87 righteousness does not consist in proximate or subordinate choice, which is a choice that is made in order to bring about a particular end.
ultimate choice, on the other hand, is choosing an ultimate, supreme end for its own sake. such choice does not bring about a particular end. it is not put forth to secure the end but is simply the choice of an object for its own sake.
subordinate or proximate choice..strictly speaking, this choice belongs (like volition) to the category of cause and effect. it results by necessity from the ultimate choice. in the strictest sense, it is not a free act, since it is itself caused. hence, it has no moral character in itself but, like volition, derives whatever moral quality it has from its primary cause or the ultimate choice.
righteousness does not consist in any of the states or activities of the sensibility. (by the sensibility i mean the department of the mind that feels, desires, suffers, enjoys.) all the states of the sensibility are involuntary and belong to the category of cause and effect. the will cannot control them directly, nor can it always control them indirectly. this we know by consciousness.
88 ...righteousness is moral rightness, moral rectitude, moral uprightness, conformity to moral law. how do we conform to moral law? what mental act or state is required by the moral law, the law of god? law is a rule of action. moral law requires action - mental action, responsible action, therefore free action. but what particular form of action does moral law require?
....Christ has taught us, by His own teaching and through His inspired prophets and apostles, that the moral law requires love and that this is the sum of its requirements.
...the moral law is the law of god's activity, the rule in conformity to which He always acts. we are created in god's image; His rule of life is therefore ours ..as our Creator and Lawgiver, He requires of us the same kind of love and the same degree of perfection that He Himself exercises. 'God is love' I john 4.8. this means He loves with all the strength of His infinite nature. He requires us to love with all the strength of our finite nature. (note: matt. 22. 37-39) this is being perfect as God is perfect (matthew 5.48).
but what is this love of God (that is, as a mental exercise)? it must be benevolence or goodwill, for God is a moral agent. the good of universal being is infinitely valuable in itself. God must appreciate this infinitely well. He must see and feel the moral propriety of choosing
89 this for its own sake. He has chosen it from eternity. by His executive volitions He is endeavoring to make it real. the law that He has established to govern our activity requires us to be in harmony with His choice, His benevolence. it requires us to choose the same end that He does, for the same reason - that is, for its own sake.
God's infinite choice of the good of universal being is righteousness in Him, because it is the choice of the intrinsically and infinitely valuable for its own sake. it is choice in conformity with His nature and the relations He has constituted. it must be a choice in conformity with His infinitely clear conscience or moral sense. righteousness in God, then, is conformity to the laws of universal love or goodwill. it must be an ultimate, supreme, inherent, effective preference or choice of the highest good of universal being, including His own. it must be ultimate in that this good of being is chosen for its own sake. it must be supreme because it is preferred to everything else. it must be inherent because it is innate and at the very foundation of all His moral activity. it must be effective because, from its very nature, it must energize to secure that which is preferred or chosen with the whole strength of His infinite nature. this is right choice, right moral action.
the moral quality, then, of unselfish benevolence is righteousness or moral rightness. all subordinate choices, volitions, actions and states of sensibility that proceed from unselfish benevolence have moral character. they have moral character in the sense and only for the reason that they proceed from or are the natural product of unselfish benevolence. this ultimate, inherent, supreme preference is the holy heart of a moral agent. out of it proceeds, directly or indirectly, the whole moral or spiritual life of the individual.
we know what righteousness is by consciousness. by consciousness, we know that our whole lives proceed from ultimate choice or preference. by consciousness, we know that conscience demands perfect, universal love or unselfish benevolence. therefore,
90 conscience demands all those acts and states of mind and outward actions of life that, by a law of our nature, proceed from unselfish benevolence. by consciousness, we know that conscience is satisfied with this, demands nothing more and accepts nothing less. by consciousness, we know that conscience pronounces this to be right or righteousness. by consciousness, we know that this is obedience to the law of God as revealed in our nature, and that when we render this obedience, we are so adjusted in the will of god that we have perfect peace. we are in harmony with God. we are at peace with God and with ourselves. short of this, we cannot be so...
a sinner is a selfish moral agent. being selfish, he will, of course, make no other selfish efforts to become righteous. selfishness is a state of voluntary commitment to the indulgence of the senses. while the will is in this state of commitment to self-indulgence, the souls will not and cannot put forth any righteous act. the first righteous act possible to an unregenerate sinner is to change his heart, or the supreme, ultimate preference of his soul. without this he may outwardly conform to the letter of God's law, but this is not righteousness. without this he may have many exercises and states of mind that he may suppose to be christian experiences, but these are not righteousness. he may even live a perfectly outwardly moral and religious life without a change of heart. all this he may do for selfish reasons, but this is not righteousness.
i say again, his first righteous act must be to change his heart. to say that he will change this for any selfish reason is simply a contradiction, for the change of heart involves the renunciation of selfishness.how, then,can a sinner change his heart or attain righteousness? my answer is, only by taking such a view of the character and claims
91 of God as to induce him to renounce his self-seeking spirit and come into harmony with God.
to say nothing here of possibility, the Bible reveals the fact (and human consciousness affirms the truth) that a sinner will never attain this view on his own. he will never reach a view of the claims of God that will induce him to renounce selfishness and come to God without the illuminations of the Holy Spirit. a sinner attains righteousness, then, only through the teachings and inspirations of the Holy Spirit.
but what is involved in this change from sin to righteousness? it must involve confidence in God, or faith. without confidence, a soul cannot be persuaded to change his heart, to renounce self and come to God. it must involve repentance. by repentance I mean the change of mind that consists in a renunciation of self seeking and a coming into harmony with God. it involves a radical change of moral attitude in respect to god and one's neighbors. all three of these are involved in a change of heart. they occur simultaneously and the presence of one implies the existence and presence of the others.
it is by the truths of the Gospel that the Holy Spirit induces this change in sinful man. this revelation of divine love, when powerfully sent home by the Holy spirit, is an effective calling. from the above it will be seen that, although a sinner may live a perfectly outwardly moral and religious life, a truly regenerated soul cannot live a sinful life. the new heart does not, cannot, sin. John, in his first epistle, clearly affirmed this (3.9). a benevolent, supreme, ultimate choice cannot produce selfish subordinate choices or volitions.
it is possible for a christian to backslide. if it were not, perseverance would be no virtue. if the change at salvation were a physical one or a change of the very nature of the sinner, backsliding would be impossible and perseverance no virtue. there is an objection to this view that backsliding must consist in going back to a selfish ultimate preference and therefore, involve an adverse change of heart. what if it does? must this not be, indeed, true? did not adam and eve change their hearts from holy to sinful ones?
92 but may a man change his heart back and forth? my answer is, Yes, or a sinner could not be required to choose a new heart for himself, nor could a christian sin after regeneration. the idea that the same person can have at the same time both a holy and a sinful heart is absurd in true philosophy contrary to the Bible, and of a most pernicious tendency. when a soul is backslidden, Christ calls upon him to repent and do his first work over again.
righteousness is sustained in the human soul by the indwelling of Christ through faith - and in no other way. it cannot be sustained by purposes or resolutions self-originated and not worked in us by the Spirit of Christ. through faith, Christ first gains ascendancy in the human heart and through faith he maintains this ascendancy and reigns as King in the soul.
there can be no righteousness in man behind his heart, for nothing behind this can be voluntary; therefore, there cn be no righteousness in the nature of man in the sense that implis praiseworthiness or virtue.
all outward conformity to the law and commandments of God that does not proceed from Christ, working in the soul by His Holy Spirit, is self-righteousness. all true righteousness, then, is the righteousness of faith or a righteousness obtained by Christ through faith in Him.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment