The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of god'. Fomans 8.16
*123 I. 1. none who believe the Scriptures to be the word of God can doubt the importance of such a truth as this; - a truth revealed therein, not once only, not obscurely, not incidentally, but frequently and that in express terms, but solemnly and of set purpose, as denoting one of the peculiar privileges of the children of God.
2. and it is the more necessary to explain and defend this truth, because there is a danger on the right hand and on the left. if we deny it, there is a danger lest our religion degenerate into mere formality; lest, 'having a form of godliness', we neglect, if not 'deny, the power of it'. if we allow it, but do not understand what we allow, we are liable to run into all the wildness of enthusiasm. it is therefor needful, in the highest degree, to guard those who fear god from both these dangers
*124 by a scriptural and rational illustration and confirmation of this momentous truth.
3. it may seem, something of this kind is the more needful, because so little has been wrote on the subject with any clearness; unless some discourses on the wrong side of the question, which explain it quite away. and it cannot be doubted, but these were occasioned, at least in a great measure, by the crude, unscriptural, irrational explication of others , who 'knew not what they spake nor e=whereof they affirmed.
4. it more nearly concerns the Methodists, so called, clearly to understand, explain and defend this doctrine, because it is one grand part of the testimony which God has given them to bear to all mankind. it is by his peculiar blessing upon them in searching the Scriptures, confirmed by the experience of his children, that this great evangelical truth has been recovered, which had been for many years well nigh lost and forgotten.
II. 1. but what is the witness of the Spirit? the original word marturia, nay be rendered either (as it is in several places) The Witness or less ambiguously, the testimony or the record: so it is rendered in our translation, (I John 5.11) 'this is the record', the testimony, the sum of what god testifies in al the inspired writings, 'that God hath given unto us eternal life and this life is in His Son'. the testimony now under consideration is given by the Spirit of God to and with our spirit: He is the person testifying. what He testifies to us is, 'that we are the children of God'. the immediate result of his testimony is, 'the fruit of the Spirit', namely, 'love, joy, peace, long-suffering, gentleness, goodness' and without these, the testimony itself cannot continue. for it si inevitably destroyed, not only by the commission of any outward sin or the omission of know duty, but by giving way to any inward sin in a word, by whatever grieves the Holy Spirit of God.
2. I observed many years ago, 'It is hard to find words in the language of men, to explain the deep things of God. indeed there are none that will adequately express what the Spirit of God works in His children. but perhaps one might say, (desiring any who are taught of God, to correct, soften, or strengthen the expression) by the testimony of the Spirit I mean, an inward impression on the soul, whereby the Spirit of God immediately and directly witnesses to my spirit, that i am a child of God; that Jesus Christ hath love me and
*125 given Himself for me, that all my sins are blotted out and I, even I, am reconciled to God.
3. after 20 years' further consideration, I see no cause to retract any part of this. neither do I conceive how any of these expressions may be altered, so as to make them more intelligible. I can only add, that if any of the children of God will point out any other expressions, which are more clear or more agreeable to the word of God, i will readily lay these aside.
4 .meantime let it be observed, I do not mean hereby, that the Spirit of God testifies this by any outward voice; no, nor always by an inward voice, although he may do this sometimes. neither do I suppose, that he always applies to the heart (though He often may) one or more texts of Scripture. but he so works upon the soul by his immediate influence and by a strong, though inexplicable operation, that the stormy wind and troubled waves subside and there is a sweet calm; the heart resting as in the arms of Jesus , and the sinner being clearly satisfied that God is reconciled, that all his 'iniquities are forgiven and his sins covered'.
5. now what is the matter of dispute concerning this? not whether there be a witness or testimony of the spirit, not whether the Spirit does testify with our spirit, that we are the children of god none can deny this, without flatly contradicting the scriptures and charging a lie upon the God of truth . therefore, that there is a testimony of the spirit is acknowledged by all parties.
6. neither is it questioned, whether there is an Indirect witness or testimony, that we are the children of God. this is nearly, if not exactly, the same with the testimony of a good conscience towards God and is the result of reason or reflection on what we feel in our own souls. strictly speaking, it is a conclusion drawn partly from the word of God and partly from our won experience. the word of God says, every one who has the fruit of the spirit is a child of God,; experience or inward consciousness, tells me, that i have the fruit of the spirit and hence I rationally conclude, 'therefore I am a child of God'. this is likewise allowed on all hands and so is no matter of controversy.
