we do know _some_ of the reasons, for he has revealed them to
us. These reasons are not men’s merits or works. We have mentioned
the first of these reasons: (1) Men’s greater sin and need; _1
Tim. 1:16_—“_that in me as chief might Jesus Christ show forth all
his longsuffering._” We may add to this: (2) The fact that men
have not sinned against the Holy Spirit and made themselves
unreceptive to Christ’s salvation; _1 Tim. 1:13_—“_I obtained
mercy, because I did it ignorantly in unbelief_”—the fact that
Paul had not sinned with full knowledge of what he did was a
reason why God could choose him. (3) Men’s ability by the help of
Christ to be witnesses and martyrs for their Lord; _Acts 9:15,
16_—“_he is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the
Gentiles and kings, and the children of Israel: for I will show
him how many things he must suffer for my name’s sake._” As Paul’s
mission to the Gentiles may have determined God’s choice, so
Augustine’s mission to the sensual and abandoned may have had the
same influence. But if Paul’s sins, as foreseen, constituted one
reason why God chose to save him, why might not his ability to
serve the kingdom have constituted another reason? We add
therefore: (4) Men’s foreseen ability to serve Christ’s kingdom in
bringing others to the knowledge of the truth; _John 15:16_—“_I
chose you and appointed you, that ye should go and bear fruit._”
Notice however that this is choice _to_ service, and not simply
choice _on account of service_. In all these cases the reasons do
not lie in the men themselves, for what these men are and what
they possess is due to God’s providence and grace.
(_d_) It tends to immorality, by representing men’s salvation as
independent of their own obedience.—Answer: The objection ignores the fact
that the salvation of believers is ordained only in connection with their
regeneration and sanctification, as means; and that the certainty of final
triumph is the strongest incentive to strenuous conflict with sin.
Plutarch: “God is the brave man’s hope, and not the coward’s
excuse.” The purposes of God are an anchor to the storm‐tossed
spirit. But a ship needs engine, as well as anchor. God does not
elect to save any without repentance and faith. Some hold the
doctrine of election, but the doctrine of election does not hold
them. Such should ponder _1 Pet. 1:2_, in which Christians are
said to be elect, “_in sanctification of the Spirit, unto
obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ_.”
Augustine: “He loved her [the church] foul, that he might make her
fair.” Dr. John Watson (Ian McLaren): “The greatest reinforcement
religion could have in our time would be a return to the ancient
belief in the sovereignty of God.” This is because there is lack
of a strong conviction of sin, guilt, and helplessness, still
remaining pride and unwillingness to submit to God, imperfect
faith in God’s trustworthiness and goodness. We must not exclude
Arminians from our fellowship—there are too many good Methodists
for that. But we may maintain that they hold but half the truth,
and that absence of the doctrine of election from their creed
makes preaching less serious and character less secure.
(_e_) It inspires pride in those who think themselves elect.—Answer: This
is possible only in the case of those who pervert the doctrine. On the
contrary, its proper influence is to humble men. Those who exalt
themselves above others, upon the ground that they are special favorites
of God, have reason to question their election.
In the novel, there was great effectiveness in the lover’s plea to
the object of his affection, that he had loved since he had first
set his eyes upon her in her childhood. But God’s love for us is
of longer standing than that. It dates back to a time before we
were born,—aye, even to eternity past. It is a love which was
fastened upon us, although God knew the worst of us. It is
unchanging, because founded upon his infinite and eternal love to
Christ. _Jer. 31:3_—“_Jehovah appeared of old unto me, saying,
Yea, I have loved thee with an everlasting love: therefore with
lovingkindness have I drawn thee_”; _Rom. 8:31‐39_—“_If God is for
us, who is against us?... Who shall separate us from the love of
Christ?_” And the answer is, that nothing “_shall be able to
separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our
Lord_.” This eternal love subdues and humbles: _Ps. 115:1_—“_Not
unto us, O Jehovah, not unto us, But unto thy name give glory For
thy lovingkindness, and for thy truth’s sake._”
Of the effect of the doctrine of election, Calvin, in his
Institutes, 3:22:1, remarks that “when the human mind hears of it,
its irritation breaks all restraint, and it discovers as serious
and violent agitation as if alarmed by the sound of a martial
trumpet.” The cause of this agitation is the apprehension of the
fact that one is an enemy of God and yet absolutely dependent upon
his mercy. This apprehension leads normally to submission. But the
conquered rebel can give no thanks to himself,—all thanks are due
to God who has chosen and renewed him. The affections elicited are
not those of pride and self‐complacency, but of gratitude and
love.
Christian hymnology witnesses to these effects. Isaac Watts (†
1748): “Why was I made to hear thy voice And enter while there’s
room, When thousands make a wretched choice, And rather starve
than come. ’T was the same love that spread the feast That sweetly
forced me in; Else I had still refused to taste, And perished in
my sin. Pity the nations, O our God! Constrain the earth to come;
Send thy victorious word abroad, And bring the wanderers home.”
Josiah Conder († 1855): “’Tis not that I did choose thee, For,
Lord, that could not be; This heart would still refuse thee; But
thou hast chosen me;—Hast, from the sin that stained me, Washed me
and set me free, And to this end ordained me That I should live to
thee. ’T was sovereign mercy called me, And taught my opening
mind; The world had else enthralled me, To heavenly glories blind.
My heart owns none above thee: For thy rich grace I thirst; This
knowing,—if I love thee, Thou must have loved me first.”
(_f_) It discourages effort for the salvation of the impenitent, whether
on their own part or on the part of others.—Answer: Since it is a secret
decree, it cannot hinder or discourage such effort. On the other hand, it
is a ground of encouragement, and so a stimulus to effort; for, without
election, it is certain that all would be lost (_cf._ Acts 18:10). While
it humbles the sinner, so that he is willing to err for mercy, it
encourages him also by showing him that some will be saved, and (since
election and faith are inseparably connected) that he will be saved, if he
will only believe. While it makes the Christian feel entirely dependent on
God’s power, in his efforts for the impenitent, it leads him to say with
Paul that he “endures all things for the elects’ sake, that they also may
attain the salvation that is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory” (2 Tim.
2:10).
God’s decree that Paul’s ship’s company should be saved (_Acts
27:24_) did not obviate the necessity of their abiding in the ship
(_verse 31_). In marriage, man’s election does not exclude
woman’s; so God’s election does not exclude man’s. There is just
as much need of effort as if there were no election. Hence the
question for the sinner is not, “Am I one of the elect?” but
rather, “What shall I do to be saved?” Milton represents the
spirits of hell as debating foreknowledge and free will, in
wandering mazes lost.
No man is saved until he ceases to debate, and begins to act. And
yet no man will thus begin to act, unless God’s Spirit moves him.
The Lord encouraged Paul by saying to him: “_I have much people in
this city_” (_Acts 18:10_)—people whom I will bring in through thy
word. “Old Adam is too strong for young Melanchthon.” If God does
not regenerate, there is no hope of success in preaching: “God
stands powerless before the majesty of man’s lordly will. Sinners
have the glory of their own salvation. To pray God to convert a
man is absurd. God elects the man, because he foresees that the
man will elect himself” (see S. R. Mason, Truth Unfolded,
298‐307). The doctrine of election does indeed cut off the hopes
of those who place confidence in themselves; but it is best that
such hopes should be destroyed, and that in place of them should
be put a hope in the sovereign grace of God. The doctrine of
election does teach man’s absolute dependence upon God, and the
impossibility of any disappointment or disarrangement of the
divine plans arising from the disobedience of the sinner, and it
humbles human pride until it is willing to take the place of a
suppliant for mercy.
Rowland Hill was criticized for preaching election and yet
exhorting sinners to repent, and was told that he should preach
only to the elect. He replied that, if his critic would put a
chalk‐mark on all the elect, he would preach only to them. But
this is not the whole truth. We are not only ignorant who God’s
elect are, but we are set to preach to both elect and non‐elect
(_Ez. 2:7_—“_thou shalt speak my words unto them, whether they
will hear, or whether they will forbear_”), with the certainty
that to the former our preaching will make a higher heaven, to the
latter a deeper hell (_2 Cor. 2:15, 16_—“_For we are a sweet savor
of Christ unto God, in them that are saved, and in them that
perish; to the one a savor from death unto death; to the other a
savor from life unto life_”; _cf._ _Luke 2:34_—“_this child is set
for the falling and the rising of many in Israel_”—for the falling
of some, and for the rising up of others).
Jesus’ own thanksgiving in _Mat. 11:25, 26_—“_I thank thee, O
Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that thou didst hide these
things from the wise and understanding, and didst reveal them unto
babes: yea, Father, for so it was well‐pleasing in thy sight_”—is
immediately followed by his invitation in _verse 28_—“_Come unto
me, all ye that labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you
rest._” There is no contradiction in his mind between sovereign
grace and the free invitations of the gospel.
G. W. Northrup, in The Standard, Sept. 19, 1889—“1. God will save
every one of the human race whom he can save and remain God; 2.
Every member of the race has a full and fair probation, so that
all might be saved and would be saved were they to use aright the
light which they already have.”... (Private letter): “Limitations
of God in the bestowment of salvation: 1. In the power of God in
relation to free will; 2. In the benevolence of God which requires
the greatest good of creation, or the greatest aggregate good of
the greatest number; 3. In the purpose of God to make the most
perfect self‐limitation; 4. In the sovereignty of God, as a
prerogative absolutely optional in its exercise; 5. In the
holiness of God, which involves immutable limitations on his part
in dealing with moral agents. Nothing but some absolute
impossibility, metaphysical or moral, could have prevented him
’whose nature and whose name is love’ from decreeing and securing
the confirmation of all moral agents in holiness and blessedness
forever.”
(_g_) The decree of election implies a decree of reprobation.—Answer: The
decree of reprobation is not a positive decree, like that of election, but
a permissive decree to leave the sinner to his self‐chosen rebellion and
its natural consequences of punishment.
Election and sovereignty are only sources of good. Election is not
a decree to destroy,—it is a decree only to save. When we elect a
President, we do not need to hold a second election to determine
that the remaining millions shall be non‐Presidents. It is
needless to apply contrivance or force. Sinners, like water, if
simply let alone, will run down hill to ruin. The decree of
reprobation is simply a decree to do nothing—a decree to leave the
sinner to himself. The natural result of this judicial forsaking,
on the part of God, is the hardening and destruction of the
sinner. But it must not be forgotten that this hardening and
destruction are not due to any positive efficiency of God,—they
are a self‐hardening and a self‐destruction,—and God’s judicial
forsaking is only the just penalty of the sinner’s guilty
rejection of offered mercy.
See _Hosea 11:8_—“_How shall I give thee up, Ephraim?... my heart
is turned within me, my compassions are kindled together_”;
_4:17_—“_Ephraim is joined to idols; let him alone_”; _Rom. 9:22,
23_—“_What if God, willing to show his wrath, and to make his
power known, endured with much longsuffering vessels of wrath
fitted unto destruction: and that he might make known the riches
of his glory upon vessels of mercy, which he afore prepared unto
glory_”—here notice that “_which he afore prepared_” declares a
positive divine efficiency, in the case of the vessels of mercy,
while “_fitted unto destruction_” intimates no such positive
agency of God,—the vessels of wrath fitted themselves for
destruction; _2 Tim. 2:20_—“_vessels ... some unto honor, and some
unto dishonor_”; _1 Pet. 2:8_—“_they stumble at the word, being
disobedient: whereunto also they were appointed_”; _Jude 4_—“_who
were of old set forth_ [‘_written of beforehand_’—Am. Rev.] _unto
this condemnation_”; _Mat. 25:34, 41_—“_the kingdom prepared for
you ... the eternal fire which is prepared_ [not for you, nor for
men, but] _for the devil and his angels_” = there is an election
to life, but no reprobation to death; a “_book of life_” (_Rev.
21:27_), but no book of death.
E. G. Robinson, Christian Theology, 313—“Reprobation, in the sense
of absolute predestination to sin and eternal damnation, is
neither a sequence of the doctrine of election, nor the teaching
of the Scriptures.” Men are not “_appointed_” to disobedience and
stumbling in the same way that they are “_appointed_” to
salvation. God uses positive means to save, but not to destroy.
Henry Ward Beecher: “The elect are whosoever will; the non‐elect
are whosoever won’t.” George A. Gordon, New Epoch for Faith,
44—“Election understood would have been the saving strength of
Israel; election misunderstood was its ruin. The nation felt that
the election of it meant the rejection of other nations.... The
Christian church has repeated Israel’s mistake.”
The Westminster Confession reads: “By the decree of God, for the
manifestation of his glory, some men and angels are predestinated
unto everlasting life, and others 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. The rest of mankind God was pleased, according to the
unsearchable counsel of his own will, whereby he extendeth or
withholdeth mercy as he pleaseth, for the glory of his sovereign
power over his creatures, to pass by and to ordain them to
dishonor and wrath for their sin, to the praise of his glorious
justice.” This reads as if both the saved and the lost were made
originally for their respective final estates without respect to
character. It is supralapsarianism. It is certain that the
supralapsarians were in the majority in the Westminster Assembly,
and that they determined the form of the statement, although there
were many sublapsarians who objected that it was only on account
of their foreseen wickedness that any were reprobated. In its
later short statement of doctrine the Presbyterian body in America
has made it plain that God’s decree of reprobation is a permissive
decree, and that it places no barrier in the way of any man’s
salvation.
On the general subject of Election, see Mozley, Predestination;
Payne, Divine Sovereignty; Ridgeley, Works, 1:261‐324, esp. 322;
Edwards, Works, 2:527 _sq._; Van Oosterzee, Dogmatics, 446‐458;
Martensen, Dogmatics, 362‐382; and especially Wardlaw, Systematic
Theology, 485‐549; H. B. Smith, Syst. of Christian Theology,
502‐514; Maule, Outlines of Christian Doctrine, 36‐56; Peck, in
Bapt. Quar. Rev., Oct. 1891:689‐706. On objections to election,
and Spurgeon’s answers to them, see Williams, Reminiscences of
Spurgeon, 189. On the homiletical uses of the doctrine of
election, see Bib. Sac., Jan. 1893:79‐92.
