|
|
THE SOVEREIGNTY
OF GOD
FOREWORD TO THE FIRST EDITION
In the following pages an attempt
has been made to examine anew in the light of God’s Word some of the
profoundest questions which can engage the human mind. Others have grappled
with these mighty problems in days gone by and from their labors we are the
gainers. While making no claim for originality the writer, nevertheless, has
endeavored to examine and deal with his subject from an entirely independent
viewpoint. We have studied diligently the writings of such men as Augustine
and Acquinas, Calvin and Melancthon, Jonathan Edwards and Ralph Erskine,
Andrew Fuller and Robert Haldane.* And sad it is to think that these eminent
and honored names are almost entirely unknown to the present generation.
Though, of course, we do not endorse all their conclusions, yet we gladly
acknowledge our deep indebtedness to their works. We have purposely refrained
from quoting freely from these deeply taught theologians, because we desired
that the faith of our readers should stand not in the wisdom of men but in the
power of God. For this reason we have quoted freely from the
Scriptures and have sought to furnish proof-texts for every
statement we have advanced.
It would be foolish for us to expect
that this work will meet with general approval. The trend of modern
theology—if theology it can be called—is ever toward the deification of the
creature rather than the glorification of the Creator, and the leaven of
present-day Rationalism is rapidly permeating the whole of Christendom. The
malevolent effects of Darwinianism are more far reaching than most are aware.
Many of those among our religious leaders who are still regarded as orthodox
would, we fear, be found to be very heterodox if they were weighed in the
balances of the Sanctuary. Even those who are clear, intellectually, upon
other truth, are rarely sound in doctrine. Few, very few, today, really
believe in the complete ruin and total depravity of man. Those
who speak of man’s "free will," and insist upon his inherent power to either
accept or reject the Saviour, do but voice their ignorance of the real
condition of Adam’s fallen children. And if there are few who believe that, so
far as he is concerned, the condition of the sinner is entirely
hopeless, there are fewer still who really believe in the absolute
Sovereignty of God.
In addition to the widespread effects of
unscriptural teaching, we also have to reckon with the deplorable
superficiality of the present generation. To announce that a certain book
is a treatise on doctrine is quite sufficient to prejudice against it the
great bulk of church-members and most of our preachers as well. The craving
today is for something light and spicy, and few have patience, still less
desire, to examine carefully that which would make a demand both upon
their hearts and their mental powers. We remember, also, ‘how that it is
becoming increasingly difficult in these strenuous days for those who are
desirous of studying the deeper things of God to find the time which such
study requires. Yet, it is still true that "Where there’s a will, there’s a
way," and in spite of the discouraging features referred to, we believe there
is even now a godly remnant who will take pleasure in giving this little work
a careful consideration, and such will, we trust, find in it "Meat in due
season."
We do not forget the words of one long
since passed away, namely, that "Denunciation is the last resort of a defeated
opponent." To dismiss this book with the contemptuous
epithet—"Hyper-Calvinism"! will not be worthy of notice. For controversy we
have no taste, and we shall not accept any challenge to enter the lists
against those who might desire to debate the truths discussed in these pages.
So far as our personal reputation is concerned, that we leave our Lord to take
care of, and unto Him we would now commit this volume and whatever fruit it
may bear, praying Him to use it for the enlightening of His own dear people
(insofar as it is in accord with His Holy Word) and to pardon the writer for
and preserve the reader from the injurious effects of any false teaching that
may have crept into it. If the joy and comfort which have come to the author
while penning these pages are shared by those who may scan them, then we shall
be devoutly thankful to the One whose grace alone enables us to discern
spiritual things.
June 1918.
ARTHUR W. PINK.
*Among those who have dealt most helpfully with the subject
of God’s Sovereignty in recent years we mention Dr. Rice, J. B. Moody, and
Bishop, from whose writings we have also received instruction.
FOREWORD TO THE SECOND EDITION
It is now two years since the first
edition of this work was presented to the Christian public. Its reception has
been far more favorable than the author had expected. Many have notified him
of the help and blessing received from a perusal of his attempts to expound
what is admittedly a difficult subject. For every word of appreciation we
return hearty thanks to Him in Whose light we alone "see light." A few have
condemned the book in unqualified terms, and these we commend to God and to
the Word of His grace, remembering that it is written, "a man can receive
nothing, except it be given him from heaven" (John 3:27). Others have sent us
friendly criticisms and these have been weighed carefully, and we trust that,
in consequence, this revised edition will be unto those who are members of the
household of faith more profitable than the former one.
One word of explanation seems to be
called for. A number of respected brethren in Christ feel that our treatment
of the Sovereignty of God was too extreme and one-sided. It has been pointed
out that a fundamental requirement in expounding the Word of God is the need
of preserving the balance of Truth. With this we are in hearty accord.
Two things are beyond dispute: God is sovereign, and man is a responsible
creature. But in this book we are treating of the Sovereignty of God, and
while the responsibility of man is readily owned, yet, we do not pause on
every page to insist on it; instead, we have sought to stress that side
of the Truth which in these days is almost universally neglected. Probably 95
per cent. of the religious literature of the day is devoted to a setting forth
of the duties and obligations of men. The fact is that those who undertake to
expound the Responsibility of man are the very ones who have lost ‘the
balance of Truth’ by ignoring, very largely, the Sovereignty of God. It is
perfectly right to insist on the responsibility of man, but what of God ?—has
He no claims, no rights! A hundred such works as this are needed, ten
thousand sermons would have to be preached throughout the land on this
subject, if the ‘balance of Truth’ is to be regained. The ‘balance of Truth’
has been lost, lost through a disproportionate emphasis being thrown on the
human side, to the minimizing, if not the exclusion, of the Divine side. We
grant that this book is one-sided, for it only pretends to deal with
one side of the Truth, and that is, the neglected side, the Divine side.
Furthermore, the question might be raised: Which is the more to be deplored—an
over emphasizing of the human side and an insufficient emphasis on the Divine
side, or, an over emphasizing of the Divine side and an insufficient emphasis
on the human side? Surely, if we err at all it is on the right side. Surely,
there is far more danger of making too much of man and too little of God, than
there is of making too much of God and too little of man. Yea, the question
might well be asked, Can we press God’s claims too far? Can we
be too extreme in insisting upon the absoluteness and universality of the
Sovereignty of God?
It is with profound thankfulness to God
that, after a further two years diligent study of Holy Writ, with the earnest
desire to discover what almighty God has been pleased to reveal to His
children on this subject, we are able to testify that we see no reason for
making any retractions from what we wrote before, and while we have
re-arranged the material of this work, the substance and doctrine of it
remains unchanged. May the One Who condescended to bless the first edition of
this work be pleased to own even more widely this revision.
1921 Swengel, Pa.
ARTHUR W. PINK
FOREWORD TO THE THIRD EDITION
That a third edition of this work is now
called for, is a cause of fervent praise to God. As the darkness deepens and
the pretentions of men are taking on an ever-increasing blatancy, the need
becomes greater for the claims of God to be emphasized. As the twentieth
century Babel of religious tongues is bewildering so many, the duty of God’s
servants to point to the one sure anchorage for the heart, is the more
apparent. Nothing is so tranquilizing and so stabilizing as the assurance that
the Lord Himself is on the Throne of the universe, "working all things
after the counsel of His own will".
The Holy Spirit has told us that there
are in the Scriptures "some things hard to be understood", but mark it is
"hard" not "impossible"! A patient waiting on the Lord, a diligent
comparison of scripture with scripture, often issues in a fuller apprehension
of that which before was obscure to us. During the last ten years it has
pleased God to grant us further light on certain parts of His Word, and this
we have sought to use in improving our expositions of different passages. But
it is with unfeigned thanksgiving that we find it unnecessary to either change
or modify any doctrine contained in the former editions. Yea, as time
goes by, we realize (by Divine grace) with ever-increasing force, the truth,
the importance, and the value of the Sovereignty of God as it pertains to
every branch of our lives.
Our hearts have been made to rejoice
again and again by unsolicited letters which have come to hand from every
quarter of the earth, telling of help and blessing received from the former
editions of this work. One Christian friend was so stirred by reading it and
so impressed by its testimony, that a check was sent to be used in sending
free copies to missionaries in fifty foreign countries, "that its glorious
message may encircle the globe"; numbers of whom have written us to say how
much they have been strengthened in their fight with the powers of darkness.
To God alone belongs all the glory. May He deign to use this third
edition to the honour of His own great Name, and to the feeding of His
scattered and starved sheep.
1929 Morton’s Gap, Kentucky.
ARTHUR W. PINK
FOREWORD TO THE FOURTH EDITION
It is with profound praise to God "most
high" that another edition of this valuable and helpful book is now called
for. Though its teaching runs directly counter to much that is being
promulgated on every hand today, yet we are happy to be able to say that its
circulation is increasing to the strengthening of the faith, comfort and hope
of an increasing number of God’s elect. We commit this new edition to Him whom
we "delight to honour," praying that He may be pleased to bless its
circulation to the enlightening of many more of His own, to the "praise of the
glory of His grace," and a clearer apprehension of the majesty of God and His
Sovereign mercy.
1949 I. C. Herendeen
THE
SOVEREIGNTY OF GOD
INTRODUCTION
Who is regulating affairs on this earth
today—God, or the Devil? That God reigns supreme in Heaven, is generally
conceded; that He does so over this world, is almost universally denied—if not
directly, then indirectly. More and more are men in their philosophizing and
theorizing, relegating God to the background. Take the material realm. Not
only is it denied that God created everything, by personal and direct
action, but few believe that He has any immediate concern in regulating
the works of His own hands. Everything is supposed to be ordered according to
the (impersonal and abstract) "laws of Nature". Thus is the Creator banished
from His own creation. Therefore we need not be surprised that men, in their
degrading conceptions, exclude Him from the realm of human affairs. Throughout
Christendom, with an almost negligible exception, the theory is held that man
is "a free agent", and therefore, lord of his fortunes and the determiner of
his destiny. That Satan is to be blamed for much of the evil which is in the
world, is freely affirmed by those who, though having so much to say about
"the responsibility of man", often deny their own
responsibility, by attributing to the Devil what, in fact, proceeds from their
own evil hearts (Mark 7 :21-23).
But who is regulating affairs on
this earth today—God, or the Devil? Attempt to take a serious and
comprehensive view of the world. What a scene of confusion and chaos confronts
us on every side! Sin is rampant; lawlessness abounds; evil men and seducers
are waxing "worse and worse" (2 Tim. 3:13). Today, everything appears
to be out of joint. Thrones are creaking and tottering, ancient
dynasties are being overturned, democracies are revolting, civilization is a
demonstrated failure; half of Christendom was but recently locked-together in
a death grapple; and now that the titanic conflict is over, instead of the
world having been made "safe for democracy", we have discovered that democracy
is very unsafe for the world. Unrest, discontent, and lawlessness are
rife every where, and none can say how soon another great war will be set in
motion. Statesmen are perplexed and staggered. Men’s hearts are "failing them
for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth"
(Luke 21:26). Do these things look as though God had full
control?
But let us confine our attention to the
religious realm. After nineteen centuries of Gospel preaching, Christ is still
"despised and rejected of men". Worse still, He (the Christ of
Scripture) is proclaimed and magnified by very few. In the majority of modern
pulpits He is dishonored and disowned. Despite frantic efforts to attract the
crowds, the majority of the churches are being emptied rather than filled. And
what of the great masses of non-church goers? In the light of Scripture we are
compelled to believe that the "many" are on the Broad Road that leadeth to
destruction, and that only "few" are on the Narrow Way that leadeth unto life.
Many are declaring that Christianity is a failure, and despair is settling on
many faces. Not a few of the Lord’s own people are bewildered, and their faith
is being severely tried. And what of God? Does He see and hear? Is He
impotent or indifferent? A number of those who are regarded as leaders of
Christian-thought told us that, God could not help the coming of the late
awful War, and that He was unable to bring about its termination. It
was said, and said openly, that conditions were beyond God’s control.
Do these things look as though God were ruling the world?
Who is regulating affairs on this earth
today—God, or the Devil? What impression is made upon the minds of those men
of the world who, occasionally, attend a Gospel service? What are the
conceptions formed by those who hear even those preachers who are counted as
"orthodox"? Is it not that a disappointed God is the One whom
Christians believe in? From what is heard from the average evangelist today,
is not any serious hearer obliged to conclude that he professes to
represent a God who is filled with benevolent intentions, yet unable to carry
them out; that He is earnestly desirous of blessing men, but that they will
not let Him? Then, must not the average hearer draw the inference that
the Devil has gained the upper hand, and that God is to be pitied rather than
blamed?
But does not everything seem to show
that the Devil has far more to do with the affairs of earth than God
has? Ah, it all depends upon whether we are walking by faith, or walking by
sight. Are your thoughts, my reader, concerning this world and God’s relation
to it, based upon what you see? Face this question seriously and
honestly. And if you are a Christian, you will, most probably, have cause to
bow your head with shame and sorrow, and to acknowledge that it is so.
Alas, in reality, we walk very little "by faith". But what does "walking by
faith" signify? It means that our thoughts are formed, our actions regulated,
our lives molded by the Holy Scriptures, for, "faith cometh by hearing, and
hearing by the Word of God" (Rom. 10:17). It is from the Word of
Truth, and that alone, that we can learn what is God’s relation to this
world.
Who is regulating affairs on this earth
today—God or the Devil? What saith the Scriptures? Ere we consider the
direct reply to this query, let it be said that, the Scriptures predicted
just what we now see and hear. The prophecy of Jude is in course of
fulfillment. It would lead us too far astray from our present inquiry to fully
amplify this assertion, but what we have particularly in mind is a sentence in
verse 8—"Likewise also these dreamers defile the flesh, despise dominion
and speak evil of dignities." Yes, they "speak evil" of the Supreme
Dignity, the "Only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords." Ours is
peculiarly an age of irreverence, and as the consequence, the spirit of
lawlessness, which brooks no restraint and which is desirous of casting off
everything which interferes with the free course of self-will, is rapidly
engulfing the earth like some giant tidal wave. The members of the rising
generation are the most flagrant offenders, and in the decay and disappearing
of parental authority we have the certain precursor of the abolition of civic
authority. Therefore, in view of the growing disrespect for human law and the
refusal to "render honor to whom honor is due," we need not be surprised that
the recognition of the majesty, the authority, the sovereignty of the Almighty
Law-giver should recede more and more into the background, and that the masses
have less and less patience with those who insist upon them. And conditions
will not improve; instead, the more sure Word of Prophecy makes known to us
that they will grow worse and worse. Nor do we expect to be able to stem the
tide—it has already risen much too high for that. All we can now hope to do is
warn our fellow-saints against the spirit of the age, and thus seek to
counteract its baneful influence upon them.
Who is regulating affairs on this earth
today—God, or the Devil? What saith the Scriptures? If we believe their plain
and positive declarations, no room is left for uncertainty. They affirm, again
and again, that God is on the throne of the universe; that the sceptre is in
His hands; that He is directing all things "after the counsel of His
own will". They affirm, not only that God created all things, but also that
God is ruling and reigning over all the works of His hands. They affirm that
God is the "Almighty", that His will is irreversible, that He is absolute
sovereign in every realm of all His vast dominions. And surely it must
be so. Only two alternatives are possible: God must either rule, or be ruled;
sway, or be swayed; accomplish His own will, or be thwarted by His creatures.
Accepting the fact that He is the "Most High", the only Potentate and King of
kings, vested with perfect wisdom and illimitable power, and the conclusion is
irresistible that He must be God in fact, as well as in name.
It is in view of what we have briefly
referred to above. that we say, Present-day conditions call loudly for a new
examination and new presentation of God’s omnipotency, God’s sufficiency,
God’s sovereignty. From every pulpit in the land it needs to be thundered
forth that God still lives, that God still observes, that God still reigns.
Faith is now in the crucible, it is being tested by fire, and there is no
fixed and sufficient resting-place for the heart and mind but in the Throne
of God. What is needed now, as never before, is a full, positive,
constructive setting forth of the Godhood of God. Drastic diseases call for
drastic remedies. People are weary of platitudes and mere generalizations—the
call is for something definite and specific. Soothing-syrup may serve for
peevish children, but an iron tonic is better suited for adults, and we know
of nothing which is more calculated to infuse spiritual vigor into our frames
than a scriptural apprehension of the full character of God. It is written,
"The people that do know their God shall be strong and do exploits"
(Dan. 11:32).
Without a doubt a world-crisis is at
hand, and everywhere men are alarmed. But God is not! He is never taken
by surprise. It is no unexpected emergency which now confronts Him, for He is
the One who "worketh all things after the counsel of His own will" (Eph.
1:11). Hence, though the world is panic-stricken, the word to the believer is,
"Fear not"! "All things" are subject to His immediate control: "all things"
are moving in accord with His eternal purpose, and therefore, "all things" are
"working together for good to them that love God, to them who are the
called according to His purpose." It must be so, for "of Him, and
through Him, and to Him are all things" (Rom. 11:36). Yet how little is
this realized today even by the people of God! Many suppose that He is little
more than a far-distant Spectator, taking no immediate hand in the affairs of
earth. It is true that man has a will, but so also has God. It is true that
man is endowed with power, but God is all-powerful. It is true that, speaking
generally, the material world is regulated by law, but behind that law is the
law-Giver and law-Administrator. Man is but the creature. God is the Creator,
and endless ages before man first saw the light "the mighty God" (Isa. 9:6)
existed, and ere the world was founded, made His plans; and being infinite in
power and man only finite, His purpose and plan cannot be withstood or
thwarted by the creatures of His own hands.
We readily acknowledge that life is a
profound problem, and that we are surrounded by mystery on every side; but we
are not like the beasts of the field—ignorant of their origin, and unconscious
of what is before them. No: "We have also a more sure Word of
Prophecy", of which it is said ye do well that ye "take heed, as unto a light
that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in
your hearts" (2 Pet. 1:19). And it is to this Word of Prophecy we
indeed do well to "take heed," to that Word which had not its origin in the
mind of man but in the Mind of God, for, "the prophecy came not at any time by
the will of man: but holy men of God spake moved by the Holy Spirit." We say
again, it is to this "Word" we do well to take heed. As we turn to this
Word and are instructed there, we discover a fundamental principle which must
be applied to every problem: Instead of beginning with man and his world and
working back to God, we must begin with God and work down to man—"In the
beginning God"! Apply this principle to the present situation. Begin
with the world as it is today and try and work back to God, and everything
will seem to show that God has no connection with the world at all. But begin
with God and work down to the world and light, much light, is cast on the
problem. Because God is holy His anger burns against sin; because God
is righteous His judgments fall upon those who rebel against Him;
because God is faithful the solemn threatenings of His Word are
fulfilled; because God is omnipotent none can successfully resist Him,
still less overthrow His counsel; and because God is omniscient no
problem can master Him and no difficulty baffle His wisdom. It is just because
God is who He is and what He is that we are now beholding on earth what we
do—the beginning of His out-poured judgments: in view of His inflexible
justice and immaculate holiness we could not expect anything other than what
is now spread before our eyes.
But let it be said very emphatically
that the heart can only rest upon and enjoy the blessed truth of the
absolute sovereignty of God as faith is in exercise. Faith is ever
occupied with God. That is the character of it: that is what
differentiates it from intellectual theology. Faith endures "as seeing
Him who is invisible" (Heb. 11:27) : endures the disappointments, the
hardships, and the heart-aches of life, by recognizing that all comes
from the hand of Him who is too wise to err and too loving to be unkind. But
so long as we are occupied with any other object than God Himself, there will
be neither rest for the heart nor peace for the mind. But when we receive all
that enters our lives as from His hand, then, no matter what may be our
circumstances or surroundings—whether in a hovel, a prison-dungeon, or a
martyr’s stake—we shall be enabled to say, "The lines are fallen unto me in
pleasant places" (Ps. 16:6). But that is the language of faith,
not of sight or of sense.
But if instead of bowing to the
testimony of Holy Writ, if instead of walking by faith, we follow the evidence
of our eyes, and reason therefrom, we shall fall into a quagmire of
virtual atheism. Or, if we are regulated by the opinions and views of others,
peace will be at an end. Granted that there is much in this world of
sin and, suffering which appalls and saddens us; granted that there is much in
the providential dealings of God which startle and stagger us; that is no
reason why we should unite with the unbelieving worldling who says, "If I were
God, I would not allow this or tolerate that" etc. Better far, in the presence
of bewildering mystery, to say with one of old, "I was dumb, I opened not my
mouth; because Thou didst it" (Ps. 39:9). Scripture tells us that God’s
judgments are "unsearchable", and His ways "past finding out" (Rom.
11:33). It must be so if faith is to be tested, confidence in His wisdom and
righteousness strengthened, and submission to His holy will fostered.
Here is the fundamental difference
between the man of faith and the man of unbelief. The unbeliever is "of the
world," judges everything by worldly standards, views life from the standpoint
of time and sense, and weighs everything in the balances of his own carnal
making. But the man of faith brings in God, looks at everything from
His standpoint, estimates values by spiritual standards, and views life in
the light of eternity. Doing this, he receives whatever comes as from the hand
of God. Doing this, his heart is calm in the midst of the storm. Doing this,
he rejoices in hope of the glory of God.
In these opening paragraphs we have
indicated the lines of thought followed out in this book. Our first postulate
is that because God is God, He does as He pleases, only as He pleases,
always as He pleases; that His great concern is the accomplishment of His own
pleasure and the promotion of His own glory; that He is the Supreme Being, and
therefore Sovereign of the universe. Starting with this postulate we have
contemplated the exercise of God’s Sovereignty, first in Creation,
second in Governmental Administration over the works of His hands, third in
the Salvation of His own elect, fourth in the Reprobation of the wicked, and
fifth in Operation upon and within men. Next we have viewed the Sovereignty of
God as it relates to the human will in particular and human Responsibility in
general, and have sought to show what is the only becoming attitude for the
creature to take in view of the majesty of the Creator. A separate chapter has
been set apart for a consideration of some of the difficulties which are
involved, and to answering the questions which are likely to be raised in the
minds of our readers; while one chapter has been devoted to a more careful yet
brief examination of God’s Sovereignty in relation to prayer. Finally, we have
sought to show that the Sovereignty of God is a truth revealed to us in
Scripture for the comfort of our hearts, the strengthening of our souls, and
the blessing of our lives. A due apprehension of God’s Sovereignty promotes
the spirit of worship, provides an incentive to practical godliness, and
inspires zeal in service. It is deeply humbling to the human heart, but in
proportion to the degree that it brings man into the dust before his Maker, to
that extent is God glorified.
We are well aware that what we have
written is in open opposition to much of the teaching that is current both in
religious literature and in the representative pulpits of the land. We freely
grant that the postulate of God’s Sovereignty with all its corollaries is at
direct variance with the opinions and thoughts of the natural man, but the
truth is, we are quite unable to think upon these matters: we
are incompetent for forming a proper estimate of God’s character and
ways, and it is because of this that God has given us a revelation of His
mind, and in that revelation He plainly declares, "My thoughts are not
your thoughts, neither are your ways My ways, saith the Lord. For as the
heavens are higher than the earth, so are My ways higher than your ways, and
My thoughts than your thoughts" (Is. 55:8,9). In view of this scripture, it is
only to be expected that much of the contents of the Bible conflicts
with the sentiments of the carnal mind, which is enmity against God.
Our appeal then is not to the popular beliefs of the day, nor to the creeds of
the churches, but to the Law and Testimony of Jehovah. All that we ask for is
an impartial and attentive examination of what we have written, and that, made
prayerfully in the light of the Lamp of Truth. May the reader heed the Divine
admonition to "prove all things; hold fast that which is good" (1 Thess.
5:21).
Chapter 1
GOD'S SOVEREIGNTY DEFINED
"Thine, O Lord, is the greatness, and the power, and the
glory, and the victory, and the majesty: for all that is in the heaven and in
the earth is Thine; Thine is the kingdom, O Lord, and Thou art exalted as Head
above all"
1 Chronicles 29:11
The Sovereignty of God is an expression
that once was generally understood. It was a phrase commonly used in religious
literature. It was a theme frequently expounded in the pulpit. It was a truth
which brought comfort to many hearts, and gave virility and stability to
Christian character. But, today, to make mention of God’s sovereignty is, in
many quarters, to speak in an unknown tongue. Were we to announce from the
average pulpit that the subject of our discourse would be the sovereignty of
God, it would sound very much as though we had borrowed a phrase from one of
the dead languages. Alas! that it should be so. Alas! that the doctrine which
is the key to history, the interpreter of Providence, the warp and woof of
Scripture, and the foundation of Christian theology, should be so sadly
neglected and so little understood.
The sovereignty of God. What do we mean
by this expression? We mean the supremacy of God, the kingship of God, the
godhood of God. To say that God is sovereign is to declare that God is
God. To say that God is sovereign is to declare that He is the Most High,
doing according to His will in the army of heaven, and among the inhabitants
of the earth, so that none can stay His hand or say unto Him what doest Thou?
(Dan. 4:35). To say that God is sovereign is to declare that He is the
Almighty, the Possessor of all power in heaven and earth, so that none can
defeat His counsels, thwart His purpose, or resist His will (Ps. 115:3). To
say that God is sovereign is to declare that He is "The Governor among the
nations" (Ps. 22:28), setting up kingdoms, overthrowing empires, and
determining the course of dynasties as pleaseth Him best. To say that God is
sovereign is to declare that He is the "Only Potentate, the King of kings, and
Lord of lords" (1 Tim. 6:15). Such is the God of the Bible.
How different is the God of the Bible
from the God of modern Christendom! The conception of Deity which prevails
most widely today, even among those who profess to give heed to the
Scriptures, is a miserable caricature, a blasphemous travesty of the Truth.
The God of the twentieth century is a helpless, effeminate being who commands
the respect of no really thoughtful man. The God of the popular mind is the
creation of a maudlin sentimentality. The God of many a present-day pulpit is
an object of pity rather than of awe-inspiring reverence.[1]
To say that God the Father has purposed the salvation of all mankind, that God
the Son died with the express intention of saving the whole human race, and
that God the Holy Spirit is now seeking to win the world to Christ; when, as a
matter of common observation, it is apparent that the great majority of our
fellow-men are dying in sin, and passing into a hopeless eternity: is to say
that God the Father is disappointed, that God the Son is
dissatisfied, and that God the Holy Spirit is defeated. We have
stated the issue baldly, but there is no escaping the conclusion. To argue
that God is "trying His best" to save all mankind, but that the majority of
men will not let Him save them, is to insist that the will of the Creator is
impotent, and that the will of the creature is omnipotent. To throw the blame,
as many do, upon the Devil, does not remove the difficulty, for if Satan is
defeating the purpose of God, then, Satan is Almighty and God is no longer the
Supreme Being.
To declare that the Creator’s original
plan has been frustrated by sin, is to dethrone God. To suggest that
God was taken by surprise in Eden and that He is now attempting to remedy an
unforeseen calamity, is to degrade the Most High to the level of a
finite, erring mortal. To argue that man is a free moral agent and the
determiner of his own destiny, and that therefore he has the power to
checkmate his Maker, is to strip God of the attribute of Omnipotence.
To say that the creature has burst the hounds assigned by his Creator, and
that God is now practically a helpless Spectator before the sin and suffering
entailed by Adam’s fall, is to repudiate the express declaration of
Holy Writ, namely, "Surely the wrath of man shall praise Thee: the remainder
of wrath shalt Thou restrain" (Ps. 76:10). In a word, to deny
the sovereignty of God is to enter upon a path which, if followed to its
logical terminus, is to arrive at blank atheism.
The sovereignty of the God of Scripture
is absolute, irresistible, infinite. When we say that God is sovereign we
affirm His right to govern the universe, which He has made for His own glory,
just as He pleases. We affirm that His right is the right of the Potter
over the clay, i.e., that He may mould that clay into whatsoever form He
chooses, fashioning out of the same lump one vessel unto honor and
another unto dishonor. We affirm that He is under no rule or law outside of
His own will and nature, that God is a law unto Himself, and that He is
under no obligation to give an account of His matters to any.
Sovereignty characterizes the whole
Being of God. He is sovereign in all His attributes. He is sovereign in the
exercise of His power. His power is exercised as He wills, when
He wills, where He wills. This fact is evidenced on every page of
Scripture. For a long season that power appears to be dormant, and then it is
put forth in irresistible might. Pharaoh dared to hinder Israel from going
forth to worship Jehovah in the wilderness—what happened? God exercised His
power, His people were delivered and their cruel task-masters slain. But a
little later, the Amalekites dared to attack these same Israelites in the
wilderness, and what happened? Did God put forth His power on this occasion
and display His hand as He did at the Red Sea? Were these enemies of His
people promptly overthrown and destroyed? No, on the contrary, the Lord swore
that He would "have war with Amalek from generation to generation"
(Ex. 17:16). Again, when Israel entered the land of Canaan, God’s power
was signally displayed. The city of Jericho barred their progress—what
happened? Israel did not draw a bow nor strike a blow: the Lord stretched
forth His hand and the walls fell down flat. But the miracle was never
repeated! No other city fell after this manner. Every other city had to
be captured by the sword!
Many other instances might be adduced
illustrating the sovereign exercise of God’s power. Take one other example.
God put forth His power and David was delivered from Goliath, the giant; the
mouths of the lions were closed and Daniel escaped unhurt; the three Hebrew
children were cast into the burning fiery furnace and came forth unharmed and
unscorched. But God’s power did not always interpose for the deliverance of
His people, for we read: "And others had trial of cruel mockings
and scourgings, yea, moreover of bonds and imprisonment: they were stoned,
they were sawn asunder, were tempted, were slain with the sword; they wandered
about in sheepskins and goatskins; being destitute, afflicted, tormented"
(Heb. 11:36, 37). But why? Why were not these men of faith delivered like the
others? Or, why were not the others suffered to be killed like these? Why
should God’s power interpose and rescue some and not the others? Why allow
Stephen to be stoned to death, and then deliver Peter from prison?
God is sovereign in the delegation of
His power to others. Why did God endow Methuselah with a vitality which
enabled him to outlive all his contemporaries? Why did God impart to Samson a
physical strength which no other human has ever possessed? Again; it is
written, "But thou shalt remember the Lord thy God: for it is He that
giveth thee power to get wealth" (Deut. 8:18), but God does not bestow
this power on all alike. Why not? Why has He given such power to men like
Morgan, Carnegie, Rockefeller? The answer to all of these questions, is,
Because God is Sovereign, and being Sovereign He does as He pleases.
God is sovereign in the exercise of
His mercy. Necessarily so, for mercy is directed by the will of Him
that showeth mercy. Mercy is not a right to which man is entitled.
Mercy is that adorable attribute of God by which He pities and relieves the
wretched. But under the righteous government of God no one is wretched who
does not deserve to be so. The objects of mercy, then, are those who
are miserable, and all misery is the result of sin, hence the miserable
are deserving of punishment not mercy. To speak of deserving mercy is a
contradiction of terms.
God bestows His mercies on whom He
pleases and withholds them as seemeth good unto Himself. A remarkable
illustration of this fact is seen in the manner that God responded to the
prayers of two men offered under very similar circumstances. Sentence of death
was passed upon Moses for one act of disobedience, and he besought the Lord
for a reprieve. But was his desire gratified? No; he told Israel, "The Lord is
wroth with me for your sakes, and would not hear me: and the Lord said
unto me, Let it suffice thee" (Deut. 3:26). Now mark the second case
those days was Hezekiah sick unto death.
And the prophet Isaiah the son of Amoz came to him, and said unto him, Thus
saith the Lord, Set thine house in order; for thou shalt die, and not live.
Then he turned his face to the wall, and prayed unto the Lord, saying, I
beseech Thee, O Lord, remember now how I have walked before Thee in truth and
with a perfect heart, and have done that which is good in Thy sight. And
Hezekiah wept sore. And it came to pass, afore Isaiah was gone out into the
middle court, that the word of the Lord came to him, saying, Turn again, and
tell Hezekiah the captain of my people, Thus saith the Lord, the God of David
thy father, I have heard thy prayer, I have seen thy tears: behold, I
will heal thee: on the third day thou shalt go up unto the house of the Lord.
And I will add unto thy days fifteen years" (2 Kings 20:1-6). Both of these
men had the sentence of death in themselves, and both prayed earnestly unto
the Lord for a reprieve: the one wrote: "The Lord would not hear me," and
died; but to the other it was said, "I have heard thy prayer", and his life
was spared. What an illustration and exemplification of the truth expressed in
Romans 9:15!—"For He saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have
mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion."
The sovereign exercise of God’s
mercy—pity shown to the wretched—was displayed when Jehovah became flesh and
tabernacled among men. Take one illustration. During one of the Feasts of the
Jews, the Lord Jesus went up to Jerusalem. He came to the Pool of Bethesda,
where lay "a great multitude of impotent folk, of blind, halt,
withered, waiting for the moving of the water." Among this "great multitude"
there was "a certain man which had an infirmity thirty and eight years." What
happened? "When Jesus saw hint lie, and knew that he had been now a
long time in that case, he saith unto him, Wilt thou be made whole? The
impotent man answered Him, Sir, I have no man, when the water is troubled, to
put me into the pool: but while I am coming, another steppeth down before me.