7. now do we assert, that there can be any real testimony of the spirit without the fruit of the Spirit. we assert, on the contrary, that they fruit of the spirit immediately springs from
*126 this testimony; not always indeed in the dame degree, even when the testimony is first given and much less afterwards. neither joy nor peace is always at one stay; no, nor love; as neither is the testimony itself always equally strong and clear.
8. but the point in question is, whether there be any Direct testimony of the Spirit at all; whether there be any other testimony of the Spirit, than that which arises from a consciousness of the fruit.
III. 1. I believe there is; because that is the plain, natural meaning of the text, 'The Spirit itself beareth witness with or spirit, that we are the children of God'. it is manifest, here are 2 witnesses mentioned, who together testify the same thing; the Spirit of God and our won spirit. the late Bishop of London, in his sermon on this text, seems astonished that any one can doubt of this, which appears upon the very face of the words. now, 'The testimony of our own spirit' says the Bishop, 'is one, which is the consciousness of our won sincerity' or to express the same thing a little more clearly the consciousness of the fruit of the spirit. when our spirit is conscious of this, of love, joy, peace, long-suffering, gentleness, goodness, it easily infers form these premises, that we are the children of God.
2. it is true, that great man supposes the other witness to be, 'The consciousness of our own good works'. this, he affirms , is the testimony of God's Spirit. but this is included in the testimony of our own spirit; year and in sincerity, even according to the common sense of the word. so the apostle, , 'our rejoicing is this, the testimony of our conscience, that in simplicity and godly sincerity we have had our conversation in the world'. where it is plain, sincerity refers to our words and actions, at least as much as to our inward dispositions. so that this is not another witness, but the very same that he mentioned before; the consciousness of our sincerity. consequently here is only one witness still. if therefore the text speaks of 2 witnesses, one of these is not the consciousness of our good works, neither of our sincerity; all this being manifestly contained in the testimony of our spirit.
3. what then is the other witness? this might easily be learned, if the text itself were not sufficiently clear, form the verse immediately preceding: 'ye have received, not the
*127 spirit of bondage, but the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father'. it follows, 'The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God'.
4. this is farther explained by the parallel text, (Gal. 4.6) 'because ye are sons, god hath sent forth the spirit of His Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father'. is not this something immediate and direct , not the result of reflection or argumentation? does not this spirit cry, 'Abba, Father', in our hearts the moment it is given, antecedently to any reflection upon our sincerity; yea, to any reasoning whatsoever? and is not this the plain natural sense of the words, which strikes any one as soon as he hears them? all these texts then, in their most obvious meaning, describe a direct testimony of the Spirit.
5.that the testimony of the Spirit of God must, in the very nature of things, be antecedent to the testimony of our own spirit, may appear from this single consideration: we must be holy in hear and life before we can be conscious that we are so. but we must love God before we can be holy at all, this being the root of all holiness. now we cannot love god, till we know He loves us: 'we love Him, because he firs loved us ' and we cannot know His love to us, till his spirit witnesses it to our Spirit. till then we cannot believe it; we cannot say, 'the life which i now live, I live by faith in the son of God, who love me and gave Himself for me'.
then, only then we feel
our interest in His blood
and cry, with joy unspeakable,
thou art my Lord, my God!
since, therefore, the testimony of His spirit must precede the love of God and all holiness, of consequence it must precede our consciousness hereof.
6. and here properly comes in, to confirm this scriptural doctrine, the experience of the children of God; the experience not of 2 or 3, not of a few, but of a great multitude which no man can number. it has been confirmed, both in this and in all ages, by 'a cloud' of living and dying 'witnesses'. it is confirmed by Your Experience and Mine. the Spirit itself bore witness to my spirit that i was a child of God, gave me an evidence hereof and I immediately cried, 'Abba, Father!' and this I did , (and so did you) before I reflected on or was conscious of, any fruit of the spirit. it was from this testimony
*128 received, that love, joy, peace and the whole fruit of the Spirit flowed. first, I heard,
Thy sins are forgiven! Accepted thou art!-
I listen'd and heaven sprung up in my heart.
7. but this is confirmed, not only by the experience of the children of God; -thousands of whom can declare that they never did know themselves to be in the favour of God till it was directly witnessed to them by His Spirit; - but by all those who are convinced of sin, who feel the wrath of god abiding on them. these cannot e satisfied with any thing less than a direct testimony from His spirit, that he is 'merciful to their unrighteousness and remembers their sins and iniquities no more'. tell any of these, 'you are to know you are a child by reflection on what he has wrought in you , on your love joy, and peace' and will he not immediately reply, 'By all this i know i am a child of the devil. I have no more love to God than the devil has; my carnal mind is enmity against God. I have no joy in the Holy Ghost; my soul is sorrowful even unto death. i have no peace; my heart is a troubled sea; I am all storm and tempest'. and which way can these souls possibly be comforted, but by a divine testimony (not that they are good, or sincere, or conformable to the Scripture in heart and life, but) that God Justifieth The Ungodly? - him that, till the moment he is justified, is all ungodly, void of all true holiness; ''him that worketh not', that worketh nothing that is truly good, till he is conscious that he is accepted, not for any 'works of righteousness which he hath done', but by the mere, free mercy of God; wholly and solely for what the son of God hath done and suffered for him. and can it be any otherwise, if 'a man is justified by faith, without the works of the law'? if so, what inward or outward goodness can he be conscious of, antecedent to this justification? nay, is not the having nothing to pay, that is, the being conscious that 'there dwelleth in us no good thing', neither inward nor outward goodness, essentially, indispensably necessary, before we can be 'justified freely, through the redemption that is in Jesus Christ' was ever any man justified since his coming into the world or can any man ever be justified, till he is bought to that point, -
I gave up every plea beside, -
Lord, i am damn'd; but Thou hast died
*129 8. every one, therefore, who denies the existence of such a testimony, does in effect deny justification by faith. it follows, that either he never experienced this, either he never was justified, or that he has forgotten, as St. peter speaks, ...the purification from his former sins, the experience he then had himself; the manner wherein god wrought in his own soul, when his former sins were blotted out.
9. and the experience even of the children of the world here confirms that of the children of God. many of these have a desire to please God: some of them take much pains to please Him, but do they not, one and all, count it the highest absurdity for any to talk of Knowing his sins are forgiven? which of them even pretends to any such thing? and yet many of them are conscious of their own sincerity. many of them undoubtedly have, in a degree, the testimony of their own spirit, a consciousness of their own uprightness. but this brings them no consciousness that they are forgiven; no knowledge that they are the children of God. yea, the more sincere they are, the more uneasy they generally are, for want of knowing it, plainly showing that this cannot be known, in a satisfactory manner, by the bare testimony of our won spirit, without God's directly testifying that we are his children.
IV. but abundance of objections have been made to this; the chief of which it may be well to consider.
1. it is objected, first, 'Experience is not sufficient to prove a doctrine which is not founded on Scripture'. this is undoubtedly true and it is an important truth, but it does not affect the present question; for it has been shown, that this doctrine is founded on Scripture; therefore experience is properly alleged to confirm it.
2. but madmen, French prophets and enthusiasts of every kind, have imagined they experienced this witness;. they have so and perhaps not a few of them did, although they did not retain it long, but if they did not, this is no proof at all that others have not experienced it; as a madman's imagining himself a king, does no prove that there are no real kings.
nay, many who pleaded strongly for this, have utterly decried the Bible'. perhaps So; but this was no necessary consequence: thousands plead for it who have the highest esteem for the Bible.
yea, but many have fatally deceived themselves hereby, and got above all conviction.
*130 and yet a scriptural doctrine is no worse though men abuse it to their own destruction.
3. 'but i lay it down as an undoubted truth, the fruit of the Spirit is the witness of the spirit'. not undoubted; thousands doubt of, yea, flatly deny it, but let that pass. 'if this witness be sufficient, there is no need of any other. but it is sufficient, unless in one of these cases, 1. the Total Absence of the fruit of the Spirit'. and this is the case, when the direct witness is first given. 2. the Not perceiving It. but to contend for it in this case, is to contend for being in the favour of god and not knowing it'. true; not knowing it at any time any otherwise than by the testimony which is given for that end. and this we do contend for; we contend that the direct witness may shine clear, even while the indirect one is under a cloud.
4. it is objected, Secondly, 'The design of the winess contended for is, to prove that the provession we make is genuine
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment