Page images

“ Ye are

will keep my words” (John xiv. 23). Addressing His disciples, He says, “If ye love me, keep my commandments (John xiv. 15). my friends if ye do whatsoever I command you (John xv. 14). In these sayings of our Lord, not only are doctrine and life set forth as inseparable, but as mutually dependent. Where there is love to Christ, it will manifest itself in the keeping of His words, and on the other hand, where there is a strict adherence to, and obedience of the law, it necessarily presupposes love to Him. In illustration of the same, witness the great doctrine of justification by faith propounded and confirmed in Paul's letter to the Church at Rome; the priesthood and sacrifice of Christ, established in the letter to the Hebrews; and in both these, doctrinal teaching is followed by earnest counsels to give heed to the practical duties of a religious life. In both they are introduced and illustrated as standing in the indissoluble relation of antecedent and consequent. Further evidence is furnished, in the pathetic appeals and pointed exhortations contained in the Word, urging adherence to doctrine, as absolutely essential to a consistent Christian life. Take, for instance, the doctrine which is according to godliness (1 Tim. vi. 3), and what is the meaning of this, but that the doctrine has practical godliness as its necessary outcome, and that it is not possible to have a godly life, save in the way of receiving into the heart Scripture doctrine ? See also (Heb. vi. 1), “Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection : not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith towards God, of the doctrine of baptisms and of laying on of hands, and of the resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment.” Does not this clearly show the close connection between principles of doctrine and spiritual life? Paul thus exhorts Timothy, “ Take heed unto thyself and unto the doctrine, continue in them, for in doing this thou shalt both save thyself and them that hear thee.” Here also is clearly established the indissoluble union of sound doctrine and real spirit ual culture. We have thus shown, that the tendency of modern times to dissociate the religious life from Christian doctrine is subversive of the principles of sound reason, and of divine revelation; in other words, that it is unreasonable and unscriptural; hence it of necessity follows, that belief in sound doctrine is necessary to life, and wherever life exists, doctrine lies at the foundation of its enjoyment.

Thirdly,- It is destructive of man's highest interests. This might almost be regarded as a self-evident truth. If a man pursue a course of life, which as we have shown is directly antagonistic to the dictates of sound reason, to those principles the following out of which is indispensable to the right regulation of society, and to the teaching of Scripture, how is it possible for his spiritual and eternal interests to be furthered ? Let his temporal interests be so dealt with, and he will find that neither his bodily health nor his business will thrive, yea, that the ruin of both would inevitably follow. For instance, let him act in direct opposition to the ordinary laws of health; let him carry his principles of proud independence so far as to sneer at, and set aside as unworthy of notice, the principles of natural law, bearing upon self preservation, and in accordance with this resolution of his self-will, disregard all hygienic regulations, and shut himself up in an airless cell, or refuse to partake of sound and wholesome food for the nourishment of the body, or take some poisonous substance in its place, and in either case, the death of the body would be the result. Let a man of business, or a professional man, act independently of the laws of business, or the profession to which he may belong, and the consequence would be, the ruin of his whole worldly prospects. In like manner,

if any one set aside the revealed will of God in the matter of his salvation, and put his own will in its place, if he ignore the divine prescription for the healing and saving of the soul, and resort to human expedients, if he regulate his life by the spirit of the

age, and not by the mind and will of the Spirit of God, the result will be the eternal ruin of both soul and body. Such is the position of those who sneer at, and ruthlessly set aside the clearly revealed doctrines of grace, imagining they have within themselves, or intuitively all that is necessary to conduct them through life, and fit them for the joys of heaven. God calls in His Word, and they refuse, He stretches out His hand in the overtures of mercy, but they will not reyard; but He will yet "laugh at their calamity, and mock when their fear cometh.” We conclude by stating Christ's view of the conduct of those who act upon the principles we have been combating, and also of the treatment such conduct merits, and will assuredly receive. “In vain they do worship Me, teaching for doctrines, the commandments of men " (Matt. xv. 9). “ But those Mine emenies that would not that I should reign over them, bring them hither and slay them before Me" (Luke xix. 27).

[ocr errors]


BY JOHN ROBINSON, TEACHER, LANARK, The proposition whose truth we seek in this paper, by God's grace, to demonstrate, is to be found in the Westminster Confession of Faith, Chap. X., Sect. 4, and last clause of that section, “Much less can men, not professing the Christian religion, be saved in any other way whatever, be they ever so diligent to frame their lives according to the light of nature, and the law of that religion they do profess, and to assert and maintain that they may is very pernicious and to be detested.”

In order to prepare our readers for the adequate understanding of this proposition, we cannot do better than quote the chapter in which it occurs, and which is devoted to the definition of Effectual Calling:

I. All those whom God has predestinated unto life, and those only, He is pleased, in His appointed and accepted time, effectually to call, by His Word and Spirit, out of that state of sin and death in which they are by nature, to grace and salvation by Jesus Christ, enlightening their minds spiritually and savingly to understand the things of God, taking away their heart of stone, and giving unto them a heart of flesh,

a renewing their wills, and by His Almighty power determining them to that which is good, and effectually drawing them to Jesus Christ, yet 80 as they come most freely, being made willing by His grace.

II. This effectual call is of God's free and special grace alone, not from any thing at all foreseen in man, who is altogether passive therein, until, being quickened and renewed by the Holy Ghost, he is thereby enabled to answer this call, and to embrace the grace offered and conveyed in it.

“III. Elect infants dying in infancy are regenerated and saved by Christ through the Spirit, who worketh when, and where, and how, He pleaseth. So also are all other elect persons, who are incapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the Word.

“IV. Others not elected, though they may be called by the ministry of the Word, and may have some common operations of the Spirit, yet they never truly come to Christ, and therefore cannot be saved.”

Then follows the proposition we have already quoted.

From this chapter, the reader will see most clearly God's plan of salvation.

And at the very outset, it cannot fail to strike us most forcibly, that if any one is prepared to admit that this is God's plan of salvation, he is, by an inexorable logical necessity compelled also to admit that it is the only possible plan of salvation. If this plan, in its conception and execution, engaged the Three Persons of the Adorable Trinity, then it follows that it is not one of many possible plans of salvation, but the only possible plan of salvation. If it be a Divine plan, then can no human plan, however plausible, compete with it, work irrespectively of it, or work along with it. This conclusion is so necessary and natural, that it would be the merest waste of words to attempt the proof of it. As many persons, however, unfortunately for themselves, are not prepared or are not willing to admit that this is God's plan of salvation, it is necessary for us to consider this proposition that deals with hypothetical plans of salvation.

When our first parents were created by God, and placed in the garden of Eden, a wide dominion was assigned them. They were entrusted with "authority over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.” But they were answerable to God for the exercise of this authority. They were God's deputies to rule in His name over His inferior creatures. Our first parents were thus under law. But they were not merely under law as a natural necessity. They were formally placed under it. In order to rule, they must learn to obey. In their case, law took the form of a single prohibition. “Of every tree of the garden," said their Divine Friend, when conveying to them their Charter of Rights, “thou mayest freely eat. But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, which is in the midst of the garden thore shalt not eat.

To the infringement of this command there was attached, as is attached to the infringement of every command, Divine or human, a penalty. This penalty was not a light one. It was the penalty of death. It ran thus, “For in the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.” The dread nature of the penalty shewed the infinite importance of the command, and God's fatherly anxiety that it should not be violated. God did not annex a light penalty to the transgression of His law, as if it were a matter of little moment, whether they obeyed or disobeyed it. He annexed such a penalty as shewed the absolute necessity of keeping the law, and, by implication, the absolute necessity of imposing it.

Instead, however, of being animated by a holy and filial regard for that law to which their Heavenly Father attached so much importance, and instead of being inspired by a holy fear, lest by any possibility they should in an unguarded moment break it, our first parents thought all too lightly of the law, and of its dread penalty. The fence of prohibition, which the kindly hands of their Divine Friend had planted round the tree of knowledge, was wantonly broken through at the suggestion apparently emanating from a creature who was one of their own subjects. The moment Eve listened to this suggestion, she abdicated her authority over the creatures, and confessed her inability to rule. Had she dismissed the suggestion, she had shewn that rule over herself, which betokened her fitness to rule for God. But she listened to the temptation, and in a spirit of rebellion broke through the fence that guarded the tree. “And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit and did eat." It is evident from this, that Eve was not satisfied, either with her material or with her intellectual condition. And the temptation derived additional force from being framed, so as to offer gratification alike to the baser and the nobler longings of her nature.

Eve wished above all to know more than the Great Teacher had seen fit to impart to her. It may be also that she justified her conduct by the reflection that much knowledge had been kept back from herself and her husband, wbich should have been imparted to them. This forbidden knowledge was now within her reach, if she should only be courageous enough to avail herself of the means suggested to her of obtaining it. So eager was she to gratify this inordinate desire, that she would not even wait the return of her husband—who was evidently absent when the tempter appeared to her-with a view to obtain his sanction to her proceedings. Casting off all regard for his authority at the time she set aside the authority of God, she resolved to act without his advice or sanction. With nervous haste, therefore, lest his untimely return should prevent the immediate gratification of her wishes, she stretched out her hand, and did eat."

And when her husband approached “she gave him also of the fruit, and he did eat." Adam, as the Sacred Commentator tells us, was not deceived, as his wife had been. He saw, as by a flash of lightning, the whole process of temptation to which his wife had been subjected, and he saw its result. From whom the temptation had proceeded he might not then be able to divine. But he saw that his wife had been tempted by some one who had taken advantage of his absence. And he saw more than all this. He saw, or rather he experienced, to his unutterable dismay, that the temptation had not yet spent its force. He felt that the tempter who had assailed his wife, but had withdrawn on his approach, had aimed at him. The victory over her was virtually a victory over him. The tempter had withdrawn, but a tempter remained. The tempted had become in turn the tempter, and such a tempter as Adam might not resist. The temptation was to him nothing, but the tempter was everything. Was she not his alter ego, his other self, bone of his bone, flesh of his flesh ? Was she not his only earthly friend and associate ? What she offered him was no temptation, but the reverse. Her temptation offered him nothing that he desired, but everything that he dreaded. It was a temptation to choose between his Heavenly Friend and his earthly friend. This was a dreadful choice, a choice the necessity of which he never contemplated requiring to make. But make that choice he

« PreviousContinue »