Jesus saith unto him, Rise, take up thy bed, and walk. And immediately the man
was made whole, and took up his bed, and walked" (John 5:3-9). Why was this
one man singled out from all the others? We are not told that he cried "Lord,
have mercy on me." There is not a word in the narrative which
intimates that this man possessed any qualifications which entitled him to
receive special favor. Here then was a case of the sovereign exercise of
Divine mercy, for it was just as easy for Christ to heal the whole of that
"great multitude" as this one "certain man." But lie did not. He put forth His
power and relieved the wretchedness of this one particular sufferer, and for
some reason known only to Himself, He declined to do the same for the others.
Again, we say, what an illustration and exemplification of Romans 9:15!—"I
will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom
I will have compassion."
God is sovereign in the exercise of
His love. Ah! that is a hard saying, who then can receive it? It is
written, "A man can receive nothing, except it be given him from heaven" (John
3:27). When we say that God is sovereign in the exercise of His love,
we mean that He loves whom He chooses. God does not love everybody;[2]
if He did, He would love the Devil. Why does not God love the Devil? Because
there is nothing in him to love; because there is nothing in him to
attract the heart of God. Nor is there anything to attract God’s
love in any of the fallen sons of Adam, for all of them are, by nature,
"children of wrath" (Eph. 2:3). If then there is nothing
in any member of the human race to attract God’s love, and if,
notwithstanding, He does love some, then it necessarily follows
that the cause of His love must be found in Himself, which is only
another way of saying that the exercise of God’s love towards the fallen sons
of men is according to His own good pleasure.[3]
In the final analysis, the exercise of
God’s love must be traced back to His sovereignty, or, otherwise, He
would love by rule; and if He loved by rule, then is He under a law
of love, and if He is under a law of love then is He not supreme,
but is Himself ruled by law. "But," it may be asked, "Surely you do not
deny that God loves the entire human family?" We reply, it is written,
"Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated" (Rom. 9:13). If then God loved
Jacob and hated Esau, and that before they were born or had done either good
or evil, then the reason for His love was not in them, but in Himself.
That the exercise of God’s love is
according to His own sovereign pleasure is also clear from the language of
Ephesians 1:3-5, where we read, "Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord
Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly
places in Christ: According as He hath chosen us in Him before the foundation
of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before Him. In love
having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to
Himself according to the good pleasure of His will." It was "in
love" that God the Father predestined His chosen ones unto the
adoption of children by Jesus Christ to Himself, "according"—according to
what? According to some excellency He discovered in them? No. What
then? According to what He foresaw they would become? No; mark
carefully the inspired answer—"According to the good pleasure of His will."
God is sovereign in the exercise of
His grace. This of necessity, for grace is favor shown to the
undeserving, yea, to the Hell-deserving. Grace is the antithesis of
justice. Justice demands the impartial enforcement of law. Justice requires
that each shall receive his legitimate due, neither more nor less. Justice
bestows no favors and is no respecter of persons. Justice, as such, shows no
pity and knows no mercy. But after justice has been fully satisfied, grace
flows forth. Divine grace is not exercised at the expense of justice, but
"grace reigns through righteousness" (Rom. 5:21), and if grace "reigns",
then is grace sovereign.
Grace has been defined as the unmerited
favor of God;[4] and if unmerited, then none can
claim it as their inalienable right. If grace is unearned and
undeserved, then none are entitled to it. If grace is a gift, then none
can demand it. Therefore, as salvation is by grace, the free gift of
God, then He bestows it on whom He pleases. Because salvation is by grace, the
very chief of sinners is not beyond the reach of Divine mercy. Because
salvation is by grace, boasting is excluded and God gets all the glory.
The sovereign exercise of grace is
illustrated on nearly every page of Scripture. The Gentiles are left to walk
in their own ways, while Israel becomes the covenant people of Jehovah.
Ishmael the firstborn is cast out comparatively unblessed, while Isaac the son
of his parents’ old age is made the child of promise. Esau the
generous-hearted and forgiving-spirited is denied the blessing, though he
sought it carefully with tears, while the worm Jacob receives the inheritance
and is fashioned into a vessel of honor. So in the New Testament. Divine truth
is hidden from the wise and prudent, but is revealed to babes. The Pharisees
and Sadducees are left to go their own way, while publicans and harlots are
drawn by the cords of love.
In a remarkable manner Divine grace was
exercised at the time of the Saviour’s birth. The incarnation of God’s Son was
one of the greatest events in the history of the universe, and yet its actual
occurrence was not made known to all mankind; instead, it was specially
revealed to the Bethlehem shepherds and wise men of the East. And this was
prophetic and indicative of the entire course of this dispensation, for even
today Christ is not made known to all. It would have been an easy matter f or
God to have sent a company of angels to every nation and announced the
birth of His Son. But He did not. God could have readily attracted the
attention of all mankind to the "star;" but He did not. Why? Because God is
sovereign and dispenses His favors as He pleases. Note particularly the two
classes to whom the birth of the Saviour was made known, namely, the
most unlikely classes—illiterate shepherds and heathen from a far
country. No angel stood before the Sanhedrin and announced the advent of
Israel’s Messiah! No "star" appeared unto the scribes and lawyers as they, in
their pride and self-righteousness, searched the Scriptures! They searched
diligently to find out where He should be born, and yet it was not made known
to them when He was actually come. What a display of Divine
sovereignty—the illiterate shepherds singled out for peculiar honor, and the
learned and eminent passed by! And why was the birth of the Saviour revealed
to these foreigners, and not to those in whose midst He was born? See in this
a wonderful foreshadowing of God’s dealings with our race throughout the
entire Christian dispensation—sovereign in the exercise of His grace,
bestowing His favors on whom He pleases, often on the most unlikely and
unworthy.[5]
ENDNOTES:
[1]
Some years ago an evangelical (?)
preacher of nation-wide reputation visited the town in which we then were,
and during the course of his address kept repeating, “Poor God! Poor God!”
Surely it is this “preacher” who needs to be pitied.
[2]
John 3:16 will be examined in
Appendix III.
[3]
We are not unmindful of the fact
that men have invented the distinction between God’s love of
complacency and His love of compassion, but this is
an invention pure and simple. Scripture terms the latter
God’s “pity” (see Matt. 18:33), and “He is kind unto the
unthankful and the evil” (Luke 6:35).
[4]
An esteemed friend who kindly read
through this book in its manuscript form, and to whom we are indebted for a
number of excellent suggestions, has pointed out that, grace is something more
than “unmerited favor.” To feed a tramp who calls on me is “unmerited favor,”
but it is scarcely grace. But suppose that after
robbing me I should feed this starving tramp—that would be “grace.”
Grace, then, is favor shown where there is positive de-merit in the one
receiving it.
[5]
It has been pointed out to us that
God’s sovereignty was signally displayed in His choice of the place
where His Son was born. Not to Greece or Italy did the Lord of Glory come,
but to the insignificant land of Palestine! Not in Jerusalem—the royal
city—was Immanuel born, but in Bethlehem, which was “little among
the thousands (of towns and villages) in Judah” (Micah 5:2)! And it was in
despised Nazareth that He grew up!! Truly, God’s ways are not
ours.
Chapter 2
THE SOVEREIGNTY OF GOD IN CREATION
"Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory, and honor,
and power: for Thou hast created all things, and
for Thy pleasure they are and were created"
Revelation 4:11
Having shown that sovereignty
characterizes the whole Being of God, let us now observe how it marks all His
ways and dealings.
In the great expanse of eternity, which
stretches behind Genesis 1:1, the universe was unborn and creation existed
only in the mind of the great Creator. In His sovereign majesty God dwelt all
alone. We refer to that far distant period before the heavens and the earth
were created. There were then no angels to hymn God’s praises, no creatures to
occupy His notice, no rebels to be brought into subjection. The great God was
all alone amid the awful silence of His own vast universe. But even at that
time, if time it could be called, God was sovereign. He might create or not
create according to His own good pleasure. He might create this way or
that way; He might create one world or one million worlds, and who was there
to resist His will? He might call into existence a million different creatures
and place them on absolute equality, endowing them with the same
faculties and placing them in the same environment; or, He might create a
million creatures each differing from the others, and possessing
nothing in common save their creaturehood, and who was there to challenge His
right? If He so pleased, He might call into existence a world so immense that
its dimensions were utterly beyond finite computation; and were He so
disposed, He might create an organism so small that nothing but the most
powerful microscope could reveal its existence to human eyes. It was His
sovereign right to create, on the one hand, the exalted seraphim to burn
around His throne, and on the other hand, the tiny insect which dies the same
hour that it is born. If the mighty God chose to have one vast gradation
in His universe, from loftiest seraph to creeping reptile, from revolving
worlds to floating atoms, from macrocosm to microcosm, instead of making
everything uniform, who was there to question His sovereign pleasure?
Behold then the exercise of Divine
sovereignty long before man ever saw the light. With whom took God counsel in
the creation and disposition of His creatures. See the birds as they fly
through the air, the beasts as they roam the earth, the fishes as they swim in
the sea, and then ask, Who was it that made them to differ? Was it not their
Creator who sovereignly assigned their various locations and
adaptations to them!
Turn your eye to the heavens and
observe the mysteries of Divine sovereignty which there confront the
thoughtful beholder: "There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the
moon, and another glory of the stars: for one star differeth from
another star in glory" (1 Cor. 15:41). But why should they? Why should the sun
be more glorious than all the other planets? Why should there be stars of the
first magnitude and others of the tenth? Why such amazing inequalities?
Why should some of the heavenly bodies be more favorably placed than
others in their relation to the sun? And why should there be "shooting stars,"
"falling stars," "wandering stars" (Jude 13), in a word, ruined stars?
And the only possible answer is, "For Thy pleasure they are and were created"
(Rev. 4:11).
Come now to our own planet. Why
should two thirds of its surface be covered with water, and why should so much
of its remaining third be unfit for human cultivation or habitation? Why
should there be vast stretches of marshes, deserts and ice-fields? Why should
one country be so inferior, topographically, from another? Why should one be
fertile, and another almost barren? Why should one be rich in minerals and
another own none? Why should the climate of one be congenial and healthy, and
another uncongenial and unhealthy? Why should one abound in rivers and lakes,
and another be almost devoid of them? Why should one be constantly troubled
with earthquakes, and another be almost entirely free from them? Why? Because
thus it pleased the Creator and Upholder of all things.
Look at the animal kingdom and
note the wondrous variety. What comparison is possible between the lion and
the lamb, the bear and the kid, the elephant and the mouse? Some, like the
horse and the dog, are gifted with great intelligence; while others, like
sheep and swine, are almost devoid of it. Why? Some are designed to be beasts
of burden, while others enjoy a life of freedom. But why should the mule and
the donkey be shackled to a life of drudgery, while the lion and tiger are
allowed to roam the jungle at their pleasure? Some are fit for food, others
unfit; some are beautiful, others ugly; some are endowed with great strength,
others are quite helpless; some are fleet of foot, others can scarcely
crawl—contrast the hare and the tortoise; some are of use to man, others
appear to be quite valueless; some live for centuries, others a few months at
most; some are tame, others fierce. But why all these variations and
differences?
What is true of the animals is equally
true of the birds and fishes. But consider now the vegetable kingdom.
Why should roses have thorns, and lilies grow without them? Why should one
flower emit a fragrant aroma and another have none? Why should one tree bear
fruit which is wholesome and another that which is poisonous? Why should one
vegetable be capable of enduring frost and another wither under it? Why should
one apple tree be loaded with fruit, and another tree of the same age and in
the same orchard be almost barren? Why should one plant flower a dozen times
in a year and another bear blossoms but once a century? Truly, "whatsoever
the Lord pleased, that did He in heaven, and in the earth, in the seas,
and all deep places" (Ps. 135:6).
Consider the angelic hosts.
Surely we shall find uniformity here. But no; there, as elsewhere, the same
sovereign pleasure of the Creator is displayed. Some are higher in rank than
others; some are more powerful than others; some are nearer to God than
others. Scripture reveals a definite and well-defined gradation in the angelic
orders. From arch-angel, past seraphim and cherubim, we come to
"principalities and powers" (Eph. 3:10), and from principalities and powers to
"rulers" (Eph. 6:12), and then to the angels themselves, and even among them
we read of "the elect angels" (1 Tim. 5:21). Again we ask, Why this
inequality, this difference in rank and order? And all we can say is "Our
God is in the heavens, He hath done whatsoever He hath pleased" (Ps. 115:3).
If then we see the sovereignty of God
displayed throughout all creation why should it be thought a strange thing if
we behold it operating in the midst of the human family? Why should it
be thought strange if to one God is pleased to give five talents and to
another only one? Why should it be thought strange if one is born with a
robust constitution and another of the same parents is frail and sickly? Why
should it be thought strange if Abel is cut off in his prime, while Cain is
suffered to live on for many years? Why should it be thought strange that some
should be born black and others white; some be born idiots and others with
high intellectual endowments; some be born constitutionally lethargic and
others full of energy; some be born with a temperament that is selfish, fiery,
egotistical, others who are naturally self-sacrificing, submissive and meek?
Why should it be thought strange if some are qualified by nature to lead and
rule, while others are only fitted to follow and serve? Heredity and
environment cannot account for all these variations and inequalities. No; it
is God who maketh one to differ from another. Why should He? "Even so,
Father, for so it seemed good in Thy sight" must be our reply.
Learn then this basic truth, that the
Creator is absolute Sovereign, executing His own will, performing His own
pleasure, and considering nought but His own glory. "The Lord hath made all
things for Himself" (Prov. 16:4). And had He not a perfect right
to? Since God is God, who dare challenge His prerogative? To murmur
against Him is rank rebellion. To question His ways is to impugn His wisdom.
To criticize Him is sin of the deepest dye. Have we forgotten who He
is? Behold, "All nations before Him are as nothing; and they are counted to
Him less than nothing, and vanity. To whom then will ye liken God ?" (Isa.
40:17, 18).
Chapter 3
THE SOVEREIGNTY OF GOD IN ADMINISTRATION
"The Lord hath prepared His Throne in the heavens; and
His Kingdom ruleth over all"
Psalm 103:19
First, a word concerning the need
for God to govern the material world. Suppose the opposite for a
moment. For the sake of argument, let us say that God created the world,
designed and fixed certain laws (which men term "the laws of Nature"), and
that He then withdrew, leaving the world to its fortune and the
out-working of these laws. In such a case, we should have a world over which
there was no intelligent, presiding Governor, a world controlled by nothing
more than impersonal laws—a concept worthy of gross Materialism and
blank Atheism. But, I say, suppose it for a moment; and in the light of such a
supposition, weigh well the following question:—What guaranty have we that
some day ere long the world will not be destroyed? A very superficial
observation of "the laws of Nature" reveals the fact that they are not
uniform in their working. The proof of this is seen in the fact that no
two seasons are alike. If then Nature’s laws are irregular in their
operations, what guaranty have we against some dreadful catastrophe striking
our earth? "The wind bloweth where it listeth" (pleaseth), which
means that man can neither harness nor hinder it. Sometimes the wind blows
with great fury, and it might be that it should suddenly gather in volume and
velocity, until it became a hurricane earth-wide in its range. If there is
nothing more than the laws of Nature regulating the wind, then, perhaps
tomorrow, there may come a terrific tornado and sweep everything from the
surface of the earth! What assurance have we against such a calamity? Again;
of late years we have heard and read much about clouds bursting and flooding
whole districts, working fearful havoc in the destruction of both property and
life. Man is helpless before them, for science can devise no means to
prevent clouds bursting. Then how do we know that these bursting-clouds
will not be multiplied indefinitely and the whole earth be deluged by their
downpour? This would be nothing new: why should not the Flood of Noah’s day be
repeated? And what of earthquakes? Every few years, some island or some great
city is swept out of existence by one of them—and what can man do? Where is
the guaranty that ere long a mammoth earthquake will not destroy the whole
world? Science tells us of great subterranean fires burning beneath the
comparatively thin crust of our earth, how do we know but what these fires
will not suddenly burst forth and consume our entire globe? Surely every
reader now sees the point we are seeking to make: Deny that God is
governing matter, deny that He is "upholding all things by the word
of His power" (Heb. 1:3), and all sense of security is gone!
Let us pursue a similar course of
reasoning in connection with the human race. Is God governing this
world of ours? Is He shaping the destinies of nations, controlling the course
of empires, determining the limits of dynasties? Has He described the limits
of evil-doers, saying, Thus far shalt thou go and no further? Let us suppose
the opposite for a moment. Let us assume that God has delivered over the helm
into the hand of His creatures, and see where such a supposition leads us. For
the sake of argument we will say that every man enters this world endowed with
a will that is absolutely free, and that it is impossible to compel or
even coerce him without destroying his freedom. Let us say that every
man possesses a knowledge of right and wrong, that he has the power to choose
between them, and that he is left entirely free to make his own choice and go
his own way. Then what? Then it follows that man is sovereign, for he
does as he pleases and is the architect of his own fortune. But in such
a case we can have no assurance that ere long every man will reject the good
and choose the evil. In such a case we have no guaranty against the entire
human race committing moral suicide. Let all Divine restraints be removed and
man be left absolutely free, and all ethical distinctions would immediately
disappear, the spirit of barbarism would prevail universally, and pandemonium
would reign supreme. Why not? If one nation deposes its rulers and repudiates
its constitution, what is there to prevent all nations from doing the same? If
little more than a century ago the streets of Paris ran with the blood of
rioters, what assurance have we that before the present century closes every
city throughout the world will not witness a similar sight? What is there to
hinder worldwide lawlessness and universal anarchy? Thus we have sought to
show the need, the imperative need, for God to occupy the Throne, take
the government upon His shoulder, and control the activities and
destinies of His creatures.