II. Calling.
Calling is that act of God by which men are invited to accept, by faith,
the salvation provided by Christ.—The Scriptures distinguish between:
(_a_) _The general, or external, call_ to all men through God’s
providence, word, and Spirit.
_Is. 45:22_—“_Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the
earth; for I am God, and there is none else_”; _55:6_—“_Seek ye
Jehovah while he may be found; call ye upon him while he is
near_”; _65:12_—“_when I called, ye did not answer; when I spake,
ye did not hear; but ye did that which was evil in mine eyes, and
chose that wherein I delighted not_”; _Ez. 33:11_—“_As I live,
saith the Lord Jehovah, I have no pleasure in the death of the
wicked; but that the wicked turn from his way and live; turn ye,
turn ye from your evil ways; for why will ye die, O house of
Israel?_” _Mat. 11:28_—“_Come unto me, all ye that labor and are
heavy laden, and I will give you rest_”; _22:3_—“_sent forth his
servants to call them that were bidden to the marriage feast: and
they would not come_”; _Mark 16:15_—“_Go ye into all the world,
and preach the gospel to the whole creation_”; _John 12:32_—“_And
I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto
myself_”—draw, not drag; _Rev. 3:20_—“_Behold, I stand at the door
and knock: if any man hear my voice and open the door, I will come
in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me._”
(_b_) _The special, efficacious call_ of the Holy Spirit to the elect.
_Luke 14:23_—“_Go out into the highways and hedges, and constrain
them to come in, that my house may be filled_”; _Rom. 1:7_—“_to
all that are in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints: Grace
to you and peace from God our father and the Lord Jesus Christ_”;
_8:30_—“_whom he foreordained, them he also called: and whom he
called, them he also justified_”; _11:29_—“_For the gifts and the
calling of God are not repented of_”; _1 Cor. 1:23, 24_—“_but we
preach Christ crucified, unto Jews a stumblingblock, and unto
Gentiles foolishness; but unto them that are called, both Jews and
Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God_”;
_26_—“_For behold your calling, brethren, that not many wise after
the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called_”; _Phil.
3:14_—“_I press on toward the goal unto the prize of the high_
[marg. ‘_upward_’] _calling of God in Christ Jesus_”; _Eph.
1:18_—“_that ye may know what is the hope of his calling, what the
riches of the glory of his inheritance in the saints_”; _1 Thess.
2:12_—“_to the end that ye should walk worthily of God, who
calleth you into his own kingdom and glory_”; _2 Thess.
2:14_—“_whereunto he called you through our gospel, to the
obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ_”; _2 Tim.
1:9_—“_who saved us, and called us with a holy calling, not
according to our works, but according to his own purpose and
grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before times eternal_”;
_Heb. 3:1_—“_holy brethren, partakers of a heavenly calling_”; _2
Pet. 1:10_—“_Wherefore, brethren, give the more diligence to make
your calling and election sure._”
Two questions only need special consideration:
A. Is God’s general call sincere?
This is denied, upon the ground that such sincerity is incompatible,
first, with the inability of the sinner to obey; and secondly, with the
design of God to bestow only upon the elect the special grace without
which they will not obey.
(_a_) To the first objection we reply that, since this inability is not a
physical but a moral inability, consisting simply in the settled
perversity of an evil will, there can be no insincerity in offering
salvation to all, especially when the offer is in itself a proper motive
to obedience.
God’s call to all men to repent and to believe the gospel is no
more insincere than his command to all men to love him with all
the heart. There is no obstacle in the way of men’s obedience to
the gospel, that does not exist to prevent their obedience to the
law. If it is proper to publish the commands of the law, it is
proper to publish the invitations of the gospel. A human being may
be perfectly sincere in giving an invitation which he knows will
be refused. He may desire to have the invitation accepted, while
yet he may, for certain reasons of justice or personal dignity, be
unwilling to put forth special efforts, aside from the invitation
itself, to secure the acceptance of it on the part of those to
whom it is offered. So God’s desires that certain men should be
saved may not be accompanied by his will to exert special
influences to save them.
These desires were meant by the phrase “revealed will” in the old
theologians; his purpose to bestow special grace, by the phrase
“secret will.” It is of the former that Paul speaks, in _1 Tim,
2:4_—“_who would have all men to be saved._” Here we have, not the
active σῶσαι, but the passive σωθῆναι. The meaning is, not that
God _purposes_ to save all men, but that he _desires_ all men to
be saved through repenting and believing the gospel. Hence God’s
revealed will, or desire, that all men should be saved, is
perfectly consistent with his secret will, or purpose, to bestow
special grace only upon a certain number (see, on _1 Tim. 2:4_,
Fairbairn’s Commentary on the Pastoral Epistles).
The sincerity of God’s call is shown, not only in the fact that
the only obstacle to compliance, on the sinner’s part, is the
sinner’s own evil will, but also in the fact that God has, at
infinite cost, made a complete external provision, upon the ground
of which “_he that will_” may “_come_” and “_take the water of
life freely_” (_Rev. 22:17_); so that God can truly say: “_What
could have been done more to my vineyard, that I have not done in
it?_” (_Is. 5:4_). Broadus, Com. on _Mat. 6:10_—“_Thy will be
done_”—distinguishes between God’s will of purpose, of desire, and
of command. H. B. Smith, Syst. Theol., 521—“Common grace passes
over into effectual grace in proportion as the sinner yields to
the divine influence. Effectual grace is that which effects what
common grace tends to effect.” See also Studien und Kritiken,
1887:7 _sq._
(_b_) To the second, we reply that the objection, if true, would equally
hold against God’s foreknowledge. The sincerity of God’s general call is
no more inconsistent with his determination that some shall be permitted
to reject it, than it is with foreknowledge that some will reject it.
Hodge, Syst. Theol., 2:643—“Predestination concerns only the
purpose of God to render effectual, in particular cases, a call
addressed to all. A general amnesty, on certain conditions, may be
offered by a sovereign to rebellious subjects, although he knows
that through pride or malice many will refuse to accept it; and
even though, for wise reasons, he should determine not to
constrain their assent, supposing that such influence over their
minds were within his power. It is evident, from the nature of the
call, that it has nothing to do with the secret purpose of God to
grant his effectual grace to some, and not to others.... According
to the Augustinian scheme, the non‐elect have all the advantages
and opportunities of securing their salvation, which, according to
any other scheme, are granted to mankind indiscriminately.... God
designed, in its adoption, to save his own people, but he
consistently offers its benefits to all who are willing to receive
them.” See also H. B. Smith, System of Christian Theology,
515‐521.
B. Is God’s special call irresistible?
We prefer to say that this special call is efficacious,—that is, that it
infallibly accomplishes its purpose of leading the sinner to the
acceptance of salvation. This implies two things:
(_a_) That the operation of God is not an outward constraint upon the
human will, but that it accords with the laws of our mental constitution.
We reject the term “irresistible,” as implying a coercion and compulsion
which is foreign to the nature of God’s working in the soul.
_Ps. 110:3_—“_Thy people are freewill‐offerings in the day of thy
power: in holy array, Out of the womb of the morning Thou hast the
dew of thy youth_”—_i. e._, youthful recruits to thy standard, as
numberless and as bright as the drops of morning dew; _Phil. 2:12,
13_—“_Work out your own salvation with fear and trembling; for it
is God who worketh in you both to will and to work, for his good
pleasure_”—_i. e._, the result of God’s working is our own
working. The Lutheran Formula of Concord properly condemns the
view that, before, in, and after conversion, the will only resists
the Holy Spirit: for this, it declares, is the very nature of
conversion, that out of non‐willing, God makes willing, persons
(F. C. 60, 581, 582, 673).
_Hos. 4:16_—“_Israel hath behaved himself stubbornly, like a
stubborn heifer,_” or “_or as a heifer that slideth back_” = when
the sacrificial offering is brought forward to be slain, it holds
back, settling on its haunches so that it has to be pushed and
forced before it can be brought to the altar. These are not “_the
sacrifices of God_” which are “_a broken spirit, a broken and a
contrite heart_” (_Ps. 51:17_). E. H. Johnson, Theology, 2d ed.,
250—“The N. T. nowhere declares, or even intimates, ... that the
general call of the Holy Spirit is insufficient. And furthermore,
it never states that the efficient call is irresistible.
Psychologically, to speak of irresistible influence upon the
faculty of self‐determination in man is express contradiction in
terms. No harm can come from acknowledging that we do not know
God’s unrevealed reasons for electing one individual rather than
another to eternal life.” Dr. Johnson goes on to argue that if,
without disparagement to grace, faith can be a condition of
justification, faith might also be a condition of election, and
that inasmuch as salvation is _received_ as a gift only on
condition of faith exercised, it is in _purpose_ a gift, even if
only on condition of faith foreseen. This seems to us to ignore
the abundant Scripture testimony that faith itself is God’s gift,
and therefore the initiative must be wholly with God.
(_b_) That the operation of God is the originating cause of that new
disposition of the affections, and that new activity of the will, by which
the sinner accepts Christ. The cause is not in the response of the will to
the presentation of motives by God, nor in any mere coöperation of the
will of man with the will of God, but is an almighty act of God in the
will of man, by which its freedom to choose God as its end is restored and
rightly exercised (John 1:12, 13). For further discussion of the subject,
see, in the next section, the remarks on Regeneration, with which this
efficacious call is identical.
_John 1:12, 13_—“_But as many as received him, to them gave he the
right to become children of God, even to them that believe on his
name: who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh,
nor of the will of man, but of God._” God’s saving grace and
effectual calling are irresistible, not in the sense that they are
never resisted, but in the sense that they are never successfully
resisted. See Andrew Fuller, Works, 2:373, 513, and 3:807; Gill,
Body of Divinity, 2:121‐130; Robert Hall, Works, 3:75.
Matheson, Moments on the Mount, 128, 129—“Thy love to Him is to
his love to thee what the sunlight on the sea is to the sunshine
in the sky—a reflex, a mirror, a diffusion; thou art giving back
the glory that has been cast upon the waters. In the attraction of
thy life to him, in the cleaving of thy heart to him, in the
soaring of thy spirit to him, thou art told that he is near thee,
thou hearest the beating of his pulse for thee.”
Upton, Hibbert Lectures, 302—“In regard to our reason and to the
essence of our ideals, there is no real dualism between man and
God; but in the case of the will which constitutes the essence of
each man’s individuality, there is a real dualism, and therefore a
possible antagonism between the will of the dependent spirit, man,
and the will of the absolute and universal spirit, God. Such
_real_ duality of will, and not the _appearance_ of duality, as F.
H. Bradley put it, is the essential condition of ethics and
religion.”
Section II.—The Application Of Christ’s Redemption In Its Actual
Beginning.
Under this head we treat of Union with Christ, Regeneration, Conversion
(embracing Repentance and Faith), and Justification. Much confusion and
error have arisen from conceiving these as occurring in chronological
order. The order is logical, not chronological. As it is only “in Christ”
that man is “a new creature” (2 Cor. 5:17) or is “justified” (Acts 13:39),
union with Christ logically precedes both regeneration and justification;
and yet, chronologically, the moment of our union with Christ is also the
moment when we are regenerated and justified. So, too, regeneration and
conversion are but the divine and human sides or aspects of the same fact,
although regeneration has logical precedence, and man turns only as God
turns him.
Dorner, Glaubenslehre, 3:694 (Syst. Doct., 4:159), gives at this
point an account of the work of the Holy Spirit in general. The
Holy Spirit’s work, he says, presupposes the historical work of
Christ, and prepares the way for Christ’s return. “As the Holy
Spirit is the principle of union between the Father and the Son,
so he is the principle of union between God and man. Only through
the Holy Spirit does Christ secure for himself those who will love
him as distinct and free personalities.” Regeneration and
conversion are not chronologically separate. Which of the spokes
of a wheel starts first? The ray of light and the ray of heat
enter at the same moment. Sensation and perception are not
separated in time, although the former is the cause of the latter.
“Suppose a non‐elastic tube extending across the Atlantic. Suppose
that the tube is completely filled with an incompressible fluid.
Then there would be no interval of time between the impulse given
to the fluid at this end of the tube, and the effect upon the
fluid at the other end.” See Hazard, Causation and Freedom in
Willing, 33‐38, who argues that cause and effect are always
simultaneous; else, in the intervening time, there would be a
cause that had no effect; that is, a cause that caused nothing;
that is, a cause that that was not a cause. “A potential cause may
exist for an unlimited period without producing any effect, and of
course may precede its effect by any length of time. But actual,
effective cause being the exercise of a sufficient power, its
effect cannot be delayed; for, in that case, there would be the
exercise of a sufficient power to produce the effect, without
producing it,—involving the absurdity of its being both sufficient
and insufficient at the same time.
“A difficulty may here be suggested in regard to the flow or
progress of events in time, if they are all simultaneous with
their causes. This difficulty cannot arise as to intelligent
effort; for, in regard to it, periods of non‐action may
continually intervene; but if there are series of events and
material phenomena, each of which is in turn effect and cause, it
may be difficult to see how any time could elapse between the
first and the last of the series.... If, however, as I suppose,
these series of events, or material changes, are always effected
through the medium of motion, it need not trouble us, for there is
precisely the same difficulty in regard to our conception of the
motion of matter from point to point, there being no space or
length between any two consecutive points, and yet the body in
motion gets from one end of a long line to the other, and in this
case this difficulty just neutralizes the other.... So, even if we
cannot conceive how motion involves the idea of time, we may
perceive that, if it does so, it may be a means of conveying
events, which depend upon it, through time also.”
Martineau, Study, 1:148‐150—“Simultaneity does not exclude
duration,”—since each cause has duration and each effect has
duration also. Bowne, Metaphysics, 106—“In the system, the
complete ground of an event never lies in any one thing, but only
in a complex of things. If a single thing were the sufficient
ground of an effect, the effect would coëxist with the thing, and
all effects would be instantaneously given. Hence all events in
the system must be viewed as the result of the interaction of two
or more things.”
The first manifestation of life in an infant may be in the lungs
or heart or brain, but that which makes any and all of these
manifestations possible is the antecedent life. We may not be able
to tell which comes first, but having the life we have all the
rest. When the wheel goes, all the spokes will go. The soul that
is born again will show it in faith and hope and love and holy
living. Regeneration will involve repentance and faith and
justification and sanctification. But the one life which makes
regeneration and all these consequent blessings possible is the
life of Christ who joins himself to us in order that we may join
ourselves to him. Anne Reeve Aldrich, The Meaning: “I lost my life
in losing love. This blurred my spring and killed its dove. Along
my path the dying roses Fell, and disclosed the thorns thereof. I
found my life in finding God. In ecstasy I kiss the rod; For who
that wins the goal, but lightly Thinks of the thorns whereon he
trod?”
See A. A. Hodge, on the Ordo Salutis, in Princeton Rev., March,
1888:304‐321. Union with Christ, says Dr. Hodge, “is effected by
the Holy Ghost in effectual calling. Of this calling the parts are
two: (_a_) the offering of Christ to the sinner, _externally_ by
the gospel, and _internally_ by the illumination of the Holy
Ghost; (_b_) the reception of Christ, which on our part is both
passive and active. The passive reception is that whereby a
spiritual principle is ingenerated into the human will, whence
issues the active reception, which is an act of faith with which
repentance is always conjoined. The communion of benefits which
results from this union involves: (_a_) a change of state or
relation, called justification; and (_b_) a change of subjective
moral character, commenced in regeneration and completed through
sanctification.” See also Dr. Hodge’s Popular Lectures on
Theological Themes, 340, and Outlines of Theology, 333‐429.
H. B. Smith, however, in his System of Christian Theology, is more
clear in the putting of Union with Christ before Regeneration. On
page 502, he begins his treatment of the Application of Redemption
with the title: “The Union between Christ and the individual
believer as effected by the Holy Spirit. This embraces the
subjects of Justification, Regeneration, and Sanctification, with
the underlying topic which comes first to be considered,
Election.” He therefore treats Union with Christ (531‐539) before
Regeneration (553‐569). He says Calvin defines regeneration as
coming to us by participation in Christ, and apparently agrees
with this view (559).
“This union [with Christ] is at the ground of regeneration and
justification” (534). “The great difference of theological systems
comes out here. Since Christianity is redemption through Christ,
our mode of conceiving that will determine the character of our
whole theological system” (536). “The union with Christ is
mediated by his Spirit, whence we are both renewed and justified.
The great fact of objective Christianity is incarnation in order
to atonement; the great fact of subjective Christianity is union
with Christ, whereby we receive the atonement” (537). We may add
that this union with Christ, in view of which God elects and to
which God calls the sinner, is begun in regeneration, completed in
conversion, declared in justification, and proved in
sanctification and perseverance.
I. Union with Christ.
The Scriptures declare that, through the operation of God, there is
constituted a union of the soul with Christ different in kind from God’s
natural and providential concursus with all spirits, as well as from all
unions of mere association or sympathy, moral likeness, or moral
influence,—a union of life, in which the human spirit, while then most
truly possessing its own individuality and personal distinctness, is
interpenetrated and energized by the Spirit of Christ, is made inscrutably
but indissolubly one with him, and so becomes a member and partaker of
that regenerated, believing, and justified humanity of which he is the
head.
Union with Christ is not union with a system of doctrine, nor with
external religious influences, nor with an organized church, nor
with an ideal man,—but rather, with a personal, risen, living,
omnipresent Lord (J. W. A. Stewart). Dr. J. W. Alexander well
calls this doctrine of the Union of the Believer with Christ “the
central truth of all theology and of all religion.” Yet it
receives little of formal recognition, either in dogmatic
treatises or in common religious experience. Quenstedt, 886‐912,
has devoted a section to it; A. A. Hodge gives to it a chapter, in
his Outlines of Theology, 369 sq., to which we are indebted for
valuable suggestions; H. B. Smith treats of it, not however as a
separate topic, but under the head of Justification (System,
531‐539).
The majority of printed systems of doctrine, however, contain no
chapter or section on Union with Christ, and the majority of
Christians much more frequently think of Christ as a Savior
outside of them, than as a Savior who dwells within. This
comparative neglect of the doctrine is doubtless a reaction from
the exaggerations of a false mysticism. But there is great need of
rescuing the doctrine from neglect. For this we rely wholly upon
Scripture. Doctrines which reason can neither discover nor prove
need large support from the Bible. It is a mark of divine wisdom
that the doctrine of the Trinity, for example, is so inwoven with
the whole fabric of the New Testament, that the rejection of the
former is the virtual rejection of the latter. The doctrine of
Union with Christ, in like manner, is taught so variously and
abundantly, that to deny it is to deny inspiration itself. See
Kahnis, Luth. Dogmatik, 3:447‐450.
1. Scripture Representations of this Union.
A. Figurative teaching. It is illustrated:
(_a_) From the union of a building and its foundation.
_Eph. 2:20‐22_—“_being built upon the foundation of the apostles
and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the chief corner stone;
in whom each several building, fitly framed together, groweth into
a holy temple in the Lord; in whom ye also are builded together
for a habitation of God in the Spirit_”; _Col. 2:7_—“_builded up
in him_”—grounded in Christ as our foundation; _1 Pet. 2:4,
5_—“_unto whom coming, a living stone, rejected indeed of men, but
with God elect, precious, ye also, as living stones, are built up
a spiritual house_”—each living stone in the Christian temple is
kept in proper relation to every other, and is made to do its part
in furnishing a habitation for God, only by being built upon and
permanently connected with Christ, the chief corner‐stone. _Cf._
_Ps. 118:22_—“_The stone which the builders rejected Is become the
head of the corner_”; _Is. 28:16_—“_Behold, I lay in Zion for a
foundation a stone, a tried stone, a precious corner‐stone of sure
foundation: he that believeth shall not be in haste._”
(_b_) From the union between husband and wife.
_Rom. 7:4_—“_ye also were made dead to the law through the body of
Christ; that ye should be joined to another, even to him who was
raised from the dead, that we might bring forth fruit unto
God_”—here union with Christ is illustrated by the indissoluble
bond that connects husband and wife, and makes them legally and
organically one; _2 Cor. 11:2_—“_I am jealous over you with a
godly jealousy: for I espoused you to one husband, that I might
present you as a pure virgin to Christ_”; _Eph. 5:31, 32_—“_For
this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall
cleave to his wife; and the two shall become one flesh. This
mystery is great: but I speak in regard of Christ and of the
church_”—Meyer refers _verse 31_ wholly to Christ, and says that
Christ leaves father and mother (the right hand of God) and is
joined to the church as his wife, the two constituting thenceforth
one moral person. He makes the union future, however,—“_For this
cause shall a man leave his father and mother_”—the consummation
is at Christ’s second coming. But the Fathers, as Chrysostom,
Theodoret, and Jerome, referred it more properly to the
incarnation.
_Rev. 19:7_—“_the marriage of the Lamb is come, and his wife hath
made herself ready_”; _22:17_—“_And the Spirit and the bride say,
Come_”; _cf._ _Is. 54:5_—“_For thy Maker is thine husband_”; _Jer.
3:20_—“_Surely as a wife treacherously departeth from her husband,
so have ye dealt treacherously with me, O house of Israel, saith
Jehovah_”; _Hos. 2:2‐5_—“_for their mother hath played the
harlot_”—departure from God is adultery; the _Song of Solomon_, as
Jewish interpreters have always maintained, is an allegorical poem
describing, under the figure of marriage, the union between
Jehovah and his people: Paul only adopts the Old Testament figure,
and applies it more precisely to the union of God with the church
in Jesus Christ.
(_c_) From the union between the vine and its branches.
_John 15:1‐10_—“_I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that
abideth in me, and I in him, the same beareth much fruit: for
apart from me ye can do nothing_”—as God’s natural life is in the
vine, that it may give life to its natural branches, so God’s
spiritual life is in the vine, Christ, that he may give life to
his spiritual branches. The roots of this new vine are planted in
heaven, not on earth; and into it the half‐withered branches of
the old humanity are to be grafted, that they may have life
divine. Yet our Lord does not say “I am the root.” The branch is
not something _outside_, which has to get nourishment _out of_ the
root,—it is rather a _part_ of the vine. _Rom. 6:5_—“_if we have
become united with him_ [σύμφυτοι—‘grown together’—used of the man
and horse in the Centaur, Xen., Cyrop., 4:3:18], _in the likeness
of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his
resurrection_”; _11:24_—“_thou wast cut out of that which is by
nature a wild olive tree, and wast grafted contrary to nature into
a good olive tree_”; _Col. 2:6, 7_—“_As therefore ye received
Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk in him, rooted and builded up in
him_”—not only grounded in Christ as our foundation, but thrusting
down roots into him as the deep, rich, all‐sustaining soil. This
union with Christ is consistent with individuality: for the graft
brings forth fruit after its kind, though modified by the tree
into which it is grafted.
Bishop H. W. Warren, in S. S. Times, Oct. 17, 1891—“The lessons of
the vine are intimacy, likeness of nature, continuous impartation
of life, fruit. Between friends there is intimacy by means of
media, such as food, presents, care, words, soul looking from the
eyes. The mother gives her liquid flesh to the babe, but such
intimacy soon ceases. The mother is not rich enough in life
continuously to feed the ever‐enlarging nature of the growing man.
Not so with the vine. It continuously feeds. Its rivers crowd all
the banks. They burst out in leaf, blossom, clinging tendrils, and
fruit, everywhere. In nature a thorn grafted on a pear tree bears
only thorn. There is not pear‐life enough to compel change of its
nature. But a wild olive, typical of depraved nature, grafted on a
good olive tree finds, contrary to nature, that there is force
enough in the growing stock to change the nature of the wild
scion.”
(_d_) From the union between the members and the head of the body.
_1 Cor. 6:15, 19_—“_Know ye not that your bodies are members of
Christ?... know ye not that your body is a temple of the Holy
Spirit which is in you, which ye have from God?_” _12:12_—“_For as
the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of the
body, being many, are one body; so also is Christ_”—here Christ is
identified with the church of which he is the head; _Eph. 1:22,
23_—“_he put all things in subjection under his feet, and gave him
to be head over all things to the church, which is his body, the
fulness of him that filleth all in all_”—as the members of the
human body are united to the head, the source of their activity
and the power that controls their movements, so all believers are
members of an invisible body whose head is Christ. Shall we tie a
string round the finger to keep for it its own blood? No, for all
the blood of the body is needed to nourish one finger. So Christ
is “_head over all things to_ [for the benefit of] _the church_”
(Tyler, Theol. Greek Poets, preface, ii). “The church is the
fulness (πλήρωμα) of Christ; as it was not good for the first man,
Adam, to be alone, no more was it good for the second man, Christ”
(C. H. M.). _Eph. 4:15, 16_—“_grow up in all things into him, who
is the head, even Christ; from whom all the body ... maketh the
increase of the body unto the building up of itself in love_”;
_5:29, 30_—“_for no man ever hated his own flesh; but nourisheth
and cherisheth it, even as Christ also the church; because we are
members of his body._”
(_e_) From the union of the race with the source of its life in Adam.
_Rom. 5:12, 21_—“_as through one man sin entered into the world,
and death through sin.... that, as sin reigned in death, even so
might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life through
Jesus Christ our Lord_”; _1 Cor. 15:22, 45, 49_—“_as in Adam all
die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive.... The first man
Adam became a living soul. The last Adam became a life‐giving
Spirit.... as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also
bear the image of the heavenly_”—as the whole race is one with the
first man Adam, in whom it fell and from whom it has derived a
corrupted and guilty nature, so the whole race of believers
constitutes a new and restored humanity, whose justified and
purified nature is derived from Christ, the second Adam. _Cf._
_Gen. 2:23_—“_This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh:
she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man_”—here
C. H. M. remarks that, as man is first created and then woman is
viewed in and formed out of him, so it is with Christ and the
church. “We are members of Christ’s body, because in Christ we
have the principle of our origin; from him our life arose, just as
the life of Eve was derived from Adam.... The church is Christ’s
helpmeet, formed out of Christ in his deep sleep of death, as Eve
out of Adam.... The church will be nearest to Christ, as Eve was
to Adam.” Because Christ is the source of all spiritual life for
his people, he is called, in _Is. 9:6_, “_Everlasting Father,_”
and it is said, in _Is. 53:10_, that “_he shall see his seed_”
(see page 680).
B. Direct statements.
(_a_) The believer is said to be in Christ.
Lest we should regard the figures mentioned above as merely
Oriental metaphors, the fact of the believer’s union with Christ
is asserted in the most direct and prosaic manner. _John
14:20_—“_ye in me_”; _Rom. 6:11_—“_alive unto God in Christ
Jesus_”; _8:1_—“_no condemnation to them that are in Christ
Jesus_”; _2 Cor. 5:17_—“_if any man is in Christ, he is a new
creature_”; _Eph. 1:4_—“_chose us in him before the foundation of
the world_”; _2:13_—“_now in Christ Jesus ye that once were far
off are made nigh in the blood of Christ._” Thus the believer is
said to be “_in Christ_,” as the element or atmosphere which
surrounds him with its perpetual presence and which constitutes
his vital breath; in fact, this phrase “_in Christ_,” always
meaning “in union with Christ,” is the very key to Paul’s
epistles, and to the whole New Testament. The fact that the
believer is in Christ is symbolized in baptism: we are “_baptized
into Christ_” (_Gal. 3:27_).
(_b_) Christ is said to be in the believer.
_John 14:20_—“_I in you_”; _Rom. 8:9_—“_ye are not in the flesh
but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwelleth in
you. But if any man hath not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of
his_”—that this Spirit of Christ is Christ himself, is shown from
_verse 10_—“_And if Christ is in you, the body is dead because of
sin; but the spirit is life because of righteousness_”; _Gal.
2:20_—“_I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I
that live, but Christ liveth in me_”—here Christ is said to be in
the believer, and so to live his life within the believer, that
the latter can point to this as the dominating fact of his
experience,—it is not so much he that lives, as it is Christ that
lives in him. The fact that Christ is in the believer is
symbolized in the Lord’s supper: “_The bread which we break, is it
not a participation in the body of Christ?_” (_1 Cor. 10:16_).
(_c_) The Father and the Son dwell in the believer.
_John 14:23_—“_If a man love me, he will keep my word: and my
Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our
abode with him_”; _cf._ _10_—“_Believest thou not that I am in the
Father, and the Father in me? the words that I say unto you I
speak not from myself: but the Father abiding in me doeth his
works_”—the Father and the Son dwell in the believer; for where
the Son is, there always the Father must be also. If the union
between the believer and Christ in _John 14:23_ is to be
interpreted as one of mere moral influence, then the union of
Christ and the Father in _John 14:10_ must also be interpreted as
a union of mere moral influence. _Eph. 3:17_—“_that Christ may
dwell in your hearts through faith_”; _1 John 4:16_—“_he that
abideth in love abideth in God, and God abideth in him._”
(_d_) The believer has life by partaking of Christ, as Christ has life by
partaking of the Father.
_John 6:53, 56, 57_—“_Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man
and drink his blood, ye have not life in yourselves .... He that
eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood abideth in me, and I in him.
As the living Father sent me and I live because of the Father, so
he that eateth me, he also shall live because of me_”—the believer
has life by partaking of Christ in a way that may not
inappropriately be compared with Christ’s having life by partaking
of the Father. _1 Cor. 10:16, 17_—“_the cup of blessing which we
bless, is it not a communion of the blood of Christ? The bread
which we break, is it not a communion of the body of
Christ?_”—here it is intimated that the Lord’s Supper sets forth,
in the language of symbol, the soul’s actual participation in the
life of Christ; and the margin properly translates the word
κοινωνία, not “communion,” but “_participation_.” _Cf._ _1 John
1:3_—“_our fellowship (κοινωνία) is with the Father, and with his
Son Jesus Christ._” Foster, Christian Life and Theology, 216—“In
_John 6_, the phrases call to mind the ancient form of sacrifice,
and the participation therein by the offerer at the sacrificial
meal,—as at the Passover.”
(_e_) All believers are one in Christ.
_John 17:21‐23_—“_that they may all be one; even as thou, Father,
art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be in us: that the
world may believe that thou didst send me. And the glory which
thou hast given me I have given unto them; that they may be one,
even as we are one; I in them, and thou in me, that they may be
perfected into one_”—all believers are one in Christ, to whom they
are severally and collectively united, as Christ himself is one
with God.
(_f_) The believer is made partaker of the divine nature.
_2 Pet. 1:4_—“_that through these_ [promises] _ye may become
partakers of the divine nature_”—not by having the essence of your
humanity changed into the essence of divinity, but by having
Christ the divine Savior continually dwelling within, and
indissolubly joined to, your human souls.
(_g_) The believer is made one spirit with the Lord.
_1 Cor. 6:17_—“_he that is joined unto the Lord is one
spirit_”—human nature is so interpenetrated and energized by the
divine, that the two move and act as one; _cf._ _19_—“_know ye not
that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit which is in you,
which ye have from God?_” _Rom. 8:26_—“_the Spirit also helpeth
our infirmity: for we know not how to pray as we ought; but the
Spirit himself maketh intercession for us with groanings which
cannot be uttered_”—the Spirit is so near to us, and so one with
us, that our prayer is called his, or rather, his prayer becomes
ours. Weiss, in his Life of Jesus, says that, in the view of
Scripture, human greatness does not consist in a man’s producing
everything in a natural way out of himself, but in possessing
perfect receptivity for God’s greatest gift. Therefore God’s Son
receives the Spirit without measure; and we may add that the
believer in like manner receives Christ.
2. Nature of this Union.
We have here to do not only with a fact of life, but with a unique
relation between the finite and the infinite. Our descriptions must
therefore be inadequate. Yet in many respects we know what this union is
not; in certain respects we can positively characterize it.
It should not surprise us if we find it far more difficult to give
a scientific definition of this union, than to determine the fact
of its existence. It is a fact of life with which we have to deal;
and the secret of life, even in its lowest forms, no philosopher
has ever yet discovered. The tiniest flower witnesses to two
facts: first, that of its own relative independence, as an
individual organism; and secondly, that of its ultimate dependence
upon a life and power not its own. So every human soul has its
proper powers of intellect, affection, and will; yet it lives,
moves, and has its being in God (_Acts 17:28_).
Starting out from the truth of God’s omnipresence, it might seem
as if God’s indwelling in the granite boulder was the last limit
of his union with the finite. But we see the divine intelligence
and goodness drawing nearer to us, by successive stages, in
vegetable life, in the animal creation, and in the moral nature of
man. And yet there are two stages beyond all these: first, in
Christ’s union with the believer; and secondly, in God’s union
with Christ. If this union of God with the believer be only one of
several approximations of God to his finite creation, the fact
that it is, equally with the others, not wholly comprehensible to
reason, should not blind us either to its truth or to its
importance.
It is easier to‐day than at any other previous period of history
to believe in the union of the believer with Christ. That God is
immanent in the universe, and that there is a divine element in
man, is familiar to our generation. All men are naturally one with
Christ, the immanent God, and this natural union prepares the way
for that spiritual union in which Christ joins himself to our
faith. Campbell, The Indwelling Christ, 131—“In the immanence of
Christ in nature we find the ground of his immanence in human
nature.... A man may be out of Christ, but Christ is never out of
him. Those who banish him he does not abandon.” John Caird, Fund.
Ideas of Christianity, 2:233‐256—“God is united with nature, in
the atoms, in the trees, in the planets. Science is seeing nature
full of the life of God. God is united to man in body and soul.
The beating of his heart and the voice of conscience witness to
God within. God sleeps in the stone, dreams in the animal, wakes
in man.”
A. Negatively.—It is not:
(_a_) A merely natural union, like that of God with all human spirits,—as
held by rationalists.
In our physical life we are conscious of another life within us
which is not subject to our wills: the heart beats involuntarily,
whether we sleep or wake. But in our spiritual life we are still
more conscious of a life within our life. Even the heathen said:
“Est Deus in nobis; agitante calescimus illo,” and the Egyptians
held to the identification of the departed with Osiris (Renouf,
Hibbert Lectures, 185). But Paul urges us to work out our
salvation, upon the very ground that “_it is God that worketh_” in
us, “_both to will and to work, for his good pleasure_” (_Phil.
2:12, 13_). This life of God in the soul is the life of Christ.
The movement of the electric car cannot be explained simply from
the working of its own motor apparatus. The electric current
throbbing through the wire, and the dynamo from which that energy
proceeds, are needed to explain the result. In like manner we need
a spiritual Christ to explain the spiritual activity of the
Christian. A. H. Strong, Sermon before the Baptist World Congress
in London, 1905—“We had in America some years ago a steam engine
all whose working parts were made of glass. The steam came from
without, but, being hot enough to move machinery, this steam was
itself invisible, and there was presented the curious spectacle of
an engine, transparent, moving, and doing important work, while
yet no cause for this activity was perceptible. So the church,
humanity, the universe, are all in constant and progressive
movement, but the Christ who moves them is invisible. Faith comes
to believe where it cannot see. It joins itself to this invisible
Christ, and knows him as its very life.”
(_b_) A merely moral union, or union of love and sympathy, like that
between teacher and scholar, friend and friend,—as held by Socinians and
Arminians.
There is a moral union between different souls: _1 Sam.
18:1_—“_the soul of Jonathan was knit with the soul of David, and
Jonathan loved him as his own soul_”—here the Vulgate has: “Anima
Jonathæ agglutinata Davidi.” Aristotle calls friends “one soul.”
So in a higher sense, in _Acts 4:32_, the early believers are said
to have been “_of one heart and soul_.” But in _John 17:21, 26_,
Christ’s union with his people is distinguished from any mere
union of love and sympathy: “_that they may all be one; even as
thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be in
us;... that the love wherewith thou lovedst me may be in them, and
I in them_.” Jesus’ aim, in the whole of his last discourse, is to
show that no mere union of love and sympathy will be sufficient:
“_apart from me_,” he says, “_ye can do nothing_” (_John 15:5_).
That his disciples may be vitally joined to himself, is therefore
the subject of his last prayer.
Dorner says well, that Arminianism (and with this doctrine Roman
Catholics and the advocates of New School views substantially
agree) makes man a mere tangent to the circle of the divine
nature. It has no idea of the interpenetration of the one by the
other. But the Lutheran Formula of Concord says much more
correctly: “Damnamus sententiam quod non Deus ipse, sed dona Dei
duntaxat, in credentibus habitent.”
Ritschl presents to us a historical Christ, and Pfleiderer
presents to us an ideal Christ, but neither one gives us the
living Christ who is the present spiritual life of the believer.
Wendt, in his Teaching of Jesus, 2:310, comes equally far short of
a serious interpretation of our Lord’s promise, when he says:
“This union to his person, as to its contents, is nothing else
than adherence to the message of the kingdom of God brought by
him.” It is not enough for me to be merely _in touch_ with Christ.
He must come to be “not so far as even to be near.” Tennyson, The
Higher Pantheism: “Closer is he than breathing, and nearer than
hands or feet.” William Watson, The Unknown God: “Yea, in my flesh
his Spirit doth flow, Too near, too far, for me to know.”
(_c_) A union of essence, which destroys the distinct personality and
subsistence of either Christ or the human spirit,—as held by many of the
mystics.
Many of the mystics, as Schwenkfeld, Weigel, Sebastian Frank, held
to an _essential_ union between Christ and the believer. One of
Weigel’s followers, therefore, could say to another: “I am Christ
Jesus, the living Word of God; I have redeemed thee by my sinless
sufferings.” We are ever to remember that the indwelling of Christ
only puts the believer more completely in possession of himself,
and makes him more conscious of his own personality and power.
Union with Christ must be taken in connection with the other truth
of the personality and activity of the Christian; otherwise it
tends to pantheism. Martineau, Study, 2:190—“In nature it is God’s
immanent life, in morals it is God’s transcendent life, with which
we commune.”
Angelus Silesius, a German philosophical poet (1624‐1677),
audaciously wrote: “I know God cannot live an instant without me;
He must give up the ghost, if I should cease to be.” Lowde, a
disciple of Malebranche, used the phrase “Godded with God, and
Christed with Christ,” and Jonathan Edwards, in his Religious
Affections, quotes it with disapprobation, saying that “the saints
do not become actually partakers of the divine essence, as would
be inferred from this abominable and blasphemous language of
heretics” (Allen, Jonathan Edwards, 224). “Self is not a mode of
the divine: it is a principle of isolation. In order to religion,
I must have a will to surrender.... ‘Our wills are ours, to make
them thine.’... Though the self is, in _knowledge_, a principle of
unification; in _existence_, or metaphysically, it is a principle
of isolation” (Seth).
Inge, Christian Mysticism, 30—“Some of the mystics went astray by
teaching a real _substitution_ of the divine for human nature,
thus depersonalizing man—a fatal mistake, for without human
personality we cannot conceive of divine personality.” Lyman
Abbott: “In Christ, God and man are united, not as the river is
united with the sea, losing its personality therein, but as the
child is united with the father, or the wife with the husband,
whose personality and individuality are strengthened and increased
by the union.” Here Dr. Abbott’s view comes as far short of the
truth as that of the mystics goes beyond the truth. As we shall
see, the union of the believer with Christ is a vital union,
surpassing in its intimacy any union of souls that we know. The
union of child with father, or of wife with husband, is only a
pointer which hints very imperfectly at the interpenetrating and
energizing of the human spirit by the divine.
(_d_) A union mediated and conditioned by participation of the sacraments
of the church,—as held by Romanists, Lutherans, and High‐Church
Episcopalians.
Perhaps the most pernicious misinterpretation of the nature of
this union is that which conceives of it as a physical and
material one, and which rears upon this basis the fabric of a
sacramental and external Christianity. It is sufficient here to
say that this union cannot be mediated by sacraments, since
sacraments presuppose it as already existing; both Baptism and the
Lord’s Supper are designed only for believers. Only faith receives
and retains Christ; and faith is the act of the soul grasping what
is purely invisible and supersensible: not the act of the body,
submitting to Baptism or partaking of the Supper.
William Lincoln: “The only way for the believer, if he wants to go
rightly, is to remember that truth is always two‐sided. If there
is any truth that the Holy Spirit has specially pressed upon your
heart, if you do not want to push it to the extreme, ask what is
the counter‐truth, and lean a little of your weight upon that;
otherwise, if you bear so very much on one side of the truth,
there is a danger of pushing it into a heresy. Heresy means
selected truth; it does not mean error; heresy and error are very
different things. Heresy is truth, but truth pushed into undue
importance, to the disparagement of the truth upon the other
side.” Heresy (αἵρεσις) = an act of choice, the picking and
choosing of a part, instead of comprehensively embracing the whole
of truth. Sacramentarians substitute the symbol for the thing
symbolized.
B. Positively.—It is:
(_a_) An organic union,—in which we become members of Christ and partakers
of his humanity.
Kant defines an organism, as that whose parts are reciprocally
means and end. The body is an organism; since the limbs exist for
the heart, and the heart for the limbs. So each member of Christ’s
body lives for him who is the head; and Christ the head equally
lives for his members: _Eph. 5:29, 30_—“_no man ever hated his own
flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, __ even as Christ also
the church; because we are members of his body_.” The train‐
despatcher is a symbol of the concentration of energy; the
switchmen and conductors who receive his orders are symbols of the
localization of force; but it is all one organic system.
(_b_) A vital union,—in which Christ’s life becomes the dominating
principle within us.
This union is a vital one, in distinction from any union of mere
juxtaposition or external influence. Christ does not work upon us
from without, as one separated from us, but from within, as the
very heart from which the life‐blood of our spirits flows. See
_Gal. 2:20_—“_it is no longer I that live, but Christ liveth in
me: and that life which I now live in the flesh I live in faith,
the faith which is in the Son of God, who loved me, and gave
himself up for me;_” _Col 3:3, 4_—“_For ye died, and your life is
hid with Christ in God. When Christ, who is our life, shall be
manifested, then shall ye also with him be manifested in glory._”
Christ’s life is not corrupted by the corruption of his members,
any more than the ray of light is defiled by the filth with which
it comes in contact. We may be unconscious of this union with
Christ, as we often are of the circulation of the blood, yet it
may be the very source and condition of our life.
(_c_) A spiritual union,—that is, a union whose source and author is the
Holy Spirit.
By a spiritual union we mean a union not of body but of spirit,—a
union, therefore, which only the Holy Spirit originates and
maintains. _Rom. 8:9, 10_—“_ye are not in the flesh but in the
Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you. But if
any man hath not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his. And if
Christ is in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the spirit
is life because of righteousness._” The indwelling of Christ
involves a continual exercise of efficient power. In _Eph. 3:16,
17_, “_strengthened with power through his Spirit in the inward
man_” is immediately followed by “_that Christ may dwell in your
hearts through faith_.”
(_d_) An indissoluble union,—that is, a union which, consistently with
Christ’s promise and grace, can never be dissolved.
_Mat. 28:20_—“_lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the
world_”; _John 10:28_—“_they shall never perish, and no one shall
snatch them out of my hand_”; _Rom. 8:35, 39_—“_Who shall separate
us from the love of Christ?... nor height, nor depth, nor any
other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God,
which is in Christ Jesus our Lord_”; _1 Thess. 4:14, 17_—“_them
also that are fallen asleep in Jesus will God bring with him ...
then we that are alive, that are left, shall together with them be
caught up in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall
we ever be with the Lord._”
Christ’s omnipresence makes it possible for him to be united to,
and to be present in, each believer, as perfectly and fully as if
that believer were the only one to receive Christ’s fulness. As
Christ’s omnipresence makes the whole Christ present in every
place, each believer has the whole Christ with him, as his source
of strength, purity, life; so that each may say: Christ gives all
his time and wisdom and care to me. Such a union as this lacks
every element of instability. Once formed, the union is
indissoluble. Many of the ties of earth are rudely broken,—not so
with our union with Christ,—that endures forever.
Since there is now an unchangeable and divine element in us, our
salvation depends no longer upon our unstable wills, but upon
Christ’s purpose and power. By temporary declension from duty, or
by our causeless unbelief, we may banish Christ to the barest and
most remote room of the soul’s house; but he does not suffer us
wholly to exclude him; and when we are willing to unbar the doors,
he is still there, ready to fill the whole mansion with his light
and love.
(_e_) An inscrutable union,—mystical, however, only in the sense of
surpassing in its intimacy and value any other union of souls which we
know.
This union is inscrutable, indeed; but it is not mystical, in the
sense of being unintelligible to the Christian or beyond the reach
of his experience. If we call it mystical at all, it should be
only because, in the intimacy of its communion and in the
transforming power of its influence, it surpasses any other union
of souls that we know, and so cannot be fully described or
understood by earthly analogies. _Eph. 5:32_—“_This mystery is
great: but I speak in regard of Christ and of the church_”; _Col.
1:27_—“_the riches of the glory of this mystery among the
Gentiles, which is Christ in you, the hope of glory._”
See Diman, Theistic Argument, 380—“As physical science has brought
us to the conclusion that back of all the phenomena of the
material universe there lies an invisible universe of forces, and
that these forces may ultimately be reduced to one all‐pervading
force in which the unity of the physical universe consists; and as
philosophy has advanced the rational conjecture that this ultimate
all‐pervading force is simply will‐force; so the great Teacher
holds up to us the spiritual universe as pervaded by one
omnipotent life—a life which was revealed in him as its highest
manifestation, but which is shared by all who by faith become
partakers of his nature. He was Son of God: they too had power to
become sons of God. The incarnation is wholly within the natural
course and tendency of things. It was prepared for, it came, in
the fulness of times. Christ’s life is not something sporadic and
individual, having its source in the personal conviction of each
disciple; it implies a real connection with Christ, the head.
Behind all nature there is one force; behind all varieties of
Christian life and character there is one spiritual power. All
nature is not inert matter,—it is pervaded by a living presence.
So all the body of believers live by virtue of the all‐working
Spirit of Christ, the Holy Ghost.” An epitaph at Silton, in
Dorsetshire, reads: “Here lies a piece of Christ—a star in dust, A
vein of gold, a china dish, that must Be used in heaven when God
shall feed the just.”
A. H. Strong, in Examiner, 1880: “Such is the nature of union with
Christ,—such I mean, is the nature of every believer’s union with
Christ. For, whether he knows it or not, every Christian has
entered into just such a partnership as this. It is this and this
only which constitutes him a Christian, and which makes possible a
Christian church. We may, indeed, be thus united to Christ,
without being fully conscious of the real nature of our relation
to him. We may actually possess the kernel, while as yet we have
regard only to the shell; we may seem to ourselves to be united to
Christ only by an external bond, while after all it is an inward
and spiritual bond that makes us his. God often reveals to the
Christian the mystery of the gospel, which is Christ _in_ him the
hope of glory, at the very time that he is seeking only some
nearer access to a Redeemer outside of him. Trying to find a union
of coöperation or of sympathy, he is amazed to learn that there is
already established a union with Christ more glorious and blessed,
namely, a union of life; and so, like the miners in the Rocky
Mountains, while he is looking only for silver, he finds gold.
Christ and the believer have the same life. They are not separate
persons linked together by some temporary bond of friendship,—they
are united by a tie as close and indissoluble as if the same blood
ran in their veins. Yet the Christian may never have suspected how
intimate a union he has with his Savior; and the first
understanding of this truth may be the gateway through which he
passes into a holier and happier stage of the Christian life.”
So the Way leads, through the Truth, to the Life (_John 14:6_).
Apprehension of an external Savior prepares for the reception and
experience of the internal Savior. Christ is first the Door of the
sheep, but in him, after they have once entered in, they find
pasture (_John 10:7‐9_). On the nature of this union, see H. B.
Smith, System of Christian Theology, 531‐539; Baird, Elohim
Revealed, 601; Wilberforce, Incarnation, 208‐272, and New Birth of
Man’s Nature, 1‐30. _Per contra_, see Park, Discourses, 117‐136.
3. Consequences of this Union as respects the Believer.
We have seen that Christ’s union with humanity, at the incarnation,
involved him in all the legal liabilities of the race to which he united
himself, and enabled him so to assume the penalty of its sin as to make
for all men a full satisfaction to the divine justice, and to remove all
external obstacles to man’s return to God. An internal obstacle, however,
still remains—the evil affections and will, and the consequent guilt, of
the individual soul. This last obstacle also Christ removes, in the case
of all his people, by uniting himself to them in a closer and more perfect
manner than that in which he is united to humanity at large. As Christ’s
union with the race secures the objective reconciliation of the race to
God, so Christ’s union with believers secures the subjective
reconciliation of believers to God.
In Baird, Elohim Revealed, 607‐610, in Owen, on Justification,
chap. 8, in Boston, Covenant of Grace, chap. 2, and in Dale,
Atonement, 265‐440, the union of the believer with Christ is made
to explain the bearing of our sins by Christ. As we have seen in
our discussion of the Atonement, however (page 759), this explains
the cause by the effect, and implies that Christ died only for the
elect (see review of Dale, in Brit. Quar. Rev., Apr.
1876:221‐225). It is not the union of Christ with the believer,
but the union of Christ with humanity at large, that explains his
taking upon him human guilt and penalty.
Amnesty offered to a rebellious city may be complete, yet it may
avail only for those who surrender. Pardon secured from a
Governor, upon the ground of the services of an Advocate, may be
effectual only when the convict accepts it,—there is no hope for
him when he tears up the pardon. Dr. H. E. Robins: “The judicial
declaration of acquittal on the ground of the death of Christ,
which comes to all men (_Rom. 5:18_), and into the benefits of
which they are introduced by natural birth, is inchoate
justification, and will become perfected justification through the
new birth of the Holy Spirit, unless the working of this divine
agent is resisted by the personal moral action of those who are
lost.” What Dr. Robins calls “inchoate justification” we prefer to
call “ideal justification” or “attainable justification.” Humanity
in Christ is justified, and every member of the race who joins
himself to Christ by faith participates in Christ’s justification.
H. E. Dudley: “Adam’s sin holds us all down just as gravity holds
all, while Christ’s righteousness, though secured for all and
accessible to all, involves an effort of will in climbing and
grasping which not all will make.” Justification in Christ is the
birthright of humanity; but, in order to possess and enjoy it,
each of us must claim and appropriate it by faith.
R. W. Dale, Fellowship with Christ, 7—“When we were created in
Christ, the fortunes of the human race for good or evil became
his. The Incarnation revealed and fulfilled the relations which
already existed between the Son of God and mankind. From the
beginning Christ had entered into fellowship with us. When we
sinned, he remained in fellowship with us still. Our miseries” [we
would add: our guilt] “were his, by his own choice.... His
fellowship with us is the foundation of our fellowship with
him.... When I have discovered that by the very constitution of my
nature I am to achieve perfection in the power of the life of
Another—who is yet not Another, but the very ground of my being—it
ceases to be incredible to me that Another—who is yet not
Another—should be the Atonement for my sin, and that his relation
to God should determine mine.”
A tract entitled “The Seven Togethers” sums up the Scripture
testimony with regard to the Consequences of the believer’s Union
with Christ: 1. Crucified together with Christ—_Gal.
2:20_—συνεσταύρωμαι. 2. Died together with Christ—_Col.
2:20_—ἀπεθάνετε. 3. Buried together with Christ—_Rom.
6:4_—συνετάφημεν. 4. Quickened together with Christ—_Eph.
2:5_—συνεζωοποίησεν. 5. Raised together with Christ—_Col.
3:1_—συνηγέρθητε. 6. Sufferers together with Christ—_Rom.
8:17_—συμπάσχομεν. 7. Glorified together with Christ—_Rom.
8:17_—συνδοξασθῶμεν. Union with Christ results in common sonship,
relation to God, character, influence, and destiny.
Imperfect apprehension of the believer’s union with Christ works
to the great injury of Christian doctrine. An experience of union
with Christ first enables us to understand the death of sin and
separation from God which has befallen the race sprung from the
first Adam. The life and liberty of the children of God in Christ
Jesus shows us by contrast how far astray we had gone. The vital
and organic unity of the new race sprung from the second Adam
reveals the depravity and disintegration which we had inherited
from our first father. We see that as there is one source of
spiritual life in Christ, so there was one source of corrupt life
in Adam; and that as we are justified by reason of our oneness
with the justified Christ, so we are condemned by reason of our
oneness with the condemned Adam.
A. H. Strong, Christ in Creation, 175—“If it is consistent with
evolution that the physical and natural life of the race should be
derived from a single source, then it is equally consistent with
evolution that the moral and spiritual life of the race should be
derived from a single source. Scripture is stating only scientific
fact when it sets the second Adam, the head of redeemed humanity,
over against the first Adam, the head of fallen humanity. We are
told that evolution should give us many Christs. We reply that
evolution has not given us many Adams. Evolution, as it assigns to
the natural head of the race a supreme and unique position, must
be consistent with itself, and must assign a supreme and unique
position to Jesus Christ, the spiritual head of the race. As there
was but one Adam from whom all the natural life of the race was
derived, so that there can be but one Christ from whom all the
spiritual life of the race is derived.”
The consequences of union with Christ may be summarily stated as follows:
(_a_) Union with Christ involves a change in the dominant affection of the
soul. Christ’s entrance into the soul makes it a new creature, in the
sense that the ruling disposition, which before was sinful, now becomes
holy. This change we call _Regeneration_.
_Rom. 8:2_—“_For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus
made me free from the law of sin and of death_”; _2 Cor.
5:17_—“_if any man is in Christ, he is a new creature_”
(marg.—“_there is a new creation_”); _Gal. 1:15, 16_—“_it was the
good pleasure of God ... to reveal his Son in me_”; _Eph.
2:10_—“_For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for
good works._” As we derive our old nature from the first man Adam,
by birth, so we derive a new nature from the second man Christ, by
the new birth. Union with Christ is the true “transfusion of
blood.” “The death‐struck sinner, like the wan, anæmic, dying
invalid, is saved by having poured into his veins the healthier
blood of Christ” (Drummond, Nat. Law in the Spir. World). God
regenerates the soul by uniting it to Jesus Christ.
In the Johnston Harvester Works at Batavia, when they paint their
machinery, they do it by immersing part after part in a great tank
of paint,—so the painting is instantaneous and complete. Our
baptism into Christ is the outward picture of an inward immersion
of the soul not only into his love and fellowship, but into his
very life, so that in him we become new creatures (_2 Cor. 5:17_).
As Miss Sullivan surrounded Helen Keller with the influence of her
strong personality, by intelligence and sympathy and determination
striving to awaken the blind and dumb soul and give it light and
love, so Jesus envelops us. But his Spirit is more encompassing
and more penetrating than any human influence however powerful,
because his life is the very ground and principle of our being.
Tennyson: “O for a man to arise in me, That the man that I am may
cease to be!” Emerson: “Himself from God he could not free; He
builded better than he knew.” Religion is not the adding of a new
department of activity as an adjunct to our own life or the
grafting of a new method of manifestation upon the old. It is
rather the grafting of our souls into Christ, so that his life
dominates and manifests itself in all our activities. The magnet
which left to itself can lift only a three pound weight, will lift
three hundred when it is attached to the electric dynamo.
Expositor’s Greek Testament on _1 Cor. 15:45, 46_—“The action of
Jesus in ‘_breathing_’ upon his disciples while he said, ‘_Receive
the Holy Spirit_’ (_John 20:22_ _sq._) symbolized the vitalizing
relationship which at this epoch he assumed towards mankind; this
act raised to a higher potency the original ‘_breathing_’ of God
by which ‘_man became a living soul_’ (_Gen. 2:7_).”
(_b_) Union with Christ involves a new exercise of the soul’s powers in
repentance and faith; faith, indeed, is the act of the soul by which,
under the operation of God, Christ is received. This new exercise of the
soul’s powers we call _Conversion_ (Repentance and Faith). It is the
obverse or human side of Regeneration.
_Eph. 3:17_—“_that Christ may dwell in your hearts through
faith_”; _2 Tim. 3:15_—“_the sacred writings which are able to
make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ
Jesus._” Faith is the soul’s laying hold of Christ as its only
source of life, pardon, and salvation. And so we see what true
religion is. It is not a moral life; it is not a determination to
be religious; it is not faith, if by faith we mean an external
trust that somehow Christ will save us; it is nothing less than
the life of the soul in God, through Christ his Son. To Christ
then we are to look for the origin, continuance and increase of
our faith (_Luke 17:5_—“_said unto the Lord, Increase our
faith_”). Our faith is but a part of “_his fulness_” of which “_we
all received, and grace for grace_” (_John 1:16_).
A. H. Strong, Sermon before the Baptist World Congress, London,
1905—“Christianity is summed up in the two facts: Christ _for_ us,
and Christ _in_ us—Christ _for_ us upon the Cross, revealing the
eternal opposition of holiness to sin, and yet, through God’s
eternal suffering for sin making objective atonement for us; and
Christ _in_ us by his Spirit, renewing in us the lost image of
God, and abiding in us as the all‐sufficient source of purity and
power. Here are the two foci of the Christian ellipse: Christ
_for_ us, who redeemed us from the curse of the law by being made
a curse for us, and Christ _in_ us, the hope of glory, whom the
apostle calls the mystery of the gospel.
“We need Christ _in_ us as well as Christ _for_ us. How shall I,
how shall society, find healing and purification within? Let me
answer by reminding you of what they did at Chicago. In all the
world there was no river more stagnant and fetid than was Chicago
River. Its sluggish stream received the sweepings of the
watercraft and the offal of the city, and there was no current to
carry the detritus away. There it settled, and bred miasma and
fever. At last it was suggested that, by cutting through the low
ridge between the city and the Desplaines River, the current could
be set running in the opposite direction, and drainage could be
secured into the Illinois River and the great Mississippi. At a
cost of fifteen millions of dollars the cut was made, and now all
the water of Lake Michigan can be relied upon to cleanse that
turbid stream. What Chicago River could never do for itself, the
great lake now does for it. So no human soul can purge itself of
its sin; and what the individual cannot do, humanity at large is
powerless to accomplish. Sin has dominion over us, and we are foul
to the very depths of our being, until with the help of God we
break through the barrier of our self‐will, and let the floods of
Christ’s purifying life flow into us. Then, in an hour, more is
done to renew, than all our efforts for years had effected. Thus
humanity is saved, individual by individual, not by philosophy, or
philanthropy, or self‐development, or self‐reformation, but simply
by joining itself to Jesus Christ, and by being filled in Him with
all the fulness of God.”
(_c_) Union with Christ gives to the believer the legal standing and
rights of Christ. As Christ’s union with the race involves atonement, so
the believer’s union with Christ involves _Justification_. The believer is
entitled to take for his own all that Christ is, and all that Christ has
done; and this because he has within him that new life of humanity which
suffered in Christ’s death and rose from the grave in Christ’s
resurrection,—in other words, because he is virtually one person with the
Redeemer. In Christ the believer is prophet, priest, and king.
_Acts 13:39_—“_by him_ [lit.: ‘_in him_’ = in union with him]
_every one that believeth is justified_”; _Rom. 6:7, 8_—“_he that
hath died is justified from sin ... we died with Christ_”;
_7:4_—“_dead to the law through the body of Christ_”; _8:1_—“_no
condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus_”; _17_—“_heirs of
God, and joint‐heirs with Christ_”; _1 Cor. 1:30_—“_But of him ye
are in Christ Jesus, who was made unto us wisdom from God, and
righteousness_ [justification]”; _3:21, 23_—“_all things are yours
... and ye are Christ’s_”; _6:11_—“_ye were justified in the name
of the Lord Jesus Christ, and in the Spirit of our God_”; _2 Cor.
5:14_—“_we thus judge, that one died for all, therefore all
died_”; _21_—“_Him who knew no sin he made to be sin on our
behalf; that we might become the righteousness_ [justification]
_of God in him_” = God’s justified persons, in union with Christ
(see pages 760, 761).
_Gal. 2:20_—“_I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no
longer I that live, but Christ liveth in me_”; _Eph. 1:4,
6_—“_chose us in him ... to the praise of the glory of his grace,
which he freely bestowed on us in the Beloved_”; _2:5, 6_—“_even
when we were dead through our trespasses, made us alive together
with Christ ... made us to sit with him in the heavenly places, in
Christ Jesus_”; _Phil. 3:8, 9_—“_that I may gain Christ, and be
found in him, not having a righteousness of mine own, even that
which is of the law, but that which is through faith in Christ,
the righteousness which is from God by faith_”; _2 Tim.
2:11_—“_Faithful is the saying: For if we died with him, we shall
also live with him._” Prophet: _Luke 12:12_—“_the Holy Spirit
shall teach you in that very hour what ye ought to say_”; _1 John
2:20_—“_ye have an anointing from the Holy One, and ye know all
things._” Priest: _1 Pet. 2:5_—“_a holy priesthood, to offer up
spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God through Jesus Christ_”;
_Rev. 20:6_—“_they shall be priests of God and of Christ_”; _1
Pet. 2:9_—“_a royal priesthood._” King: _Rev. 3:21_—“_He that
overcometh, I will give to him to sit down with me in my throne_”;
_5:10_—“_madest them to be unto our God a kingdom and priests._”
The connection of justification and union with Christ delivers the
former from the charge of being a mechanical and arbitrary
procedure. As Jonathan Edwards has said: “The justification of the
believer is no other than his being admitted to communion in, or
participation of, this head and surety of all believers.”
(_d_) Union with Christ secures to the believer the continuously
transforming, assimilating power of Christ’s life,—first, for the soul;
secondly, for the body,—consecrating it in the present, and in the future
raising it up in the likeness of Christ’s glorified body. This continuous
influence, so far as it is exerted in the present life, we call
_Sanctification_, the human side or aspect of which is _Perseverance_.
For the soul: _John 1:16_—“_of his fulness we all received, and
grace for grace_”—successive and increasing measures of grace,
corresponding to the soul’s successive and increasing needs; _Rom.
8:10_—“_if Christ is in you, the body is dead because of sin; but
the spirit is life because of righteousness_”; _1 Cor.
15:45_—“_The last Adam became a life‐giving spirit_”; _Phil.
2:5_—“_Have this mind in you, which was also in Christ Jesus_”; _1
John 3:2_—“_if he shall be manifested, we shall be like him._”
“Can Christ let the believer fall out of his hands? No, for the
believer is his hands.”
For the body: _1 Cor. 6:17‐20_—“_he that is joined unto the Lord
is one spirit ... know ye not that your body is a temple of the
Holy Spirit which is in you ... glorify God therefore in your
body_”; _Thess. 5:23_—“_And the God of peace himself sanctify you
wholly; and may your spirit and soul and body be preserved entire,
without blame at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ_”; _Rom.
8:11_—“_shall give life also to your mortal bodies through his
Spirit that dwelleth in you_”; _1 Cor. 15:49_—“_as we have borne
the image of the earthy_ [man], _we shall also bear the image of
the heavenly_ [man]”; _Phil. 3:20, 21_—“_For our citizenship is in
heaven; from whence also we wait for a Savior, the Lord Jesus
Christ: who shall fashion anew the body of our humiliation, that
it may be conformed to the body of his glory, according to the
working whereby he is able even to subject all things unto
himself._”
Is there a physical miracle wrought for the drunkard in his
regeneration? Mr. Moody says, Yes; Mr. Gough says, No. We prefer
to say that the change is a spiritual one; but that the “expulsive
power of a new affection” indirectly affects the body, so that old
appetites sometimes disappear in a moment; and that often, in the
course of years, great changes take place even in the believer’s
body. Tennyson, Idylls: “Have ye looked at Edyrn? Have ye seen how
nobly changed? This work of his is great and wonderful; His very
face with change of heart is changed.” “Christ in the soul
fashions the germinal man into his own likeness,—this is the
embryology of the new life. The cardinal error in religious life
is the attempt to live without proper environment” (see Drummond,
Natural Law in Spiritual World, 253‐284). Human life from Adam
does not stand the test,—only divine‐human life in Christ can
secure us from falling. This is the work of Christ, now that he
has ascended and taken to himself his power, namely, to give his
life more and more fully to the church, until it shall grow up in
all things into him, the Head, and shall fitly express his glory
to the world.
As the accomplished organist discloses unsuspected capabilities of
his instrument, so Christ brings into activity all the latent
powers of the human soul. “I was five years in the ministry,” said
an American preacher, “before I realized that my Savior is alive.”
Dr. R. W. Dale has left on record the almost unutterable feelings
that stirred his soul when he first realized this truth; see
Walker, The Spirit and the Incarnation, preface, v. Many have
struggled in vain against sin until they have admitted Christ to
their hearts,—then they could say: “_this is the victory that hath
overcome the world, even our faith_” (_1 John 5:4_). “Go out, God
will go in; Die thou, and let him live; Be not, and he will be;
Wait, and he’ll all things give.” The best way to get air out of a
vessel is to pour water in. Only in Christ can we find our pardon,
peace, purity, and power. He is “_made unto us wisdom from God,
and justification and sanctification, and redemption_” (_1 Cor.
1:30_). A medical man says: “The only radical remedy for
dipsomania is religiomania” (quoted in William James, Varieties of
Religious Experience, 268). It is easy to break into an empty
house; the spirit cast out returns, finds the house empty, brings
seven others, and “_the last state of that man becometh worse than
the first_” (_Mat. 12:45_). There is no safety in simply expelling
sin; we need also to bring in Christ; in fact only he can enable
us to expel not only actual sin but the love of it.
Alexander McLaren: “If we are ‘_in Christ_,’ we are like a diver
in his crystal bell, and have a solid though invisible wall around
us, which keeps all sea‐monsters off us, and communicates with the
upper air, whence we draw the breath of calm life and can work in
security though in the ocean depths.” John Caird, Fund. Ideas,
2:98—“How do we know that the life of God has not departed from
nature? Because every spring we witness the annual miracle of
nature’s revival, every summer and autumn the waving corn. How do
we know that Christ has not departed from the world? Because he
imparts to the soul that trusts him a power, a purity, a peace,
which are beyond all that nature can give.”
(_e_) Union with Christ brings about a fellowship of Christ with the
believer,—Christ takes part in all the labors, temptations, and sufferings
of his people; a fellowship of the believer with Christ,—so that Christ’s
whole experience on earth is in some measure reproduced in him; a
fellowship of all believers with one another,—furnishing a basis for the
spiritual unity of Christ’s people on earth, and for the eternal communion
of heaven. The doctrine of Union with Christ is therefore the
indispensable preparation for _Ecclesiology_, and for _Eschatology_.
Fellowship of Christ with the believer: _Phil. 4:13_—“_I can do
all things in him that strengtheneth me_”; _Heb. 4:15_—“_For we
have not a high priest that cannot be touched with the feeling of
our infirmities_”; _cf._ _Is. 63:9_—“_In all their affliction he
was afflicted._” _Heb. 2:18_—“_in that he himself hath suffered
being tempted, he is able to succor them that are tempted_” = are
being tempted, are under temptation. Bp. Wordsworth: “By his
_passion_ he acquired _compassion_.” _2 Cor. 2:14_—“_thanks be
unto God, who always leadeth us in triumph in Christ_” = Christ
leads us in triumph, but his triumph is ours, even if it be a
triumph over us. One with him, we participate in his joy and in
his sovereignty. _Rev. 3:21_—“_He that overcometh, I will give to
him to sit down with me in my throne._” W. F. Taylor on _Rom.
8:9_—“_The Spirit of God dwelleth in you.... if any man hath not
the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his_”—“Christ dwells in us,
says the apostle. But do we accept him as a resident, or as a
ruler? England was first represented at King Thebau’s court by her
resident. This official could rebuke, and even threaten, but no
more,—Thebau was sovereign. Burma knew no peace, till England
ruled. So Christ does not consent to be represented by a mere
resident. He must himself dwell within the soul, and he must
reign.” Christina Rossetti, Thee Only: “Lord, we are rivers
running to thy sea, Our waves and ripples all derived from thee; A
nothing we should have, a nothing be, Except for thee. Sweet are
the waters of thy shoreless sea; Make sweet our waters that make
haste to thee; Pour in thy sweetness, that ourselves may be
Sweetness to thee!”
Of the believer with Christ: _Phil. 3:10_—“_that I may know him,
and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his
sufferings, becoming conformed unto his death_”; _Col.
1:24_—“_fill up on my part that which is lacking of the
afflictions of Christ in my flesh for his body’s sake, which is
the church_”; _1 Pet. 4:13_—“_partakers of Christ’s sufferings._”
The Christian reproduces Christ’s life in miniature, and, in a
true sense, lives it over again. Only upon the principle of union
with Christ can we explain how the Christian instinctively applies
to himself the prophecies and promises which originally and
primarily were uttered with reference to Christ: “_thou wilt not
leave my soul to Sheol; Neither wilt thou suffer thy holy one to
see corruption_” (_Ps. 16:10, 11_). This fellowship is the ground
of the promises made to believing prayer: _John
14:13_—“_whatsoever ye shall ask is my name, that will I do_”;
Westcott, Bib. Com., _in loco_: “The meaning of the phrase [‘_in
my name_’] is ‘as being one with me even as I am revealed to you.’
Its two correlatives are ‘_in me_’ and the Pauline ‘_in Christ_’.”
“_All things are yours_” (_1 Cor. 3:21_), because Christ is
universal King, and all believers are exalted to fellowship with
him. After the battle of Sedan, King William asked a wounded
Prussian officer whether it were well with him. “All is well where
your majesty leads!” was the reply. _Phil. 1:21_—“_For to me to
live is Christ, and to die is gain._” Paul indeed uses the words
“Christ” and “church” as interchangeable terms: _1 Cor.
12:12_—“_as the body is one, and hath many members, ... so also is
Christ._” Denney, Studies in Theology, 171—“There is not in the N.
T. from beginning to end, in the record of the original and
genuine Christian life, a single word of despondency or gloom. It
is the most buoyant, exhilarating and joyful book in the world.”
This is due to the fact that the writers believe in a living and
exalted Christ, and know themselves to be one with him. They
descend crowned into the arena. In the Soudan, every morning for
half an hour before General Gordon’s tent there lay a white
handkerchief. The most pressing message, even on matters of life
and death, waited till that handkerchief was withdrawn. It was the
signal that Christ and Gordon were in communion with each other.
Of all believers with one another: _John 17:21_—“_that they may
all be one_”; _1 Cor. 10:17_—“_we, who are many, are one bread,
one body: for we all partake of the one bread_”; _Eph.
2:15_—“_create in himself of the two one new man, so making
peace_”; _1 John 1:3_—“_that ye also may have fellowship with us:
yea, and our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus
Christ_”—here the word κοινωνία is used. Fellowship with each
other is the effect and result of the fellowship of each with God
in Christ. Compare _John 10:16_—“_they shall become one flock, one
shepherd_”; Westcott, Bib. Com., _in loco_: “The bond of
fellowship is shown to lie in the common relation to one Lord....
Nothing is said of one ‘fold’ under the new dispensation.” Here is
a unity, not of external organization, but of common life. Of this
the visible church is the consequence and expression. But this
communion is not limited to earth,—it is perpetuated beyond death:
_1 Thess. 4:17_—“_so shall we ever be with the Lord_”; _Heb.
12:23_—“_to the general assembly and church of the firstborn who
are enrolled in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the
spirits of just men made perfect_”; _Rev. 21_ and _22_—the city of
God, the new Jerusalem, is the image of perfect society, as well
as of intensity and fulness of life in Christ. The ordinances
express the essence of Ecclesiology—union with Christ—for Baptism
symbolizes the incorporation of the believer in Christ, while the
Lord’s Supper symbolizes the incorporation of Christ in the
believer. Christianity is a social matter, and the true Christian
feels the need of being with and among his brethren. The Romans
could not understand why “this new sect” must be holding meetings
all the time—even daily meetings. Why could they not go singly, or
in families, to the temples, and make offerings to their God, and
then come away, as the pagans did? It was this meeting together
which exposed them to persecution and martyrdom. It was the
natural and inevitable expression of their union with Christ and
so of their union with one another.
The consciousness of union with Christ gives assurance of
salvation. It is a great stimulus to believing prayer and to
patient labor. It is a duty to “_know what is the hope of his
calling, what the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the
saints, and what the exceeding greatness of his power to us‐ward
who believe_” (_Eph. 1:18, 19_). Christ’s command, “_Abide in me,
and I in you_” (_John 15:4_), implies that we are both to realize
and to confirm this union, by active exertion of our own wills. We
are to abide in him by an entire consecration, and to let him
abide in us by an appropriating faith. We are to give ourselves to
Christ, and to take in return the Christ who gives himself to
us,—in other words, we are to believe Christ’s promises and to act
upon them. All sin consists in the sundering of man’s life from
God, and most systems of falsehood in religion are attempts to
save man without merging his life in God’s once more. The only
religion that can save mankind is the religion that fills the
whole heart and the whole life with God, and that aims to
interpenetrate universal humanity with that same living Christ who
has already made himself one with the believer. This consciousness
of union with Christ gives “_boldness_” (παρρησία—_Acts 4:13_; _1
John 5:14_) toward men and toward God. The word belongs to the
Greek democracies. Freemen are bold. Demosthenes boasts of his
frankness. Christ frees us from the hidebound, introspective,
self‐conscious spirit. In him we become free, demonstrative,
outspoken. So we find, in John’s epistles, that boldness in prayer
is spoken of as a virtue, and the author of the Epistle to the
Hebrews urges us to “_draw near with boldness unto the throne of
grace_” (_Heb. 4:16_). An engagement of marriage is not the same
as marriage. The parties may be still distant from each other.
Many Christians get just near enough to Christ to be engaged to
him. This seems to be the experience of Christian in the Pilgrim’s
Progress. But our privilege is to have a present Christ, and to do
our work not only _for_ him, but _in_ him. “Since Christ and we
are one, Why should we doubt or fear?” “We two are so joined,
He’ll not be in heaven, And leave me behind.”
We append a few statements with regard to this union and its
consequences, from noted names in theology and the church. Luther:
“By faith thou art so glued to Christ that of thee and him there
becomes as it were one person, so that with confidence thou canst
say: ‘I am Christ,—that is, Christ’s righteousness, victory,
_etc._, are mine’; and Christ in turn can say: ‘I am that
sinner,—that is, his sins, his death, _etc._, are mine, because he
clings to me and I to him, for we have been joined through faith
into one flesh and bone.’ ” Calvin: “I attribute the highest
importance to the connection between the head and the members; to
the inhabitation of Christ in our hearts; in a word, to the
mystical union by which we enjoy him, so that, being made ours, he
makes us partakers of the blessings with which he is furnished.”
John Bunyan: “The Lord led me into the knowledge of the mystery of
union with Christ, that I was joined to him, that I was bone of
his bone and flesh of his flesh. By this also my faith in him as
my righteousness was the more confirmed; for if he and I were one,
then his righteousness was mine, his merits mine, his victory also
mine. Now could I see myself in heaven and on earth at once—in
heaven by my Christ, my risen head, my righteousness and life,
though on earth by my body or person.” Edwards: “Faith is the
soul’s active uniting with Christ. God sees fit that, in order to
a union’s being established between two intelligent active beings,
there should be the mutual act of both, that each should receive
the other, as entirely joining themselves to one another.” Andrew
Fuller: “I have no doubt that the imputation of Christ’s
righteousness presupposes a union with him; since there is no
perceivable fitness in bestowing benefits on one for another’s
sake, where there is no union or relation between.”
See Luther, quoted, with other references, in Thomasius, Christi
Person und Werk, 3:325. See also Calvin, Institutes, 1:660;
Edwards, Works, 4:66, 69, 70; Andrew Fuller, Works, 2:685; Pascal,
Thoughts, Eng. trans., 429; Hooker, Eccl. Polity, book 5, ch. 56;
Tillotson, Sermons, 3:307; Trench, Studies in Gospels, 284, and
Christ the True Vine, in Hulsean Lectures; Schöberlein, in Studien
und Kritiken, 1847:7‐69; Caird, on Union with God, in Scotch
Sermons, sermon 2; Godet, on the Ultimate Design of Man, in
Princeton Rev., Nov. 1880—the design is “God in man, and man in
God”; Baird, Elohim Revealed, 590‐617; Upham, Divine Union,
Interior Life, Life of Madame Guyon and Fénelon; A. J. Gordon, In
Christ; McDuff, In Christo; J. Denham Smith, Life‐truths, 25‐98;
A. H. Strong, Philosophy and Religion, 220‐225; Bishop Hall’s
Treatise on The Church Mystical; Andrew Murray, Abide in Christ;
Stearns, Evidence of Christian Experience, 145, 174, 179; F. B.
Meyer, Christian Living—essay on Appropriation of Christ, _vs._
mere imitation of Christ; Sanday, Epistle to the Romans,
supplementary essay on the Mystic Union; H. B. Smith, System of
Theology, 531; J. M. Campbell, The Indwelling Christ.
II. Regeneration.
Regeneration is that act of God by which the governing disposition of the
soul is made holy, and by which, through the truth as a means, the first
holy exercise of this disposition is secured.
Regeneration, or the new birth, is the divine side of that change of heart
which, viewed from the human side, we call conversion. It is God’s turning
the soul to himself,—conversion being the soul’s turning itself to God, of
which God’s turning it is both the accompaniment and cause. It will be
observed from the above definition, that there are two aspects of
regeneration, in the first of which the soul is passive, in the second of
which the soul is active. God changes the governing disposition,—in this
change the soul is simply acted upon. God secures the initial exercise of
this disposition in view of the truth,—in this change the soul itself
acts. Yet these two parts of God’s operation are simultaneous. At the same
moment that he makes the soul sensitive, he pours in the light of his
truth and induces the exercise of the holy disposition he has imparted.
This distinction between the passive and the active aspects of
regeneration is necessitated, as we shall see, by the twofold
method of representing the change in Scripture. In many passages
the change is ascribed wholly to the power of God; the change is a
change in the fundamental disposition of the soul; there is no use
of means. In other passages we find truth referred to as an agency
employed by the Holy Spirit, and the mind acts in view of this
truth. The distinction between these two aspects of regeneration
seems to be intimated in _Eph. 2:5, 6_—“_made us alive together
with Christ,_” and “_raised us up with him_.” Lazarus must first
be made alive, and in this he could _not_ coöperate; but he must
also come forth from the tomb, and in this he _could_ be active.
In the old photography, the plate was first made sensitive, and in
this the plate was passive; then it was exposed to the object, and
now the plate actively seized upon the rays of light which the
object emitted.
Availing ourselves of the illustration from photography, we may
compare God’s initial work in the soul to the sensitizing of the
plate, his next work to the pouring in of the light and the
production of the picture. The soul is first made receptive to the
truth; then it is enabled actually to receive the truth. But the
illustration fails in one respect,—it represents the two aspects
of regeneration as successive. In regeneration there is no
chronological succession. At the same instant that God makes the
soul sensitive, he also draws out its new sensibility in view of
the truth. Let us notice also that, as in photography the picture
however perfect needs to be developed, and this development takes
time, so regeneration is only the beginning of God’s work; not all
the dispositions, but only the governing disposition, is made
holy; there is still need that sanctification should follow
regeneration; and sanctification is a work of God which lasts for
a whole lifetime. We may add that “heredity affects regeneration
as the quality of the film affects photography, and environment
affects regeneration as the focus affects photography” (W. T.
Thayer).
Sacramentarianism has so obscured the doctrine of Scripture that
many persons who gave no evidence of being regenerate are quite
convinced that they are Christians. Uncle John Vassar therefore
never asked: “Are you a Christian?” but always: “Have you ever
been born again?” E. G. Robinson: “The doctrine of regeneration,
aside from sacramentarianism, was not apprehended by Luther or the
Reformers, was not indeed wrought out till Wesley taught that God
instantaneously renewed the affections and the will.” We get the
doctrine of regeneration mainly from the apostle John, as we get
the doctrine of justification mainly from the apostle Paul.
Stevens, Johannine Theology, 366—“Paul’s great words are,
justification, and righteousness; John’s are, birth from God, and
life. But, for both Paul and John, faith is life‐union with
Christ.”
Stearns, Evidence of Christian Experience, 134—“The sinful nature
is not gone, but its power is broken; sin no longer dominates the
life; it has been thrust from the centre to the circumference; it
has the sentence of death in itself; the man is freed, at least in
potency and promise. 218—An activity may be immediate, yet not
unmediated. God’s action on the soul may be through the sense, yet
still be immediate, as when finite spirits communicate with each
other.” Dubois, in Century Magazine, Dec. 1894:233—“Man has made
his way up from physical conditions to the consciousness of
spiritual needs. Heredity and environment fetter him. He needs
spiritual help. God provides a spiritual environment in
regeneration. As science is the verification of the ideal in
nature, so religion is the verification of the spiritual in human
life.” Last sermon of Seth K. Mitchell on _Rev. 21:5_—“_Behold, I
make all things new_”—“God first makes a new man, then gives him a
new heart, then a new commandment. He also gives a new body, a new
name, a new robe, a new song, and a new home.”
1. Scripture Representations.
(_a_) Regeneration is a change indispensable to the salvation of the
sinner.
_John 3:7_—“_Ye must be born anew_”; _Gal. 6:15_—“_neither is
circumcision anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature_”
(marg.—“_creation_”); _cf._ _Heb. 12:14_—“_the sanctification
without which no man shall see the Lord_”—regeneration, therefore,
is yet more necessary to salvation; _Eph. 2:3_—“_by nature
children of wrath, even as the rest_”; _Rom. 3:11_—“_There is none
that understandeth, There is none that seeketh after God_”; _John
6:44, 65_—“_No man can come to me, except the Father that sent me
draw him ... no man can come unto me, except it be given unto him
of the Father_”; _Jer. 13:23_—“_Can the Ethiopian change his skin,
or the leopard his spots? then may ye also do good, that are
accustomed to do evil._”
(_b_) It is a change in the inmost principle of life.
_John 3:3_—“_Except one be born anew, he cannot see the kingdom of
God_”; _5:21_—“_as the Father raiseth the dead and giveth them
life, even so the Son also giveth life to whom he will_”; _Rom.
6:13_—“_present yourselves unto God, as alive from the dead_”;
_Eph. 2:1_—“_And you did he make alive, when ye were dead through
your trespasses and sins_”; _5:14_—“_Awake, thou that sleepest,
and arise from the dead, and Christ shall shine upon thee._” In
_John 3:3_—“_born anew_” = not, “altered,” “influenced,”
“reinvigorated,” “reformed”; but a new beginning, a new stamp or
character, a new family likeness to God and to his children. “_So
is every one that is born of the Spirit_” (_John 3:8_) = 1.
secrecy of process; 2. independence of the will of man; 3.
evidence given in results of conduct and life. It is a good thing
to remove the means of gratifying an evil appetite; but how much
better it is to remove the appetite itself! It is a good thing to
save men from frequenting dangerous resorts by furnishing safe
places of recreation and entertainment; but far better is it to
implant within the man such a love for all that is pure and good,
that he will instinctively shun the impure and evil. Christianity
aims to purify the springs of action.
(_c_) It is a change in the heart, or governing disposition.
_Mat. 12:33, 35_—“_Either make the tree good, and its fruit good;
or make the tree corrupt, and its fruit corrupt: for the tree is
known by its fruit.... The good man out of his good treasure
bringeth forth good things: and the evil man out of his evil
treasure bringeth forth evil things_”; _15:19_—“_For out of the
heart come forth evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications,
thefts, false witness, railings_”; _Acts 16:14_—“_And a certain
woman named Lydia ... heard us: whose heart the Lord opened to
give heed unto the things which were spoken by Paul_”; _Rom.
6:17_—“_But thanks be to God, that, whereas ye were servants of
sin, ye became obedient from the heart to that form of teaching
whereunto ye were delivered_”; _10:10_—“_with the heart man
believeth unto righteousness_”; _cf._ _Ps. 51:10_—“_Create in me a
clean heart, O God; And renew a right spirit within me_”; _Jer.