But has the man of faith any difficulty
in perceiving the government of God over this world? Does not the anointed eye
discern, even amid much seeming confusion and chaos, the hand of the Most High
controlling and shaping the affairs of men, even in the common concerns of
every day life? Take for example farmers and their crops. Suppose God left
them to themselves: what would then prevent them, one and all, from grassing
their arable lands and devoting themselves exclusively to the rearing of
cattle and dairying? In such a case there would be a world-famine of wheat and
corn! Take the work of the post-office. Suppose that everybody decided to
write letters on Mondays only, could the authorities cope with the mail on
Tuesdays? and how would they occupy their time the balance of the week? So
again with storekeepers. What would happen if every housewife did her
shopping on Wednesday, and stayed at home the rest of the week? But instead of
such things happening, farmers in different countries both raise sufficient
cattle and grow enough grain of various kinds to supply the almost
incalculable needs of the human race; the mails are almost evenly distributed
over the six days of the week; and some women shop on Monday, some on Tuesday,
and so on. Do not these things clearly evidence the overruling and controlling
hand of God!
Having shown, in brief, the imperative
need for God to reign over our world, let us now observe still further the
fact that God does rule, actually rule, and that His government
extends to and is exercised over all things and all creatures. And,
1. God Governs Inanimate Matter.
That God governs inanimate matter, that
inanimate matter performs His bidding and fulfils His decrees, is clearly
shown on the very frontispiece of Divine revelation. God said, Let there be
light, and we read, "There was light." God said, "Let the waters
under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land
appear," and "it was so." And again, "God said, Let the earth
bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit
after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so."
As the Psalmist declares, "He spake, and it was done; He commanded,
and it stood fast."
What is stated in Genesis one is
afterwards illustrated all through the Bible. After the creation of Adam,
sixteen centuries went by before ever a shower of rain fell upon the earth,
for before Noah "there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole
face of the ground" (Gen. 2:6). But, when the iniquities of the
antediluvians had come to the full, then God said, "And, behold, I, even.
I, do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh,
wherein is the breath of life, from under heaven; and everything that is in
the earth shall die;" and in fulfillment of this we read, "In the six
hundredth year of Noah’s life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the
month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and
the windows of heaven were opened. And the rain was upon the earth forty days
and forty nights" (Gen. 6:17 and 7:11, 12).
Witness God’s absolute (and
sovereign) control of inanimate matter in connection with the plagues upon
Egypt. At His bidding the light was turned into darkness and rivers into
blood; hail fell, and death came down upon the godless land of the Nile, until
even its haughty monarch was compelled to cry out for deliverance. Note
particularly how the inspired record here emphasizes God’s absolute control
over the elements—"And Moses stretched forth his rod toward heaven: and the
Lord sent thunder and hail, and the fire ran along upon the ground; and
the Lord rained hail upon the land of Egypt." So there was hail, and fire
mingled with the hail, very grievous, such as there was none like it in all
the land of Egypt since it became a nation. And the hail smote throughout all
the land of Egypt all that was in the field, both man and beast; and the hail
smote every herb of the field, and brake every tree of the field. Only in
the land of Goshen, where the children of Israel were, was there no hail"
(Ex. 9:23-26). The same distinction was observed in connection with
the ninth plague: "And the Lord said unto Moses, Stretch out thine hand toward
heaven, that there may be darkness over the land of Egypt, even darkness which
may be felt. And Moses stretched forth his hand toward heaven; and there was a
thick darkness in all the land of Egypt three days: They saw not one another,
neither rose any from his place for three days: but all the children of
Israel had light in their dwellings" (Ex. 10:21-23).
The above examples are by no means
isolated cases. At God’s decree fire and brimstone descended from heaven
and the cities of the Plain were destroyed, and a fertile valley was converted
into a loathsome sea of death. At His bidding the waters of the Red Sea parted
asunder so that the Israelites passed over dry shod, and at His word they
rolled back again and destroyed the Egyptians who were pursuing them. A word
from Him, and the earth opened her mouth and Korah and his rebellious company
were swallowed up. The furnace of Nebuchadnezzar was heated seven times beyond
its normal temperature, and into it three of God’s children were cast, but the
fire did not so much as scorch their clothes, though it slew the men who cast
them into it.
What a demonstration of the Creator’s
governmental control over the elements was furnished when He became flesh and
tabernacled among men! Behold Him asleep in the boat. A storm arises. The
winds roar and the waves are lashed into fury. The disciples who are with Him,
fearful lest their little craft should founder, awake their Master, saying, "Carest
Thou not that we perish?" And then we read, "And He arose, and rebuked the
wind, and said unto the sea, Peace, be still. And the wind ceased, and
there was a great calm" (Mark 4:39). Mark again, the sea, at the
will of its Creator, bore Him up upon its waves. At a word from Him the
fig-tree withered; at His touch disease fled instantly.
The heavenly bodies are also ruled by
their Maker and perform His sovereign pleasure. Take two illustrations. At
God’s bidding the sun went back ten degrees on the dial of Ahaz to help the
weak faith of Hezekiah. In New Testament times, God caused a star to herald
the incarnation of His Son—the star which appeared unto the wise men of the
East. This star, we are told, "went before them till it came and stood
over where the young Child was" (Matt. 2:9).
What a declaration is this—"He sendeth
forth His commandment upon earth: His word runneth very swiftly. He giveth
snow like wool: He scattereth the hoar frost like ashes. He
casteth forth His ice like morsels: who can stand before His cold? He
sendeth out His word, and melteth them: He causeth His wind to blow,
and the waters flow" (Ps. 147:15-18). The mutations of the elements are
beneath God’s sovereign control. It is God who withholds the rain, and
it is God who gives the rain when He wills, where He wills, as He
wills, and on whom He wills. Weather Bureaus may attempt to give forecasts of
the weather, but how frequently God mocks their calculations! Sun ‘spots,’ the
varying activities of the planets, the appearing and disappearing of comets
(to which abnormal weather is sometimes attributed), atmospheric disturbances,
are merely secondary causes, for behind them all is God Himself. Let His Word
speak once more: "And also I have withholden the rain from you, when
there were yet three months to the harvest: and I caused it to rain
upon one city, and caused it not to rain upon another city: one piece was
rained upon, and the piece whereon it rained not withered. So two or three
cities wandered unto one city, to drink water; but they were not satisfied:
yet have ye not returned unto Me, saith the Lord. I have smitten you with
blasting and mildew: when your gardens and your vineyards and your fig
trees and your olive trees increased, the palmerworm devoured them: yet have
ye not returned unto Me, saith the Lord. I have sent among you the
pestilence after the manner of Egypt: your young men have I slain with the
sword, and have taken away your horses; and I have made the stink of your
camps to come up into your nostrils: yet have ye not returned unto Me, saith
the Lord" (Amos 4:7-10).
Truly, then, God governs inanimate
matter. Earth and air, fire and water, hail and snow, stormy winds and angry
seas, all perform the word of His power and fulfil His sovereign pleasure.
Therefore, when we complain about the weather, we are, in reality, murmuring
against God.
2. God Governs Irrational Creatures.
What a striking illustration of God’s
government over the animal kingdom is found in Genesis 2:19! "And out of the
ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the
air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and
whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof."
Should it be said that this occurred in Eden, and took place before the fall
of Adam and the consequent curse which was inflicted on every creature, then
our next reference fully meets the objection: God’s control of the beasts was
again openly displayed at the Flood. Mark how God caused to "come unto" Noah
every specie of living creature "of every living thing of all flesh, two of
every sort shalt thou bring into the ark, to keep them alive with thee; they
shall be male and female. Of fowls after their kind, of every creeping thing
after his kind: two of every sort shall come unto thee" (Gen.
6:19, 20)—all were beneath God’s sovereign control. The lion of the jungle,
the elephant of the forest, the bear of the polar regions; the ferocious
panther, the untameable wolf, the fierce tiger; the high-soaring eagle and the
creeping crocodile—see them all in their native fierceness, and yet, quietly
submitting to the will of their Creator, and coming two by two into the ark!
We referred to the plagues sent upon
Egypt as illustrating God’s control of inanimate matter, let us now turn to
them again to see how they demonstrate His perfect ruler-ship over irrational
creatures. At His word the river brought forth frogs abundantly, and these
frogs entered the palace of Pharaoh and the houses of his servants and,
contrary to their natural instincts, they entered the beds, the ovens and the
kneadingtroughs (Ex. 8:13). Swarms of flies invaded the land of Egypt, but
there were no flies in the land of Goshen! (Ex. 8:22). Next, the cattle were
stricken. and we read, "Behold, the hand of the Lord is upon thy cattle
which is in the field, upon the horses, upon the asses, upon the camels, upon
the oxen, and upon the sheep: there shall be a very grievous murrain. And the
Lord shall sever between the cattle of Israel and the cattle of Egypt: and
there shall nothing die of all that is the children’s of Israel. And the Lord
appointed a set time, saying, Tomorrow the Lord shall do this thing in the
land. And the Lord did that thing on the morrow, and all the cattle of Egypt
died: but of the cattle of the children of Israel died not one" (Ex.
9:3-6). In like manner God sent clouds of locusts to plague Pharaoh and his
land, appointing the time of their visitation, determining the course and
assigning the limits of their depredations.
Angels are not the only ones who do
God’s bidding. The brute beasts equally perform His pleasure. The sacred ark,
the ark of the covenant, is in the country of the Philistines. How is it to be
brought back to its home land? Mark the servants of God’s choice, and how
completely they were beneath His control: "And the Philistines called for the
priests and the diviners saying, What shall we do to the ark of the Lord? tell
us wherewith we shall send it to his place. And they said. . . . Now therefore
make a new cart, and take two milch kine, on which there hath come no yoke,
and tie the kine to the cart, and bring their calves home from them: And take
the ark of the Lord, and lay it upon the cart; and put the jewels of gold,
which ye return Him for a trespass offering, in a coffer by the side thereof,
and send it away that it may go. And see, if it goeth up by the way of his own
coast to Bethshemesh, then He hath done us this great evil: but if not, then
we shall know that it is not His hand that smote us; it was a chance that
happened to us." And what happened? How striking the sequel! "And the kine
took the straight way to the way of Bethshemesh, and went along the
highway, lowing as they went, and turned not aside to the right hand or to
the left" (1 Sam. 6:12). Equally striking is the case of Elijah:
"And the word of the Lord came unto him, saying, Get thee hence, and hide
thyself by the brook Cherith, that is before Jordan. And it shall be, that
thou shalt drink of the brook; and I have commanded the ravens to feed thee
there." (1 Kings 17:2-4). The natural instinct of these birds of
prey was held in subjection, and instead of consuming the food themselves,
they carried it to Jehovah’s servant in his solitary retreat.
Is further proof required? then it is
ready to hand. God makes a dumb ass to rebuke the prophet’s madness. He sends
forth two she-bears from the woods to devour forty and two of Elijah’s
tormentors. In fulfillment of His word, He causes the dogs to lick up the
blood of the wicked Jezebel. He seals the mouths of Babylon’s lions when
Daniel is cast into the den, though, later, He causes them to devour the
prophet’s accusers. He prepares a great fish to swallow the disobedient Jonah
and then, when His ordained hour struck, compelled it to vomit him forth on
dry land. At His bidding a fish carries a coin to Peter for tribute money,
and in order to fulfil His word He makes the cock to crow twice after Peter’s
denial. Thus we see that God reigns over irrational creatures: beasts of the
field, birds of the air, fishes of the sea, all perform His sovereign
bidding.
3. God Governs the Children of Men.
We fully appreciate the fact that this
is the most difficult part of our subject, and, accordingly, it will be dealt
with at greater length in the pages that follow; but at present we consider
the fact of God’s government over men in general, before we attempt to
deal with the problem in detail.
Two alternatives confront us, and
between them we obliged to choose: either God governs, or He is governed:
either God rules, or He is ruled; either God has His way, or men have theirs.
And is our choice between these alternatives hard to make? Shall we say that
in man we behold a creature so unruly that he is beyond God’s control?
Shall we say that sin has alienated the sinner so far from the thrice
Holy One that he is outside the pale of His jurisdiction? Or, shall we
say that man has been endowed with moral responsibility, and therefore God
must leave him entirely free, at least during the period of his probation?
Does it necessarily follow because the natural man is an outlaw against
heaven, a rebel against the Divine government, that God is unable to fulfil
His purpose through him? We mean, not merely that He may overrule the
effects of the actions of evil-doers, nor that He will yet bring the wicked to
stand before His judgment-bar so that sentence of punishment may be passed
upon them—multitudes of non-Christians believe these things—but, we mean, that
every action of the most lawless of His subjects is entirely beneath His
control, yea that the actor is, though unknown to himself, carrying out the
secret decrees of the Most High. Was it not thus with Judas? and is it
possible to select a more extreme case? If then the arch-rebel was performing
the counsel of God is it any greater tax upon our faith to believe the same of
all rebels?
Our present object is not philosophic
inquiry nor metaphysical causistry, but to ascertain the teaching of Scripture
upon this profound theme. To the Law and the Testimony, for there only can we
learn of the Divine government—its character, its design, its modus operandi,
its scope. What then has it pleased God to reveal to us in His blessed Word
concerning His rule over the works of His hands, and particularly, over the
one who originally was made in His own image and likeness?
"In Him we live, and move, and
have our being" (Acts 17:28). What a sweeping assertion is this! These words,
be it noted, were addressed, not to one of the churches of God, not to a
company of saints who had reached an exalted plane of spirituality, but to a
heathen audience, to those who worshipped "the unknown God" and who "mocked"
when they heard of the resurrection of the dead. And yet, to the Athenian
philosophers, to the Epicureans and Stoics, the apostle Paul did not hesitate
to affirm that they lived and moved and had their being in God, which
signified not only that they owed their existence and preservation to the One
who made the world and all things therein, but also that their very actions
were encompassed and therefore controlled by the Lord of heaven and earth.
Compare Dan. 5:23, last clause!
"The disposings (margin) of the
heart, and the answer of the tongue is from the Lord" (Prov. 16:1). Mark that
the above declaration is of general application—it is of "man," not simply of
believers, that this is predicated. "A man’s heart deviseth his way: but
the Lord directeth his steps" (Prov. 16:9). If the Lord directs
the steps of a man, is it not proof that he is being controlled or
governed by God? Again; "There are many devices in a man’s heart;
nevertheless the counsel of the Lord, that shall stand" (Prov.
19:21). Can this mean anything less than, that no matter what man may desire
and plan, it is the will of his Maker which is executed? As an illustration
take the "Rich Fool" The "devices" of his heart are made known to us—"And he
thought within himself, saying, What shall I do, because I have no room where
to bestow my fruits? And he said, This will I do: I will pull down my
barns, and build greater; and there I will bestow all my fruits and my
goods. And I will say to my soul, Soul, thou hast much goods laid up
for many years; take thine ease, eat, drink, and be merry." Such were the
"devices" of his heart, nevertheless it was "the counsel of the Lord"
that stood. The "I will’s" of the rich man came to nought, for "God said
unto him, Thou fool, this night shall thy soul be required of thee" (Luke
12:17-20).
"The king’s heart is in the hand of the
Lord, as the rivers of water: He turneth it whithersoever He will"
(Prov. 21:1). What could be more explicit? Out of the heart are "the
issues of life" (Prov. 4:23), for as a man "thinketh in his heart, so
is he" (Prov. 23:7). If then the heart is in the hand of the Lord, and if "He
turneth it whithersoever He will," then is it not clear that men, yea,
governors and rulers, and so all men, are completely beneath the
governmental control of the Almighty!
No limitations must be placed upon the
above declarations. To insist that some men, at least, do thwart
God’s will and overturn His counsels, is to repudiate other scriptures equally
explicit. Weigh well the following: "But He is in one mind, and who can turn
Him? and what His soul desireth, even that He doeth" (Job
23:13). "The counsel of the Lord standeth for ever, the thoughts of His
heart to all generations" (Ps. 33:11). "There is no wisdom nor understanding
nor counsel against the Lord" (Prov. 21:30). "For the Lord of hosts hath
purposed, and who shall disannul it? And His hand is stretched out, and
who shall turn it back?" (Isa. 14:27). "Remember the former things of old: for
I am God, and there is none else! I am God, and there is none like Me,
declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that
are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all My
pleasure" (Isa. 46:9, 10). There is no ambiguity in these passages.
They affirm in the most unequivocal and unqualified terms that it is
impossible to bring to naught the purpose of Jehovah.
We read the Scriptures in vain if we
fail to discover that the actions of men, evil men as well as good, are
governed by the Lord God. Nimrod and his fellows determined to erect the tower
of Babel, but ere their task was accomplished God frustrated their plans. God
called Abraham "alone" (Isa. 51:2), but his kinsfolk accompanied him as he
left Ur of the Chaldees. Was then the will of the Lord defeated? Nay, verily.
Mark the sequel. Terah died before Canaan was reached (Gen. 11:31), and
though Lot accompanied his uncle into the land of promise, he soon separated
from him and settled down in Sodom. Jacob was the child to whom the
inheritance was promised, and though Isaac sought to reverse Jehovah’s decree
and bestow the blessing upon Esau, his efforts came to naught. Esau again
swore vengeance upon Jacob, but when next they met they wept for joy instead
of fighting in hate. The brethren of Joseph determined his destruction, but
their evil counsels were overthrown. Pharaoh refused to let Israel carry out
the instructions of Jehovah and perished in the Red Sea for his pains. Balak
hired Balaam to curse the Israelites, but God compelled him to bless
them. Haman erected a gallows for Mordecai but was hanged upon it himself.
Jonah resisted the revealed will of God, but what became of his efforts?
Ah, the heathen may "rage" and the
people imagine a "vain thing"; the kings of the earth may "set themselves",
and the rulers take counsel together against the Lord and against His
Christ, saying, "Let us break Their bands asunder, and cast away Their cords
from us" (Ps. 2:1-3). But is the great God perturbed or disturbed by the
rebellion of His puny creatures? No, indeed: "He that sitteth in the heavens
shall laugh: the Lord shall have them in derision" (v.
4). He is infinitely exalted above all, and the greatest confederacies of
earth’s pawns, and their most extensive and vigorous preparations to defeat
His purpose are, in His sight, altogether purile. He looks upon their
puny efforts, not only without any alarm, but He "laughs" at their folly; He
treats their impotency with "derision." He knows that He can crush them like
moths when He pleases, or consume them in a moment with the breath of His
mouth. Ah, it is but "a vain thing" for the potsherds of the earth to
strive with the glorious Majesty of Heaven. Such is our God; worship ye Him.
Mark, too, the sovereignty which
God displayed in His dealings with men! Moses who was slow of speech, and not
Aaron his elder brother who was not slow of speech, was the one chosen to be
His ambassador in demanding from Egypt’s monarch the release of His oppressed
people. Moses again, though greatly beloved utters one hasty word and was
excluded from Canaan; whereas Elijah, passionately murmurs and suffers but a
mild rebuke, and was afterwards taken to heaven without seeing death! Uzzah
merely touched the ark and was instantly slain, whereas the Philistines
carried it off in insulting triumph and suffered no immediate harm. Displays
of grace which would have brought a doomed Sodom to repentance, failed to move
an highly privileged Capernaum. Mighty works which would have subdued Tyre and
Sidon, left the upbraided cities of Galilee under the curse of a rejected
Gospel. If they would have prevailed over the former, why were they not
wrought there? If they proved ineffectual to deliver the latter then why
perform them? What exhibitions are these of the sovereign will of the Most
High!
4. God Governs Angels: Both Good and
Evil Angels.
The angels are God’s servants, His
messengers, His chariots. They ever hearken to the word of His mouth and do
His commands. "And God sent an angel unto Jerusalem to destroy it: and
as he was destroying, the Lord beheld, and He repented Him of the evil, and
said to the angel that destroyed, It is enough, Stay now thine hand. . . .And
the Lord commanded the angel; and he put his sword again into the
sheath thereof" (1 Chron. 21:15, 27). Many other scriptures might be cited to
show that the angels are in subjection to the will of their Creator and
perform His bidding—"And when Peter was come to himself, he said, Now I know
of a surety, that the Lord hath sent His angel, and hath delivered me
out of the hand of Herod" (Acts 12:11). "And the Lord God of the holy prophets
sent His angel to shew unto His servants the things which must shortly
be done" (Rev. 22:6). So it will be when our Lord returns: "The Son of
Man shall send forth His angels and they shall gather out of His
kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity" (Matt. 13:41).
Again, we read, "He shall send His angels with a great sound of a
trumpet, and they shall gather together His elect from the four winds, from
one end of heaven to the other" (Matt. 24:31).
The same is true of evil spirits:
they, too, fulfil God’s sovereign decrees. An evil spirit is sent by God to
stir up rebellion in the camp of Abimelech: "Then God sent an evil spirit
between Abimelech and the men of Shechem,. . . which aided him in the
killing of his brethren" (Judges 9:23). Another evil spirit He sent to be a
lying spirit in the mouth of Ahab’s prophets—"Now therefore, behold, the
Lord hath put a lying spirit in the mouth of all these thy prophets, and
the Lord hath spoken evil concerning thee" (1 Kings 22 :23). And yet
another was sent by the Lord to trouble Saul—"But the Spirit of the Lord
departed from Saul, and an evil spirit from the Lord troubled him" (1
Sam. 16:14). So, too, in the New Testament: a whole legion of the demons go
not out of their victim until the Lord gave them permission to enter
the herd of swine.
It is clear from Scripture, then, that
the angels, good and evil, are tinder God’s control, and willingly or
unwillingly carry out God’s purpose. Yea, Satan himself is absolutely
subject to God’s control. When arraigned in Eden, he listened to the awful
sentence, but answered not a word. He was unable to touch Job until God
granted him leave. So, too, he had to gain our Lord’s consent before he could
"sift" Peter. When Christ commanded him to depart— "Get thee hence, Satan"—we
read, "Then the Devil leaveth Him" (Matt. 4:11). And, in the end, he
will be cast into the Lake of Fire, which has been prepared for him and his
angels.
The Lord God omnipotent reigneth. His
government is exercised over inanimate matter, over the brute beasts, over the
children of men, over angels good and evil, and over Satan himself. No
revolving world, no shining of star, no storm, no creature moves, no actions
of men, no errands of angels, no deeds of Devil—nothing in all the vast
universe can come to pass otherwise than God has eternally purposed. Here
is a foundation for faith. Here is a resting place for the intellect. Here is
an anchor for the soul, both sure and steadfast. It is not blind fate,
unbridled evil, man or Devil, but the Lord Almighty who is ruling the world,
ruling it according to His own good pleasure and for His own eternal glory.
"Ten thousand ages ere the skies
Were into motion brought;
All the long years and worlds to come,
Stood present to His thought:
There’s not a sparrow nor a worm,
But’s found in His decrees,
He raises monarchs to their thrones
And sinks as He may please."
Chapter 4
THE SOVEREIGNTY OF GOD IN SALVATION
"O the depths of the riches both of the wisdom and
knowledge of God! how unsearchable are His judgments, and His ways past
finding out"
Romans 11:33
"Salvation is of the Lord" (Jonah 2:9);
but the Lord does not save all. Why not? He does save some; then if
He saves some, why not others? Is it because they are too sinful and
depraved? No; for the apostle wrote, "This is a faithful saying, and worthy of
all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of
whom 1 am chief" (1 Tim. 1:15). Therefore, if God saved the "chief"
of sinners, none are excluded because of their depravity. Why then does not
God save all? Is it because some are too stony-hearted to be won? No; because
of the most stony-hearted people of all it is written, that God will yet "take
the stony heart out of their flesh, and will give them a heart of flesh"
(Ezek. 11:19). Then is it because some are so stubborn, so intractable, so
defiant that God is unable to woo them to Himself? Before we answer
this question let us ask another; let us appeal to the experience of the
Christian reader.
Friend; was there not a time when you
walked in the counsel of the ungodly, stood in the way of sinners, sat in
the seat of the scorners, and with them said, "We will not have this
Man to reign over us" (Luke 19:14)? Was there not a time when you
"would not come to Christ that you might have life" (John 5:40)? Yea, was
there not a time when you mingled your voice with those who said unto
God, "Depart from us; for we desire not the knowledge of Thy ways. What is the
Almighty, that we should serve Him? and what profit should we have, if we pray
unto Him?" (Job 21:14, 15)? With shamed face you have to acknowledge
there was. But how is it that all is now changed? What was it that brought
you from haughty self-sufficiency to a humble suppliant, from one that was at
enmity with God to one that is at peace with Him, from lawlessness to
subjection, from hate to love? And, as one ‘born of the Spirit,’ you will
readily reply, "By the grace of God I am what I am" (1 Cor. 15:10).
Then do you not see that it is due to no lack of power in God, nor to His
refusal to coerce man, that other rebels are not saved too? If God was
able to subdue your will and win your heart, and that without
interfering with your moral responsibility, then is He not able to do the
same for others? Assuredly He is. Then how inconsistent, how illogical, how
foolish of you, in seeking to account for the present course of the
wicked and their ultimate fate, to argue that God is unable to save
them, that they will not let Him. Do you say, "But the time came when
I was willing, willing to receive Christ as my Saviour"? True, but it
was the Lord who made you willing (Ps. 110:3; Phil. 2:13) why
then does He not make all sinners willing? Why, but for the fact that
He is sovereign and does as He pleases! But to return to our opening inquiry.
Why is it that all are not saved,
particularly all who hear the Gospel? Do you still answer, Because the
majority refuse to believe? Well, that is true, but it is only a part of the
truth. It is the truth from the human side. But there is a Divine side
too, and this side of the truth needs to be stressed or God will be robbed of
His glory. The unsaved are lost because they refuse to believe; the others are
saved because they believe. But why do these others believe? What is it
that causes them to put their trust in Christ? Is it because they are more
intelligent than their fellows, and quicker to discern their need of
salvation? Perish the thought—"Who maketh thee to differ from another?
And what hast thou that thou didst not receive? Now if thou didst receive
it, why dost thou glory, as if thou hadst not received it?" (1 Cor. 4:7). It
is God Himself who maketh the difference between the elect and the non-elect,
for of His own it is written, "And we know that the Son of God is come, and
hath given us an understanding, that we may know Him that is true" (1 John
5:20).
Faith is God’s gift, and "all men
have not faith" (2 Thess. 3:2); therefore, we see that God does not bestow
this gift upon all. Upon whom then does He bestow this saving favor? And we
answer, upon His own elect—"As many as were ordained to eternal life believed"
(Acts 13:48). Hence it is that we read of "the faith of God’s elect" (Titus
1:1). But is God partial in the distribution of His favors? Has He not the
right to be? Are there still some who ‘murmur against the Good-Man
of the house’? Then His own words are sufficient reply—"Is it not lawful for
Me to do what I will with Mine own?" (Matt. 20:15). God is
sovereign in the bestowment of His gifts, both in the natural and in the
spiritual realms. So much then for a general statement, and now to
particularize.
1. The Sovereignty of God the Father in
Salvation.
Perhaps the one Scripture which most
emphatically of all asserts the absolute sovereignty of God in connection with
His determining the destiny of His creatures, is the ninth of Romans. We shall
not attempt to review here the entire chapter, but will confine ourselves to
verses 21-23—"Hath not the potter power over the clay of the same lump, to
make one vessel unto honor, and another unto dishonor? What if God, willing to
show His wrath, and to make His power known, endured with much long-suffering
the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction: And that He might make known the
riches of His glory on the vessels of mercy, which He had afore prepared unto
glory?" These verses represent fallen mankind as inert and as impotent as a
lump of lifeless clay. This Scripture evidences that there is "no difference,"
in themselves, between the elect and the non-elect: they are clay of "the same
lump," which agrees with Ephesians 2:3, where we are told, that all are by
nature "children of wrath." It teaches us that the ultimate destiny of
every individual is decided by the will of God, and blessed it is that such be
the case; if it were left to our wills, the ultimate destination of us
all would be the Lake of Fire. It declares that God Himself does make a
difference in the respective destinations to which He assigns His creatures,
for one vessel is made "unto honor and another unto dishonor;"
some are "vessels of wrath fitted to destruction," others are "vessels of
mercy, which He had afore prepared unto glory."
We readily
acknowledge that it is very humbling to the proud heart of the creature to
behold all mankind in the hand of God as the clay is in the potter’s hand, yet
this is precisely how the Scriptures of Truth represent the case. In this day
of human boasting, intellectual pride, and deification of man, it needs to be
insisted upon that the potter forms his vessels for himself. Let man strive
with his Maker as he will, the fact remains that he is nothing more than clay
in the Heavenly Potter’s hands, and while we know that God will deal justly
with His creatures, that the Judge of all the earth will do right,
nevertheless, He shapes His vessels for His own purpose and according to His
own pleasure. God claims the indisputable right to do as He wills with His
own.
Not only has God the right to do as He
wills with the creatures of His own hands, but He exercises this right,
and nowhere is that seen more plainly than in His predestinating grace. Before
the foundation of the world God made a choice, a selection, an election.
Before His omniscient eye stood the whole of Adam’s race, and from it He
singled out a people and predestinated them "unto the adoption of children,"
predestinated them "to be conformed to the image of His Son," "ordained" them
unto eternal life. Many are the Scriptures which set forth this blessed truth,
seven of which will now engage our attention.
"As many as were ordained to eternal
life, believed" (Acts 13:48). Every artifice of human ingenuity has been
employed to blunt the sharp edge of this Scripture and to explain away the
obvious meaning of these words, but it has been employed in vain, though
nothing will ever be able to reconcile this and similar passages to the mind
of the natural man. "As many as were ordained to eternal life, believed." Here
we learn four things: First, that believing is the consequence and not the
cause of God’s decree. Second, that a limited number only are "ordained to
eternal life," for if all men without exception were thus ordained by God,
then the words "as many as are a meaningless
qualification. Third, that this "ordination" of God is not to mere external
privileges but to "eternal life," not to service but to salvation itself.
Fourth, that all—"as many as," not one less—who are thus ordained by God to
eternal life will most certainly believe.
The comments of the beloved Spurgeon on
the above passage are well worthy of our notice. Said he, "Attempts have been
made to prove that these words do not teach predestination, but these attempts
so clearly do violence to language that I shall not waste time in answering
them. I read: ‘As many as were ordained to eternal life believed’, and I shall
not twist the text but shall glorify the grace of God by ascribing to that
grace the faith of every man. Is it not God who gives the disposition to
believe? If men are disposed to have eternal life, does not He—in every
case—dispose them? Is it wrong for God to give grace? If
it be right for Him to give it, is it wrong for Him to purpose to give
it? Would you have Him give it by accident? If it is right for Him to purpose
to give grace today, it was right for Him to purpose it before today—and,
since He changes not—from eternity."
"Even so then at this present time also
there is a remnant according to the election of grace. And if by grace,
then it is no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of
works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work" (Rom. 11:5,
6). The words "Even so" at the beginning of this quotation refer us to the
previous verse where we are told, "I have reserved to Myself seven thousand
men who have not bowed the knee to Baal." Note particularly the word
"reserved." In the days of Elijah there were seven thousand—a small
minority—who were Divinely preserved from idolatry and brought to the
knowledge of the true God. This preservation and illumination was not from
anything in themselves, but solely by God’s special influence and agency. How
highly favored such individuals were to be thus "reserved" by God! Now says
the apostle, Just as there was a "remnant" in Elijah’s days "reserved by God",
even so there is in this present dispensation.
"A remnant according to the election of
grace." Here the cause of election is traced back to its source. The
basis upon which God elected this "remnant" was not faith foreseen in them,
because a choice founded upon the foresight of good works is just as truly
made on the ground of works as any choice can be, and in such a case,
it would not be "of grace;" for, says the apostle, "if by grace,
then it is no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace;" which means
that grace and works are opposites, they have nothing in common, and will no
more mingle than will oil and water. Thus the idea of
inherent good foreseen in those chosen, or of anything meritorious performed
by them, is rigidly excluded. "A remnant according to the election
of grace," signifies an unconditional choice resulting from the sovereign
favor of God; in a word, it is absolutely a gratuitous election.
"For ye see your calling, brethren, how
that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are
called: But God hath chosen the foolish things of
the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen
the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty: and base
things of the world, and things which are despised, hath
God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things
that are: That no flesh should glory in His presence" (1 Cor. 1:26-29). Three
times over in this passage reference is made to God’s choice, and
choice necessarily supposes a selection, the taking of some and the leaving of
others. The Choser here is God Himself, as said the Lord Jesus to the
apostles, "Ye have not chosen Me, but I have chosen you" (John 15:16). The
number chosen is strictly defined—"not many wise men after the flesh,
not many noble," etc., which agrees with Matthew 20:16, "So the last
shall be first, and the first last; for many be called, but few chosen."
So much then for the fact of God’s choice; now mark the objects
of His choice.
The ones spoken of above as chosen of
God are "the weak things of the world, base things of the world, and things
which are despised." But why? To demonstrate and magnify His grace. God’s
ways as well as His thoughts are utterly at variance with man’s. The
carnal mind would have supposed that a selection had been made from the ranks
of the opulent and influential, the amiable and cultured, so that Christianity
might have won the approval and applause of the world by its pageantry and
fleshly glory. Ah! but "that which is highly esteemed among men is abomination
in the sight of God" (Luke 16:15). God chooses the "base things." He
did so in Old Testament times. The nation which He singled out to be the
depository of His holy oracles and the channel through which the promised Seed
should come, was not the ancient Egyptians, the imposing Babylonians, nor the
highly civilized and cultured Greeks. No; that people upon whom Jehovah set
His love and regarded as ‘the apple of His eye’, were the despised, nomadic
Hebrews. So it was when our Lord tabernacled among men. The ones whom He took
into favored intimacy with Himself and commissioned to go forth as His
ambassadors, were, for the most part, unlettered fishermen. And so it has been
ever since. So it is today: at the present rates of increase, it will not be
long before it is manifested that the Lord has more in despised China who are
really His, than He has in the highly favored U. S. A.; more among the
uncivilized blacks of Africa, than He has in cultured (?) Germany! And
the purpose of God’s choice, the raison d’etre of the selection He has
made is, "that no flesh should glory in His presence"—there being nothing
whatever in the objects of His choice which should entitle them to His special
favors, then, all the praise will be freely ascribed to the exceeding riches
of His manifold grace.
"Blessed be the God and Father of our
Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in the
heavenlies in Christ: According as He hath chosen us in Him before the
foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before
Him; In love having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus
Christ to Himself, according to the good pleasure of His will. . . .In whom
also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the
purpose of Him who worketh all things after the counsel of His own will" (Eph.
1:3-5, 11). Here again we are told at what point in time—if time it could be
called—when God made choice of those who were to be His children by Jesus
Christ. It was not after Adam had fallen and plunged his race into sin and
wretchedness, but long ere Adam saw the light, even before the world itself
was founded, that God chose us in Christ. Here also we learn the purpose
which God had before Him in connection with His own elect: it was that
they "should be holy and without blame before Him;" it was "unto the adoption
of children;" it was that they should "obtain an inheritance." Here also we
discover the motive which prompted Him. It was "in love that He
predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to Himself"—a
statement which refutes the oft made and wicked charge that, for God to decide
the eternal destiny of His creatures before they are born, is tyrannical and
unjust. Finally, we are informed here, that in this matter He took counsel
with none, but that we are "predestinated according to the good pleasure of
His will."
"But we are bound to give thanks always
to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the
beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and
belief of the truth" (2 Thess. 2:13). There are three things
here which deserve special attention. First, the fact that we are expressly
told that God’s elect are "chosen to salvation." Language could not be more
explicit. How summarily do these words dispose of the sophistries and
equivocations of all who would make election refer to nothing but external
privileges or rank in service! It is to "salvation" itself that God hath
chosen us. Second, we are warned here that election unto salvation does not
disregard the use of appropriate means: salvation is reached through
"sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth." It is not true that
because God has chosen a certain one to salvation that he will be saved
willy-nilly, whether he believes or not: nowhere do the Scriptures so
represent it. The same God who predestined the end, also appointed the means;
the same God who "chose unto salvation", decreed that
His purpose should be realized through the work of the Spirit and belief of
the truth. Third, that God has chosen us unto salvation is a profound
cause for fervent praise. Note how strongly the apostle expresses this—"we
are bound to give thanks always to God for you, brethren beloved of
the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation,"
etc. Instead of shrinking back in horror from the
doctrine of predestination, the believer, when he sees this blessed truth as
it is unfolded in the Word, discovers a ground for gratitude and thanksgiving
such as nothing else affords, save the unspeakable gift of the Redeemer
Himself.
"Who hath saved us, and called us with
an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose
and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began" (2
Tim. 1:9). How plain and pointed is the language of Holy Writ! It is
man who, by his words, darkeneth counsel. It is impossible to state the case
more clearly, or strongly, than it is stated here. Our salvation is not
"according to our works;" that is to say, it is not due to anything in
us, nor the rewarding of anything from us; instead, it is the result of God’s
own "purpose and grace;" and this grace was given us in Christ Jesus
before the world began. It is by grace we are saved, and in the purpose
of God this grace was bestowed upon us not only before we saw the light, not
only before Adam’s fall, but even before that far distant "beginning" of
Genesis 1:1. And herein lies the unassailable comfort of God’s people. If His
choice has been from eternity it will last to eternity! "Nothing can survive
to eternity but what came from eternity, and what has so come, will"
(G. S. Bishop).
"Elect according to the foreknowledge of
God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and
sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ" (1 Pet. 1:2). Here
again election by the Father precedes the work of the Holy Spirit in, and the
obedience of faith by, those who are saved; thus taking it entirely off
creature ground, and resting it in the sovereign pleasure of the Almighty.
The "foreknowledge of God the Father" does not here
refer to His prescience of all things, but signifies that the saints were all
eternally present in Christ before the mind of God. God did not "foreknow"
that certain ones who heard the Gospel would believe it apart from the fact
that He had "ordained" these certain ones to eternal life.
What God’s prescience saw in all men was, love of sin and hatred of
Himself. The "foreknowledge" of God is based upon His own decrees as is
clear from Acts 2:23—"Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and
foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and
slain"—note the order here: first God’s "determinate counsel" (His decree),
and second His "foreknowledge." So it is again in Romans 8:28, 29, "For whom
He did foreknow, He also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of His
Son," but the first word here, "for," looks back to the
preceding verse and the last clause of it reads, "to them who are the called
according to His purpose"—these are the ones whom He did "foreknow and
predestinate." Finally, it needs to be pointed out that when we read in
Scripture of God "knowing" certain people, the word is used in the sense of
knowing with approbation and love: "But if any man love God, the same is
known of Him" (1 Cor. 8:3). To the hypocrites Christ will yet say "I never
knew you"—He never loved them. "Elect according to the foreknowledge of God
the Father" signifies, then, chosen by Him as the special objects of His
approbation and love.
Summarizing the
teaching of these seven passages we learn that, God has "ordained to eternal
life" certain ones, and that in consequence of His ordination they, in due
time, "believe;" that God’s ordination to salvation of His own elect,
is not due to any good thing in them nor to anything meritorious from them,
but solely of His "grace;" that God has designedly selected the most
unlikely objects to be the recipients of His special favors, in order that
"no flesh should glory in His presence;" that God chose His people in
Christ before the foundation of the world, not because they were so, but in
order that they "should be, holy and without blame before him"; that
having selected certain ones to salvation, He also decreed the means by which
His eternal counsel should be made good; that the very "grace" by which we are
saved was, in God’s purpose, "given us in Christ Jesus before the world
began;" that long before they were actually created, God’s elect stood
present before His mind, were "foreknown" by Him, i.e., were the definite
objects of His eternal love.
Before turning to the next division of
this chapter, a further word concerning the subjects of God’s
predestinating grace. We go over this ground again because it is at this point
that the doctrine of God’s sovereignty in predestining certain ones to
salvation is most frequently assaulted. Perverters of this truth invariably
seek to find some cause outside God’s own will, which moves Him
to bestow salvation on sinners; something or other is attributed to the
creature which entitles him to receive mercy at the hands of the Creator. We
return then to the question, Why did God choose the ones He did?
What was there in the elect themselves
which attracted God’s heart to them? Was it because of certain virtues they
possessed? because they were generous-hearted, sweet tempered, truth-speaking?
in a word, because they were "good," that God chose them? No; for our Lord
said, "There is none good but one, that is God" (Matt. 19:17). Was it because
of any good works they had performed? No; for it is written,
"There is none that doeth good, no, not one" (Rom. 3:12). Was it because they
evidenced an earnestness and zeal in inquiring after God? No; for it is
written again, "There is none that seeketh after God" (Rom. 3:11). Was it
because God foresaw they would believe? No; for how can those who are "dead
in trespasses and sins" believe in Christ? How could God foreknow some men
as believers when belief was impossible to them? Scripture declares that we
"believe through grace" (Acts 18:27). Faith is
God’s gift, and apart from this gift none would believe. The cause of
His choice then lies within Himself and not in the objects of His choice. He
chose the ones He did simply because He chose to choose them.
"Sons we are by God’s election
Who on Jesus Christ believe,
By eternal destination,
Sovereign grace we now receive,
Lord Thy mercy,
Doth both grace and glory give!"
2. The Sovereignty of God the Son in
Salvation.
For whom did Christ die? It surely does
not need arguing that the Father had an express purpose in giving Him to die,
or that God the Son had a definite design before Him in laying down His
life—"Known unto God are all His works from the beginning of the world" (Acts
15:18). What then was the purpose of the Father and the design of the Son? We
answer, Christ died for "God’s elect."
We are not unmindful of the fact that
the limited design in the death of Christ has been the subject of much
controversy—what great truth revealed in Scripture has not? Nor do we forget
that anything which has to do with the person and work of our blessed Lord
requires to be handled with the utmost reverence, and that a "Thus saith the
Lord" must be given in support of every assertion we make. Our appeal shall be
to the Law and to the Testimony.
For whom did Christ die? Who were the
ones He intended to redeem by His blood-shedding? Surely
the Lord Jesus had some absolute determination before Him when He went
to the Cross. If He had, then it necessarily follows that the extent of
that purpose was limited, because an absolute determination or
purpose must be effected. If the absolute determination of Christ
included all mankind, then all mankind would most certainly be saved.
To escape this inevitable conclusion many have affirmed that there was no such
absolute determination before Christ, that in His death a merely
conditional provision of salvation has been made for all mankind. The
refutation of this assertion is found in the promises made by the
Father to His Son before He went to the Cross, yea, before He became
incarnate. The Old Testament Scriptures represent the Father as promising the
Son a certain reward for His sufferings on behalf of sinners. At this
stage we shall confine ourselves to one or two statements recorded in the well
known fifty-third of Isaiah. There we find God saying, "When Thou shalt make
His soul an offering for sin, He shall see His seed," that "He shall see of
the travail of His soul, and shall be satisfied," and that God’s righteous
Servant "should justify many" (vv. 10 and 11). But here we would pause and
ask, How could it be certain that Christ should "see His seed,"
and "see of the travail of His soul and be satisfied," unless
the salvation of certain members of the human race had been Divinely
decreed, and therefore was sure? How could it be certain that
Christ should "justify many," if no effectual provision was made
that any should receive Him as their Saviour? On
the other hand, to insist that the Lord Jesus did expressly purpose the
salvation of all mankind, is to charge Him with that which no
intelligent being should be guilty of, namely, to design that which by
virtue of His omniscience He knew would never come to pass.
Hence, the only alternative left us is that, so far as the pre-determined
purpose of His death is concerned, Christ died for the elect only. Summing up
in a sentence, which we trust will be intelligible to every reader, we would
say, Christ died not merely to make possible the salvation of all
mankind, but to make certain the salvation of all that the Father had
given to Him. Christ died not simply to render sins pardonable, but "to put
away sin by the sacrifice of Himself" (Heb. 9:26). As to who’s
"sin" (i.e., guilt, as in 1 John 1:7, etc.) has been "put
away," Scripture leaves us in no doubt—it was that of the elect, the "world"
(John 1:29) of God’s people!
(1.) The limited design in the
Atonement follows, necessarily, from the eternal choice of the Father of
certain ones unto salvation. The Scriptures inform us that, before the Lord
became incarnate He said, "Lo, I come, to do Thy will O God" (Heb.
10:7), and after He had become incarnate He declared, "For I came down from
heaven, not to do Mine own will, but the will of Him that sent Me" (John
6:38). If then God had from the beginning chosen certain ones to salvation,
then, because the will of Christ was in perfect accord with the will of the
Father, He would not seek to enlarge upon His election. What we have
just said is not merely a plausible deduction of our own, but is in strict
harmony with the express teaching of the Word. Again and again our Lord
referred to those whom the Father had "given" Him, and concerning whom He was
particularly exercised. Said He, "All that the Father giveth Me shall come to
Me; and him that cometh to Me I will in no wise cast out. . . . And this is
the Father’s will which hath sent Me, that of all which He hath given Me I
should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day" (John 6:37,
39). And again, "These words spake Jesus, and lifted up His eyes to heaven,
and said, Father, the hour is come; glorify Thy Son, that Thy Son also may
glorify Thee; As Thou hast given Him power over all flesh, that He should give
eternal life to as many as Thou hast given Him. . . .I have manifested
Thy name unto the men which Thou gavest Me out of the world: Thine they
were, and Thou gayest them Me; and they have kept Thy Word. . . . I pray for
them: I pray not for the world, but for them
which Thou hast given Me; for they are Thine. . . . Father, I will that
they also, whom Thou hast given Me, be with Me where I am; that they
may behold My glory, which Thou hast given Me: for Thou lovest Me before the
foundation of the world" (John 17:1, 2, 6, 9, 24). Before the
foundation of the world the Father predestinated a people to be conformed to
the image of His Son, and the death and resurrection of the Lord Jesus was in
order to the carrying out of the Divine purpose.
(2.) The very nature of the
Atonement evidences that, in its application to sinners, it was limited
in the purpose of God. The Atonement of Christ may be considered from
two chief viewpoints—Godward and manward. Godwards, the Cross-work of Christ
was a propitiation, an appeasing of Divine wrath, a satisfaction
rendered to Divine justice and holiness; manwards, it was a substitution,
the Innocent taking the place of the guilty, the Just dying for the
unjust. But a strict substitution of a Person for persons, and the infliction
upon Him of voluntary sufferings, involve the definite recognition on
the part of the Substitute and of the One He is to propitiate of the
persons for whom He acts, whose sins He bears, whose legal obligations He
discharges. Furthermore, if the Law-giver accepts the satisfaction which is
made by the Substitute then those for whom the Substitute acts, whose place He
takes, must necessarily be acquitted. If I am in debt and unable to discharge
it and another comes forward and pays my creditor in full and receives a
receipt in acknowledgment, then, in the sight of the law, my creditor no
longer has any claim upon me. On the Cross the Lord Jesus gave Himself a
ransom, and that it was accepted by God was attested by the open grave three
days later; the question we would here raise is, For whom was this
ransom offered? If it was offered for all mankind then
the debt incurred by every man has been cancelled. If Christ bore in His own
body on the tree the sins of all men without exception, then none will perish.
If Christ was "made a curse" for all of Adam’s race then none are now "under
condemnation." "Payment God cannot twice demand, first at my
bleeding Surety’s hand and then again at mine." But Christ did not
discharge the debt of all men without exception, for some there are who will
be "cast into prison" (cf. 1 Pet. 3:19 where the same Greek word for "prison"
occurs), and they shall "by no means come out thence, till they have paid
the uttermost farthing" (Matt. 5:26), which, of course, will never be.
Christ did not bear the sins of all mankind, for
some there are who "die in their sins" (John 8:21), and
whose "sin remaineth" (John 9:41). Christ was not "made a curse" for
all of Adam’s race, for some there are to whom He will yet say, "Depart from
Me ye cursed" (Matt. 25:41). To say that
Christ died for all alike, to say that He became the Substitute and Surety of
the whole human race, to say that He suffered on behalf of and in the stead of
all mankind, is to say that He "bore the curse for many who are now bearing
the curse for themselves; that He suffered punishment for many who are now
lifting up their own eyes in Hell, being in torments; that He paid the
redemption price for many who shall yet pay in their own eternal anguish ‘the
wages of sin, which is death’" (G. S. Bishop). But, on the other hand,
to say as Scripture says, that Christ was stricken for the transgressions
of God’s people, to say that He gave His life for the sheep, to say
that He gave His life a ransom for many,
is to say that He made an atonement which fully atones; it is to say He paid a
price which actually ransoms; it is to say He was set forth a propitiation
which really propitiates; it is to say He is a Saviour who truly saves.
(3.) Closely connected with, and
confirmatory of what we have said above, is the teaching of Scripture
concerning our Lord’s priesthood. It is as the great High Priest that
Christ now makes intercession. But for whom does He intercede? for the
whole human race, or only for His own people? The answer furnished by the New
Testament to this question is clear as a sunbeam. Our Saviour has entered into
heaven itself "now to appear in the presence of God for us"
(Heb. 9:24), that is, for those who are "partakers of the heavenly calling"
(Heb. 3:1). And again it is written, "Wherefore He is able also to save them
to the uttermost that come unto God by Him, seeing He ever liveth to make
intercession for them" (Heb. 7:25). This is in strict accord
with the Old Testament type. After slaying the sacrificial animal, Aaron went
into the holy of holies as the representative and on behalf of the people of
God: it was the names of Israel’s tribes which were engraven on his
breastplate, and it was in their interests he appeared before God.
Agreeable to this are our Lord’s words in John 17:9—"I pray for them: I pray
not for the world, but for them which Thou hast given Me; for they are
Thine." Another Scripture which deserves careful attention in this connection
is found in Romans 8. In verse 33 the question is asked, "Who shall lay
anything to the charge of God’s elect?" and then follows the
inspired answer— "It is God that justifieth. Who is he that condemneth? It is
Christ that died, yea, rather that is risen again, who is even at the right
hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us." Note
particularly that the death and intercession of Christ have one and the same
objects! As it was in the type so it is with the antitype—expiation and
supplication are co-extensive. If then Christ intercedes for the elect
only, and "not for the world," then He died for them only. And observe
further, that the death, resurrection, exaltation and intercession of the Lord
Jesus, are here assigned as the reason why none can lay any "charge" against
God’s elect. Let those who would still take issue with what we are
advancing weigh carefully the following question—If the death of Christ
extends equally to all, how does it become security against a "charge,"
seeing that all who believe not are "under condemnation"? (John 3:18).
(4.) The number of those who share the
benefits of Christ’s death is determined not only by the nature of the
Atonement and the priesthood of Christ but also by His power.
Grant that the One who died upon the cross was God manifest in the flesh, and
it follows inevitably that what Christ has purposed that
will He perform; that what He has purchased that will He possess; that what He
has set His heart upon that will He secure. If the Lord Jesus possesses
all power in heaven and earth, then none can successfully resist His will. But
it may be said, This is true in the abstract, nevertheless, Christ refuses to
exercise this power, inasmuch as He will never force anyone to receive
Him as their Saviour. In one sense that is true, but in another sense it is
positively untrue. The salvation of any sinner is
a matter of Divine power. By nature the sinner is at enmity with God,
and naught but Divine power operating within him, can overcome this
enmity; hence it is written, "No man can come unto Me, except the
Father which hath sent Me draw him" (John 6:44). It is the Divine power
overcoming the sinner’s innate enmity which makes him willing to come
to Christ that he might have life. But this "enmity" is not overcome in
all—why? Is it because the enmity is too strong to be overcome? Are
there some hearts so steeled against Him that Christ is unable to gain
entrance? To answer in the affirmative is to deny His omnipotence. In
the final analysis it is not a question of the sinner’s willingness or
unwillingness, for by nature all are unwilling.
Willingness to come to Christ is the finished product of
Divine power operating in the human heart and will in overcoming man’s
inherent and chronic "enmity," as it is written, "Thy people shall be
willing in the day of Thy power" (Ps. 110:3). To say that Christ
is unable to win to Himself those who are unwilling is to deny that all
power in heaven and earth is His. To say that Christ cannot put forth His
power without destroying man’s responsibility is a begging of the question
here raised, for He has
put forth His power and made willing those who have
come to Him, and if He did this without destroying their
responsibility, why "cannot" He do so with others? If He is able to win
the heart of one sinner to Himself, why not that of another? To say, as is
usually said, the others will not let Him is to impeach His
sufficiency. It is a question of His will. If the
Lord Jesus has decreed, desired, purposed the salvation of all mankind, then
the entire human race will be saved, or, otherwise, He lacks the power
to make good His intentions; and in such a case it could never be said,
"He shall see of the travail of His soul and be satisfied."
The issue raised involves the deity of the Saviour, for a
defeated Saviour cannot be God.
Having reviewed some of the general
principles which require us to believe that the death of Christ was limited
in its design, we turn now to consider some of the explicit statements of
Scripture which expressly affirm it. In that wondrous and matchless
fifty-third of Isaiah God tells us concerning His Son, "He was taken from
prison and from judgment: and who shall declare His generation? for He was cut
off out of the land of the living: for the transgression
of My people was He stricken" (v. 8).
In perfect harmony with this was the word of the angel to Joseph, "Thou shalt
call His name Jesus, for He shall save His people
from their sins" (Matt. 1:21) i.e. not merely Israel, but all whom
the Father had "given" Him. Our Lord Himself declared, "The Son of Man came
not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give His life a ransom
for many" (Matt. 20:28),
but why have said "for many" if all without exception
were included? It was "His people"
whom He "redeemed" (Luke 1:68). It was for "the sheep,"
and not the "goats", that the Good Shepherd gave His life (John 10:11). It was
the "Church of God" which He purchased with His own blood (Acts 20:28).
If there is one Scripture more than any
other upon which we should be willing to rest our case it is John 11:49-52.
Here we are told, "And one of them, named Caiaphas, being the high priest that
same year, said unto them, Ye know nothing at all, nor consider that it is
expedient for us, that one man should die for the people, and that the whole
nation perish not. And this spake he not of himself: but being high priest
that year, he prophesied that Jesus should die for that nation; And not for
that nation only, but that also He should gather together in one the children
of God that were scattered abroad." Here we are told that Caiaphas "prophesied
not of himself," that is, like those employed by God in Old
Testament times (see 2 Pet. 1:21), his prophecy originated not with himself,
but he spake as he was moved by the Holy Spirit; thus is the value of his
utterance carefully guarded, and the Divine source of this revelation
expressly vouched for. Here, too, we are definitely informed that Christ died
for "that nation," i.e., Israel, and also for the One Body, His Church,
for it is into the Church that the children of God—"scattered" among the
nations—are now being "gathered together in one." And is it not remarkable
that the members of the Church are here called "children of God" even before
Christ died, and therefore before He commenced to build His Church! The vast
majority of them had not then been born, yet were they regarded as "children
of God;" children of God because they had been chosen in Christ before
the foundation of the world, and therefore "predestinated unto the adoption
of children by Jesus Christ to Himself" (Eph. 1:4, 5). In like
manner, Christ said, "Other sheep I have (not "shall have") which are
not of this fold" (John 10:16).
If ever the real design of the Cross was
uppermost in the heart and speech of our blessed Saviour it was during the
last week of His earthly ministry. What then do the Scriptures which treat of
this portion of His ministry record in connection with our present
inquiry? They say, "When Jesus knew that His hour was come that He should
depart out of this world unto the Father, having loved His own which
were in the world, He loved them unto the end" (John 13:1). They tell
us how He said, "Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down His
life for His friends" (John 15:13). They record His word, "For
their sakes I sanctify Myself, that they also might be sanctified through
the truth" (John 17:19); which means, that for the sake of His own, those
"given" to Him by the Father, He separated Himself unto the death of the
Cross. One may well ask, Why such discrimination of terms if Christ died for
all men indiscriminately?
Ere closing this section of the chapter
we shall consider briefly a few of those passages which seem to teach
most strongly an unlimited design in the death of Christ. In 2
Corinthians 5:14 we read, "One died for all." But that
is not all this Scripture affirms. If the entire verse and passage from which
these words are quoted be carefully examined, it will be found that instead of
teaching an unlimited atonement, it emphatically argues a limited design in
the death of Christ. The whole verse reads, "For the love of Christ
constraineth us; because we thus judge, that if One died for all, then were
all dead." It should be pointed out that in the Greek there is the definite
article before the last "all," and that the verb here is in the aorist tense,
and therefore should read, "We thus judge: that if One died for all, then they
all died." The apostle is here drawing a conclusion as is clear from the words
"we thus judge, that if . . . then were." His meaning is, that those
for whom the One died are regarded, judicially, as having died too. The
next verse goes on to say, "And He died for all, that they which live
should not henceforth live unto themselves, but unto Him which died for
them, and rose again." The One not only died but "rose again," and so,
too, did the "all" for whom He died, for it is here said they "live." Those
for whom a substitute acts are legally regarded as having acted themselves. In
the sight of the law the substitute and those whom he represents are one. So
it is in the sight of God. Christ was identified with His people and
His people were identified with Him, hence when He died they died (judicially)
and when He rose they rose also. But further we are told in this passage (v.
17), that if any man be in Christ he is a new creation; he has received a new
life in fact as well as in the sight of the law, hence the "all" for whom
Christ died are here bidden to live henceforth no more unto themselves, "but
unto Him which died for them, and rose again." In other words, those who
belonged to this "all" for whom Christ died, are here exhorted to manifest
practically in their daily lives what is true of them judicially: they are to
"live unto Christ who died for them." Thus the "One died for
all" is defined for us. The "all" for which Christ died are the
they which "live," and which are here bidden to live "unto Him." This passage
then teaches three important truths, and the better to show its scope we
mention them in their inverse order: certain ones are here bidden to live no
more unto themselves but unto Christ; the ones thus admonished are "they which
live," that is live spiritually, hence, the children of God, for they alone of
mankind possess spiritual life, all others being dead in trespasses and
sins; those who do thus live are the ones, the "all," the "them," for
whom Christ died and rose again. This passage therefore teaches that Christ
died for all His people, the elect, those given to Him by the Father;
that as the result of His death (and rising again "for them")
they "live"—and the elect are the only ones who do thus "live;"
and this life which is theirs through Christ must be lived "unto Him,"
Christ’s love must now "constrain" them.
"For there is one God, and one Mediator,
between God and men (not "man", for this would have been a generic term and
signified mankind. O the accuracy of Holy Writ!), the Man Christ Jesus; who
gave Himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time" (1 Tim.
2:5, 6). It is upon the words "who gave Himself a ransom for all" we would now
comment. In Scripture the word "all" (as applied to humankind) is used in two
senses—absolutely and relatively. In some passages it means all without
exception; in others it signifies all without distinction. As to
which of these meanings it bears in any particular passage, must be determined
by the context and decided by a comparison of parallel Scriptures. That the
word "all" is used in a relative and restricted sense, and in
such case means all without distinction and not all without exception,
is clear from a number of Scriptures, from which we select two or three as
samples. "And there went out unto him all the land of Judea, and they of
Jerusalem, and were all baptized of him in the river Jordan, confessing
their sins" (Mark 1:5). Does this mean that every man, woman and child
from "all the land of Judea and they of Jerusalem" were baptized of
John in Jordan? Surely not. Luke 7:30 distinctly says, "But the Pharisees and
lawyers rejected the counsel of God against themselves, being not baptized
of him." Then what does "all baptized of him" mean? We
answer it does not mean all without exception, but all without
distinction, that is, all classes and conditions of men. The same explanation
applies to Luke 3:21. Again we read, "And early in the morning He came again
into the Temple, and all the people came unto Him; and He sat down, and
taught them" (John 8:2); are we to understand this expression
absolutely or relatively? Does "all the people" mean all without exception or
all without distinction, that is, all classes and conditions of people?
Manifestly the latter; for the Temple was not able to accommodate everybody
that was in Jerusalem at this time, namely, the Feast of Tabernacles.
Again, we read in Acts 22:15, "For thou (Paul) shalt be His witness unto
all men of what thou hast seen and heard." Surely "all men" here does not
mean every member of the human race. Now we submit that
the words "who gave Himself a ransom for all" in 1 Timothy 2:6
mean all without distinction, and not all without exception. He gave
Himself a ransom for men of all nationalities, of all generations, of all
classes; in a word, for all the elect, as we read in Revelation 5:9,
"For Thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by Thy blood out of every
kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation." That this is not an
arbitrary definition of the "all" in our passage is clear from Matthew
20:28 where we read, "The Son of Man came not to be ministered unto, but to
minister, and to give His life a ransom for many",
which limitation would be quite meaningless if He gave
Himself a ransom for all without exception. Furthermore, the qualifying
words here, "to be testified in due time", must be taken into consideration.
If Christ gave Himself a ransom for the whole human race, in what sense will
this be "testified in due time"? seeing that multitudes of men will
certainly be eternally lost. But if our text means that Christ gave Himself a
ransom for God’s elect, for all without distinction, without distinction of
nationality, social prestige, moral character, age or sex, then the meaning of
these qualifying words is quite intelligible, for in "due time" this will
be "testified" in the actual and accomplished salvation of every one of
them.
"But we see Jesus, who was made a little
lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and
honor; that He by the grace of God should taste death for every man"
(Heb. 2:9). This passage need not detain us long. A false
doctrine has been erected here on a false translation. There is no word
whatever in the Greek corresponding to "man" in our English version. In the
Greek it is left in the abstract—"He tasted death for every." The Revised
Version has correctly omitted "man" from the text, but has wrongly
inserted it in italics. Others suppose the word "thing" should be supplied—"He
tasted death for every thing" —but this, too, we deem a mistake. It seems to
us that the words which immediately follow explain our text: "For it
became Him, for whom are all things, and by whom are all things, in bringing
many sons unto glory, to make the captain of their salvation perfect through
sufferings." It is of "sons" the apostle is here writing, and we
suggest an ellipsis of "son"—thus: "He tasted death for every"—and
supply son in italics. Thus instead of teaching the unlimited design of
Christ’s death, Hebrews 2:9, 10 is in perfect accord with the other Scriptures
we have quoted which set forth the restricted purpose in the Atonement:
it was for the "sons" and not the human race our Lord "tasted death" (1 John
2:2 will be examined in detail in Appendix 4).
In closing this section of the chapter
let us say that the only limitation in the Atonement we have contended for
arises from pure sovereignty; it is a limitation not of value and
virtue, but of design and application. We turn now to consider—
3. The Sovereignty of God the Holy
Spirit in Salvation.
Since the Holy Spirit is one of the
three Persons in the blessed Trinity, it necessarily follows that He is in
full sympathy with the will and design of the other Persons of the Godhead.
The eternal purpose of the Father in election, the limited design
in the death of the Son, and the restricted scope of the Holy
Spirit’s operations are in perfect accord. If the Father chose certain ones
before the foundation of the world and gave them to His Son, and if it was for
them that Christ gave Himself a ransom, then the Holy
Spirit is not now working to "bring the world to Christ." The mission of the
Holy Spirit in the world today is to apply the benefits of
Christ’s redemptive sacrifice. The question which is now to engage us
is not the extent of the Holy Spirit’s power—on that point there
can be no doubt, it is infinite—but what we shall seek to show is that, His
power and operations are directed by Divine wisdom and sovereignty.
We have just said that the power and
operations of the Holy Spirit are directed by Divine wisdom and indisputable
sovereignty. In proof of this assertion we appeal first to our Lord’s words to
Nicodemus in John 3:8—"The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the
sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth; so
is every one that is born of the Spirit." A comparison is here drawn between
the wind and the Spirit. The comparison is a double one: first, both
are sovereign in their actions, and second, both are mysterious in
their operations. The comparison is pointed out in the word "so." The
first point of analogy is seen in the words "where it listeth" or "pleaseth";
the second is found in the words "canst not tell." With the second point of
analogy we are not now concerned, but upon the first we would comment further.
"The wind bloweth where it pleaseth
. . . so is every one that is born of the Spirit."
The wind is an element which man can neither harness nor hinder. The wind
neither consults man’s pleasure nor can it be regulated by his devices. So it
is with the Spirit. The wind blows when it pleases, where it pleases, as it
pleases. So it is with the Spirit. The wind is regulated by Divine wisdom,
yet, so far as man is concerned, it is absolutely sovereign in its
operations. So it is with the Spirit. Sometimes the wind blows so softly it
scarcely rustles a leaf; at other times it blows so loudly that its roar can
be heard for miles. So it is in the matter of the new birth; with some the
Holy Spirit deals so gently, that His work is imperceptible to human
onlookers; with others His action is so powerful, radical, revolutionary, that
His operations are patent to many. Sometimes the wind is purely local in its
reach, at other times wide-spread in its scope. So it is with the Spirit:
today He acts on one or two souls, tomorrow He may, as at Pentecost, "prick in
the heart" a whole multitude. But whether He works on few or many, He consults
not man. He acts as He pleases. The new birth is
due to the sovereign will of the Spirit.
Each of the three Persons in the blessed
Trinity is concerned with our salvation: with the Father it is predestination;
with the Son propitiation; with the Spirit regeneration. The Father chose us;
the Son died for us; the Spirit quickens us. The Father was concerned about
us; the Son shed His blood for us, the Spirit performs His work
within us. What the One did was eternal, what the Other did was
external, what the Spirit does is internal. It is with the work of
the Spirit we are now concerned, with His work in the new birth, and
particularly His sovereign operations in the new birth. The Father
purposed our new birth; the Son has made possible (by His "travail") the new
birth; but it is the Spirit who effects the new birth—"Born of the
Spirit" (John 3:6).
The new birth is
solely the work of God the Spirit and man has no part or lot in it. This from
the very nature of the case. Birth altogether excludes the idea of any effort
or work on the part of the one who is born. Personally we have no more to do
with our spiritual birth than we had with our natural birth. The new
birth is a spiritual resurrection, a "passing from death unto life" (John
5:24) and, clearly, resurrection is altogether outside of
man’s province. No corpse can reanimate itself. Hence it is written, "It is
the Spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing" (John
6:63). But the Spirit does not "quicken" everybody—why? The usual answer
returned to this question is, Because everybody does not trust in Christ.