31:33_—“_I will put my law in their inward parts, and in their
hearts will I write it_”; _Ez. 11:19_—“_And I will give them one
heart, and I will put a new spirit within you; and I will take the
stony heart out of their flesh, and will give them a heart of
flesh._”
Horace Mann: “One former is worth a hundred reformers.” It is
often said that the redemption of society is as important as the
regeneration of the individual. Yes, we reply; but the
regeneration of society can never be accomplished except through
the regeneration of the individual. Reformers try in vain to
construct a stable and happy community from persons who are
selfish, weak, and miserable. The first cry of such reformers is:
“Get your circumstances changed!” Christ’s first call is: “Get
yourselves changed, and then the things around you will be
changed.” Many college settlements, and temperance societies, and
self‐reformations begin at the wrong end. They are like kindling a
coal‐fire by lighting kindlings at the top. The fire soon goes
out. We need God’s work at the very basis of character and not on
the outer edge, at the very beginning, and not simply at the end.
_Mat. 6:33_—“_seek ye first his kingdom, and his righteousness;
and all these things shall be added unto you._”
(_d_) It is a change in the moral relations of the soul.
_Eph. 2:5_—“_when we were dead through our trespasses, made us
alive together with Christ_”; _4:23, 24_—“_that ye be renewed in
the spirit of your mind, and put on the new man, that after God
hath been created in righteousness and holiness of truth_”; _Col.
1:13_—“_who delivered us out of the power of darkness, and
translated us into the kingdom of the Son of his love._” William
James, Varieties of Religious Experience, 508, finds the features
belonging to all religions: 1. an uneasiness; and 2. its solution.
1. The uneasiness, reduced to its simplest terms, is a sense that
there is _something wrong about us_, as we naturally stand. 2. The
solution is a sense that we are saved _from the wrongness_ by
making proper connection with the higher powers.
(e) It is a change wrought in connection with the use of truth as a means.
_James 1:18_—“_Of his own will he brought us forth by the word of
truth_”—here in connection with the special agency of God (not of
mere natural law) the truth is spoken of as a means; _1 Pet.
1:23_—“_having been begotten again, not of corruptible seed, but
of incorruptible, through the word of God, which liveth and
abideth_”; _2 Pet. 1:4_—“_his precious and exceeding great
promises; that through these ye may become partakers of the divine
nature_”; _cf._ _Jer. 23:29_—“_Is not my word like fire? saith
Jehovah; and like a hammer that breaketh the rock in pieces?_”
_John 15:3_—“_Already ye are clean because of the word which I
have spoken unto you_”; _Eph. 6:17_—“_the sword of the Spirit,
which is the word of God_”; _Heb. 4:12_—“_For the word of God is
living, and active, and sharper than any two‐edged sword, and
piercing even to the dividing of soul and spirit, of both joints
and marrow, and quick to discern the thoughts and intents of the
heart_”; _1 Pet. 2:9_—“_called you out of darkness into his
marvellous light._” An advertising sign reads: “For spaces and
ideas, apply to Johnson and Smith.” In regeneration, we need both
the open mind and the truth to instruct it, and we may apply to
God for both.
(_f_) It is a change instantaneous, secretly wrought, and known only in
its results.
_John 5:24_—“_He that heareth my word, and believeth him that sent
me, hath eternal life, and cometh not into judgment, but hath
passed out of death into life_”; _cf._ _Mat. 6:24_—“_No man can
serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the
other; or else he will hold to one, and despise the other._” _John
3:8_—“_The wind bloweth where it will, and thou hearest the voice
thereof, but knowest not whence it cometh, and whither it goeth:
so is every one that is born of the Spirit_”; _cf._ _Phil. 2:12,
13_—“_work out your own salvation with fear and trembling; for it
is God who worketh in you both to will and to work, for his good
pleasure_”; _2 Pet. 1:10_—“_Wherefore, brethren, give the more
diligence to make your calling and election sure._”
(_g_) It is a change wrought by God.
_John 1:13_—“_who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the
flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God_”; _3:5_—“_Except one be
born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of
God_”; _3:8_, marg.—“_The Spirit breatheth where it will_”; _Eph.
1:19, 20_—“_the exceeding greatness of his power to us‐ward who
believe, according to that working of the strength of his might
which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and
made him to sit at his right hand in the heavenly places_”;
_2:10_—“_For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for
good works, which God afore prepared that we should walk in
them_”; _1 Pet. 1:3_—“_Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord
Jesus Christ, who according to his great mercy begat us again unto
a living hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead_”;
_cf._ _1 Cor. 3:6, 7_—“_I planted, Apollos watered; but God gave
the increase. So then neither is he that planteth anything,
neither he that watereth; but God that giveth the increase._”
We have seen that we are “_begotten again ... through the word_”
(_1 Pet. 1:23_). In the revealed truth with regard to the person
and work of Christ there is a divine adaptation to the work of
renewing our hearts. But truth in itself is powerless to
regenerate and sanctify, unless the Holy Spirit uses it—“_the
sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God_” (_Eph. 6:17_).
Hence regeneration is ascribed preëminently to the Holy Spirit,
and men are said to be “_born of the Spirit_” (_John 3:8_). When
Robert Morrison started for China, an incredulous American said to
him: “Mr. Morrison, do you think you can make any impression on
the Chinese?” “No,” was the reply; “but I think the Lord can.”
(_h_) It is a change accomplished through the union of the soul with
Christ.
_Rom. 8:2_—“_For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus
made me free from the law of sin and death_”; _2 Cor. 5:17_—“_if
any man is in Christ, he is a new creature_” (marg.—“_there is a
new creation_”); _Gal. 1:15, 16_—“_it was the good pleasure of God
... to reveal his Son in me_”; _Eph. 2:10_—“_For we are his
workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works._” On the
Scriptural representations, see E. D. Griffin, Divine Efficiency,
117‐164; H. B. Smith, System of Theology, 553‐569—“Regeneration
involves union with Christ, and not a change of heart without
relation to him.”
_Eph. 3:14, 15_—“_the Father, from whom every fatherhood in heaven
and on earth is named._” But even here God works through Christ,
and Christ himself is called “_Everlasting Father_” (_Is. 9:6_).
The real basis of our sonship and unity is in Christ, our Creator,
and Upholder. Sin is repudiation of this filial relationship.
Regeneration by the Spirit restores our sonship by joining us once
more, ethically and spiritually, to Christ the Son, and so
adopting us again into God’s family. Hence the Holy Spirit does
not reveal himself, but Christ. The Spirit is light, and light
does not reveal itself, but all other things. I may know that the
Holy Spirit is working within me whenever I more clearly perceive
Christ. Sonship in Christ makes us not only individually children
of God, but also members of a commonwealth. _Ps. 87:4_—“_Yea, of
Zion it shall be said, This one and that one was born in her_” =
“the most glorious thing to be said about them is not something
pertaining to their separate history, but that they have become
members, by adoption, of the city of God” (Perowne). The Psalm
speaks of the adoption of nations, but it is equally true of
individuals.
2. Necessity of Regeneration.
That all men without exception need to be changed in moral character, is
manifest, not only from Scripture passages already cited, but from the
following rational considerations:
(_a_) Holiness, or conformity to the fundamental moral attribute of God,
is the indispensable condition of securing the divine favor, of attaining
peace of conscience, and of preparing the soul for the associations and
employments of the blest.
Phillips Brooks seems to have taught that regeneration is merely a
natural forward step in man’s development. See his Life,
2:353—“The entrance into this deeper consciousness of sonship to
God and into the motive power which it exercises is Regeneration,
the new birth, not merely with reference to time, but with
reference also to profoundness. Because man has something sinful
to cast away in order to enter this higher life, therefore
regeneration must begin with repentance. But that is an incident.
It is not essential to the idea. A man simply imperfect and not
sinful would still have to be born again. The presentation of sin
as guilt, of release as forgiveness, of consequence as punishment,
have their true meaning as the most personal expressions of man’s
moral condition as always measured by, and man’s moral changes as
always dependent upon, God.” Here imperfection seems to mean
depraved condition as distinguished from conscious transgression;
it is not regarded as sinful; it needs not to be repented of. Yet
it does require regeneration. In Phillips Brooks’s creed there is
no article devoted to sin. Baptism he calls “the declaration of
the universal fact of the sonship of man to God. The Lord’s Supper
is the declaration of the universal fact of man’s dependence upon
God for supply of life. It is associated with the death of Jesus,
because in that the truth of God giving himself to man found its
completest manifestation.”
Others seem to teach regeneration by education. Here too there is
no recognition of inborn sin or guilt. Man’s imperfection of
nature is innocent. He needs training in order to fit him for
association with higher intelligences and with God. In the
evolution of his powers there comes a natural crisis, like that of
graduation of the scholar, and this crisis may be called
conversion. This educational theory of regeneration is represented
by Starbuck, Psychology of Religion, and by Coe, The Spiritual
Life. What human nature needs however is not evolution, but
involution and revolution—involution, the communication of a new
life, and revolution, change of direction resulting from that
life. Human nature, as we have seen in our treatment of sin, is
not a green apple to be perfected by mere growth, but an apple
with a worm at the core, which left to itself will surely rot and
perish.
President G. Stanley Hall, in his essay on The Religious
Affirmations of Psychology, says that the total depravity of man
is an ascertained fact apart from the teachings of the Bible.
There had come into his hands for inspection several thousands of
letters written to a medical man who advertised that he would give
confidential advice and treatment to all, secretly. On the
strength of these letters Dr. Hall was prepared to say that John
Calvin had not told the half of what is true. He declared that the
necessity of regeneration in order to the development of character
was clearly established from psychological investigation.
A. H. Strong, Cleveland Sermon, 1904—“Here is the danger of some
modern theories of Christian education. They give us statistics,
to show that the age of puberty is the age of strongest religious
impressions; and the inference is drawn that conversion is nothing
but a natural phenomenon, a regular stage of development. The free
will, and the evil bent of that will, are forgotten, and the
absolute dependence of perverse human nature upon the regenerating
spirit of God. The age of puberty is the age of the strongest
religious impressions? Yes, but it is also the age of the
strongest artistic and social and sensuous impressions, and only a
new birth from above can lead the soul to seek first the kingdom
of God.”
(_b_) The condition of universal humanity as by nature depraved, and, when
arrived at moral consciousness, as guilty of actual transgression, is
precisely the opposite of that holiness without which the soul cannot
exist in normal relation to God, to self, or to holy beings.
Plutarch has a parable of a man who tried to make a dead body
stand upright, but who finished his labors saying: “Deest aliquid
intus”—“There’s something lacking inside.” Ribot, Diseases of the
Will, 53—“In the vicious man the moral elements are lacking. If
the idea of amendment arises, it is involuntary.... But if a first
element is not given by nature, and with it a potential energy,
nothing results. The theological dogma of grace as a free gift
appears to us therefore founded upon a much more exact psychology
than the contrary opinion.” “Thou art chained to the wheel of the
foe By links which a world cannot sever: With thy tyrant through
storm and through calm thou shall go, And thy sentence is bondage
forever.”
Martensen, Christian Ethics: “When Kant treats of the radical evil
of human nature, he makes the remarkable statement that, if a good
will is to appear in us, this cannot happen through a partial
improvement, nor through any reform, but only through a
revolution, a total overturn within us, that is to be compared to
a new creation.” Those who hold that man may attain perfection by
mere natural growth deny this radical evil of human nature, and
assume that our nature is a good seed which needs only favorable
external influences of moisture and sunshine to bring forth good
fruit. But human nature is a damaged seed, and what comes of it
will be aborted and stunted like itself. The doctrine of mere
development denies God’s holiness, man’s sin, the need of Christ,
the necessity of atonement, the work of the Holy Spirit, the
justice of penalty. Kant’s doctrine of the radical evil of human
nature, like Aristotle’s doctrine that man is born on an inclined
plane and subject to a downward gravitation, is not matched by a
corresponding doctrine of regeneration. Only the apostle Paul can
tell us how we came to be in this dreadful predicament, and where
is the power that can deliver us; see Stearns, Evidence of
Christian Experience, 274.
Dean Swift’s worthy sought many years for a method of extracting
sunbeams from cucumbers. We cannot cure the barren tree by giving
it new bark or new branches,—it must have new sap. Healing
snakebites is not killing the snake. Poetry and music, the
uplifting power of culture, the inherent nobility of man, the
general mercy of God—no one of these will save the soul. Horace
Bushnell: “The soul of all improvement is the improvement of the
soul.” Frost cannot be removed from a window pane simply by
scratching it away,—you must raise the temperature of the room. It
is as impossible to get regeneration out of reformation as to get
a harvest out of a field by mere plowing. Reformation is plucking
bitter apples from a tree, and in their place tying good apples on
with a string (Dr. Pentecost). It is regeneration or
degradation—the beginning of an upward movement by a power not
man’s own, or the continuance and increase of a downward movement
that can end only in ruin.
Kidd, Social Evolution, shows that in humanity itself there
resides no power of progress. The ocean steamship that has burned
its last pound of coal may proceed on its course by virtue of its
momentum, but it is only a question of the clock how soon it will
cease to move, except as tossed about by the wind and the waves.
Not only is there power lacking for the good, but apart from God’s
grace the evil tendencies constantly became more aggravated. The
settled states of the affections and will practically dominate the
life. Charles H. Spurgeon: “If a thief should get into heaven
unchanged, he would begin by picking the angels’ pockets.” The
land is full of examples of the descent of man, not _from_ the
brute, but _to_ the brute. The tares are not degenerate wheat,
which by cultivation will become good wheat,—they are not only
useless but noxious, and they must be rooted out and burned.
“Society never will be better than the individuals who compose it.
A sound ship can never be made of rotten timber. Individual
reformation must precede social reconstruction.” Socialism will
always be a failure until it becomes Christian. We must be born
from above, as truly as we have been begotten by our fathers upon
earth, or we cannot see the kingdom of God.
(_c_) A radical internal change is therefore requisite in every human
soul—a change in that which constitutes its character. Holiness cannot be
attained, as the pantheist claims, by a merely natural growth or
development, since man’s natural tendencies are wholly in the direction of
selfishness. There must be a reversal of his inmost dispositions and
principles of
Showing first 200,000 characters. Full text: gutenberg.org/ebooks/45283