It is supposed that the Holy Spirit quickens only those
who believe. But this is to put the cart before the horse. Faith is not the
cause of the new birth, but the consequence of it. This ought not to need
arguing. Faith (in God) is an exotic, something that is not native to
the human heart. If faith were a natural product of the human heart,
the exercise of a principle common to human nature, it would never have been
written, "All men have not faith" (2 Thess. 3:2). Faith is a spiritual grace,
the fruit of the spiritual nature, and because the unregenerate are
spiritually dead—"dead in trespasses and sins"—then it follows that faith from
them is impossible, for a dead man cannot believe anything. "So then they that
are in the flesh cannot please God" (Rom. 8:8)—but they could if it
were possible for the flesh to believe. Compare with this last-quoted
Scripture Hebrews 11:6—"But without faith it is impossible to please Him."
Can God be "pleased" or satisfied with any thing which
does not have its origin in Himself?
That the work of the Holy Spirit
precedes our believing is unequivocally established by 2 Thessalonians
2:13—"God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through
sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth." Note that
"sanctification of the Spirit" comes before and makes possible "belief of the
truth." What then is the "sanctification of the Spirit"? We answer, the new
birth. In Scripture "sanctification" always means "separation,"
separation from something and unto something or someone. Let us now amplify
our assertion that the "sanctification of the Spirit" corresponds to the new
birth and points to the positional effect of it.
Here is a servant of God who preaches
the Gospel to a congregation in which are an hundred unsaved people. He brings
before them the teaching of Scripture concerning their ruined and lost
condition; he speaks of God, His character and righteous demands; he tells of
Christ meeting God’s demands, and dying the Just for the unjust, and declares
that through "this Man" is now preached the forgiveness of sins; he closes by
urging the lost to believe what God has said in His Word and receive His Son
as their own personal Saviour. The meeting is over; the congregation
disperses; ninety-nine of the unsaved have refused to come to Christ that they
might have life, and go out into the night having no hope, and without God in
the world. But the hundredth heard the Word of life; the Seed sown fell into
ground which had been prepared by God; he believed the Good News, and goes
home rejoicing that his name is written in heaven. He has been "born again,"
and just as a newly-born babe in the natural world begins life by clinging
instinctively, in its helplessness, to its mother, so this newborn soul has
clung to Christ. Just as we read, "The Lord opened" the heart of Lydia "that
she attended unto the things which were spoken of Paul" (Acts 16:14), so
in the case supposed above, the Holy Spirit quickened that one before he
believed the Gospel message. Here then is the "sanctification of the Spirit:"
this one soul who has been born again has, by virtue of his new birth, been
separated from the other ninety-nine. Those born again are, by the Spirit,
set apart from those who are dead in trespasses and sins.
A beautiful type of the operations of
the Holy Spirit antecedent to the sinner’s "belief of the truth", is
found in the first chapter of Genesis. We read in verse 2, "And the earth was
without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep." The
original Hebrew here might be literally rendered thus: "And the earth had
become a desolate ruin, and darkness was upon the face of the deep." In
"the beginning" the earth was not created in the condition
described in verse 2. Between the first two verses of Genesis 1
some awful catastrophe had occurred [the Gap Theory-ed.]—possibly the fall of
Satan—and, as the consequence, the earth had been blasted and blighted, and
had become a "desolate ruin", lying beneath a pall of "darkness." Such also is
the history of man. Today, man is not in the condition in which he left the
hands of his Creator: an awful catastrophe has happened, and now man is a
"desolate ruin" and in total "darkness" concerning spiritual things. Next we
read in Genesis 1 how God refashioned the ruined earth and created new beings
to inhabit it. First we read, "And the Spirit of God moved upon the
face of the waters." Next we are told, "And God said, Let there be
light; and there was light." The order is the same in the new creation: there
is first the action of the Spirit, and then the Word of God giving light.
Before the Word found entrance into the scene of desolation and darkness,
bringing with it the light, the Spirit of God "moved." So it is in the new
creation. "The entrance of Thy words giveth light" (Ps. 119:130), but
before it can enter the darkened human heart the Spirit of God must
operate upon it. [1]
To return to 2 Thessalonians 2:13: "But
we are bound to give thanks always to God for you, brethren beloved of the
Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through
sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth." The order of
thought here is most important and instructive. First, God’s eternal choice;
second, the sanctification of the Spirit; third, belief of the truth.
Precisely the same order is found in 1 Peter 1:2—"Elect according to the
foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto
obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ." We take it that the
"obedience" here is the "obedience of faith" (Rom. 1:5), which
appropriates the virtues of the sprinkled blood of the Lord Jesus. So then
before the "obedience" (of faith, cf. Heb. 5:9), there is the work of the
Spirit setting us apart, and behind that is the election of God the Father.
The ones "sanctified of the Spirit" then, are they whom "God hath from the
beginning chosen to salvation" (2 Thess. 2:13), those who are
"elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father" (1 Pet. 1:2).
But, it may be said, is not the present
mission of the Holy Spirit to "convict the world of sin"? And we
answer, It is not. The mission of the Spirit is threefold; to glorify
Christ, to vivify the elect, to edify the saints. John 16:8-11 does not
describe the "mission" of the Spirit, but sets forth the significance
of His presence here in the world. It treats not of His subjective work
in sinners, showing them their need of Christ, by searching their consciences
and striking terror to their hearts; what we have there is entirely objective.
To illustrate. Suppose I saw a man hanging on the gallows, of what
would that "convince" me? Why, that he was a murderer. How would I thus
be convinced? By reading the record of his trial? by hearing a confession from
his own lips? No; but by the fact that he was hanging there. So the
fact that the Holy Spirit is here furnishes proof of the world’s guilt,
of God’s righteousness, and of the Devil’s judgment.
The Holy Spirit ought not to be here at
all. That is a startling statement, but we make it deliberately. Christ
is the One who ought to be here. He was sent here by the Father, but
the world did not want Him, would not have Him, hated Him, and cast Him out.
And the presence of the Spirit here instead evidences its guilt. The
coming of the Spirit was a proof to demonstration of the resurrection,
ascension, and glory of the Lord Jesus. His presence on earth reverses the
world’s verdict, showing that God has set aside the blasphemous judgment in
the palace of Israel’s high priest and in the hall of the Roman governor. The
"reproof" of the Spirit abides, and abides altogether irrespective of the
world’s reception or rejection of His testimony.
Had our Lord been referring here to the
gracious work which the Spirit would perform in those who should be
brought to feel their need of Him, He had said that the Spirit would convict
men of their unrighteousness, their lack of righteousness. But this is not the
thought here at all. The descent of the Spirit from heaven establishes
God’s righteousness, Christ’s righteousness. The proof of that is, Christ
has gone to the Father. Had Christ been an Imposter, as the religious
world insisted when they cast Him out, the Father had not received Him. The
fact that the Father did exalt Him to His own right hand, demonstrates
that He was innocent of the charges laid against Him; and the proof that the
Father has received Him, is the presence now of the Holy Spirit on
earth, for Christ has sent Him from the Father (John 16:7)! The world
was unrighteous in casting Him out, the Father righteous in glorifying Him;
and this is what the Spirit’s presence here establishes.
"Of judgment, because the Prince of this
world is judged" (v. 11). This is the logical and inevitable climax. The world
is brought in guilty for their rejection of, for their refusal to receive,
Christ. Its condemnation is exhibited by the Father’s exaltation of the
spurned One. Therefore nothing awaits the world, and its Prince, but judgment.
The "judgment" of Satan is already established by The Spirit’s presence here,
for Christ, through death, set at nought him who had the power of death, that
is, the Devil (Heb. 2:14). When God’s time comes for the Spirit
to depart from the earth, then His sentence will be executed, both on
the world and its Prince. In the light of this unspeakably solemn passage, we
need not be surprised to find Christ saying, "The Spirit of truth, whom the
world cannot receive, because it seeth Him not, neither knoweth Him".
No, the world wants Him not; He condemns the world.
"And when He is come, He will reprove
(or, better, "convict"—bring in guilty) the world of sin, and of
righteousness, and of judgment: Of sin, because they believe not on Me; Of
righteousness, because I go to My Father, and ye see Me no more; Of judgment,
because the prince of this world is judged" (John 16:8-11). Three things,
then, the presence of the Holy Spirit on earth demonstrates to the world:
first, its sin, because the world refused to believe on Christ; second, God’s
righteousness in exalting to His own right hand the One cast out, and now no
more seen by the world; third, judgment, because Satan the world’s prince is
already judged, though execution of his judgment is yet future. Thus the Holy
Spirit’s presence here displays things as they really are.
The Holy Spirit is sovereign in His
operations and His mission is confined to God’s elect: they are the ones He
"comforts," "seals," guides into all truth, shews things to come, etc. The
work of the Spirit is necessary in order to the complete accomplishment
of the Father’s eternal purpose. Speaking hypothetically, but reverently, be
it said, that if God had done nothing more than given
Christ to die for sinners, not a single sinner would ever have been saved. In
order for any sinner to see his need of a Saviour and be willing to
receive the Saviour he needs, the work of the Holy Spirit upon and within
him were imperatively required. Had God done nothing more than given Christ to
die for sinners and then sent forth His servants to proclaim salvation through
Christ, leaving sinners entirely to themselves to accept or reject as they
pleased, then every sinner would have rejected, because at
heart every man hates God and is at enmity with Him. Therefore the work
of the Holy Spirit was needed to bring the sinner to Christ, to overcome his
innate opposition, and compel him to accept the provision God has made. We say
"compel" the sinner, for this is precisely what the Holy Spirit does, has to
do, and this leads us to consider at some length, though as briefly as
possible, the parable of the "Marriage Supper."
In Luke 14:16 we read, "A certain man
made a great supper, and bade many." By comparing carefully what follows here
with Matthew 22:2-10 several important distinctions will be observed. We take
it that these passages are two independent accounts of the same parable,
differing in detail according to the distinctive purpose and design of the
Holy Spirit in each Gospel. Matthew’s account—in harmony with the Spirit’s
presentation there of Christ as the Son of David, the King of the Jews—says,
"A certain king made a marriage for his son." Luke’s account—where the
Spirit presents Christ as the Son of Man—says, "A certain man made a
great supper and bade many." Matthew 22:3 says, "And sent forth His
servants;" Luke 14:17 says, "And sent His servant."
Now what we wish particularly to call attention to is, that all through
Matthew’s account it is "servants," whereas in Luke it is always "servant."
The class of readers for whom we are writing are those that believe,
unreservedly, in the verbal inspiration of the Scriptures, and such
will readily acknowledge there must be some reason for this change from the
plural number in Matthew to the singular number in Luke. We believe the reason
is a weighty one and that attention to this variation reveals an important
truth. We believe that the "servants" in Matthew, speaking generally, are
all who go forth preaching the Gospel, but that the "Servant" in Luke 14
is the Holy Spirit Himself. This is not incongruous, or derogatory to the Holy
Spirit, for God the Son, in the days of His earthly ministry, was the Servant
of Jehovah (Isa. 42:1). It will be observed that in Matthew 22
the "servants" are sent forth to do three things: first, to "call"
to the wedding (v. 3); second, to "tell those which are bidden . .
. all things are ready: come unto the marriage" (v. 4); third, to "bid
to the marriage" (v. 9); and these three are the things which those who
minister the Gospel today are now doing. In Luke 14 the Servant is also sent
forth to do three things: first, He is "to say to them that were
bidden, Come: for all things are now ready" (v. 17) ; second, He is to "bring
in the poor, and the maimed, and the halt, and the blind" (v. 21); third,
He is to "compel them to come in" (v. 23), and the last
two of these the Holy Spirit alone can do!
In the above Scripture we see that "the
Servant," the Holy Spirit, compels certain ones to come in to the
"supper" and herein is seen His sovereignty, His omnipotency, His Divine
sufficiency. The clear implication from this word "compel" is, that those whom
the Holy Spirit does "bring in" are not willing of themselves
to come. This is exactly what we have sought to show in previous
paragraphs. By nature, God’s elect are children of wrath even as others
(Eph. 2:3), and as such their hearts are at enmity with God. But this "enmity"
of theirs is overcome by the Spirit and He "compels" them to come in.
Is it not clear then that the reason why others are left outside, is
not only because they are unwilling to go in, but also because the Holy
Spirit does not "compel" them to come in? Is it not manifest that the
Holy Spirit is sovereign in the exercise of His power, that as the wind
"bloweth where it pleaseth", so the Holy Spirit operates
where He pleases?
And now to sum up. We have sought to
show the perfect consistency of God’s ways: that each Person in the Godhead
acts in sympathy and harmony with the Others. God the Father elected certain
ones to salvation, God the Son died for the elect, and God the Spirit quickens
the elect. Well may we sing,
Praise God from whom all blessings flow,
Praise Him all creatures here below,
Praise Him above ye heavenly host,
Praise Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.
ENDNOTES:
[1]
The priority
contended for above is rather in order of nature than of time, just as the
effect must ever be preceded by the cause. A blind man must have
his eyes opened before he can see, and yet there is no interval
of time between the one and the other. As soon as his eyes are opened, he
sees. So a man must be born again before he can “see the kingdom
of God” (John 3:3). Seeing the Son is necessary to believing in
Him. Unbelief is attributed to spiritual blindness—those who believed not the
“report” of the Gospel “saw no beauty” in Christ that they should desire Him.
The work of the Spirit in “quickening” the one dead in sins, precedes
faith in Christ, just as cause ever precedes effect. But no sooner
is the heart turned toward Christ by the Spirit, than the Saviour
is embraced by the sinner.
Chapter 5
THE SOVEREIGNTY OF GOD IN REPROBATION
"Behold therefore the goodness and the severity of God"
Romans. 11:22
In the last chapter when treating of the
Sovereignty of God the Father in Salvation, we examined seven passages which
represent Him as making a choice from among the children of men, and
predestinating certain ones to be conformed to the image of His Son. The
thoughtful reader will naturally ask, And what of those who were not
"ordained to eternal life?" The answer which is usually returned to this
question, even by those who profess to believe what the Scriptures teach
concerning God’s sovereignty, is, that God passes by the non-elect,
leaves them alone to go their own way, and in the end casts them into the
Lake of Fire because they refused His way, and rejected the Saviour of
His providing. But this is only a part of the truth; the other part—that which
is most offensive to the carnal mind—is either ignored or denied.
In view of the awful solemnity of the
subject here before us, in view of the fact that today almost all—even those
who profess to be Calvinists—reject and repudiate this doctrine, and in view
of the fact that this is one of the points in our book which is calculated to
raise the most controversy, we feel that an extended enquiry into this aspect
of God’s Truth is demanded. That this branch of the subject of God’s
sovereignty is profoundly mysterious we freely allow, yet, that is no reason
why we should reject it. The trouble is that, nowadays,
there are so many who receive the testimony of God only so far as they
can satisfactorily account for all the reasons and grounds of His conduct,
which means they will accept nothing but that which can be measured in the
petty scales of their own limited capacities.
Stating it in its baldest form the point
now to be considered is, Has God fore-ordained certain ones to damnation? That
many will be eternally damned is clear from Scripture, that each one
will be judged according to his works and reap as he has sown, and that in
consequence his "damnation is just" (Rom. 3:8), is equally sure, and that God
decreed that the non-elect should choose the course they
follow we now undertake to prove.
From what has been before us in the
previous chapter concerning the election of some to salvation, it would
unavoidably follow, even if Scripture had been silent upon it, that there must
be a rejection of others. Every choice, evidently and necessarily
implies a refusal, for where there is no leaving out there can be no choice.
If there be some whom God has elected unto salvation (2 Thess. 2:13),
there must be others who are not elected unto salvation. If there are
some that the Father gave to Christ (John 6:37), there must be others whom He
did not give unto Christ. If there are some whose names are written in the
Lamb’s book of Life (Rev. 21:27), there must be others whose names are
not written there. That this is the case we shall fully prove
below.
Now all will acknowledge that from the
foundation of the world God certainly fore-knew and fore-saw who would and who
would not receive Christ as their Saviour, therefore in giving being and birth
to those He knew would reject Christ, He necessarily created
them unto damnation. All that can be said in reply to this is, No,
while God did foreknow these ones would reject Christ, yet He did not
decree that they should. But this is a begging of the real
question at issue. God had a definite reason why He created men, a
specific purpose why He created this and that individual, and in view of the
eternal destination of His creatures, He purposed either that this one
should spend eternity in Heaven or that this one should spend eternity in the
Lake of Fire. If then He foresaw that in creating a
certain person that that person would despise and reject the Saviour, yet
knowing this beforehand He, nevertheless, brought that person into existence,
then it is clear He designed and ordained that that person should be eternally
lost. Again; faith is God’s gift, and the purpose
to give it only to some, involves the purpose not to give it to others.
Without faith there is no salvation—"He that believeth not shall be damned"—
hence if there were some of Adam’s descendants to whom He purposed not to give
faith, it must be because He ordained that they should be damned.
Not only is there no escape from these
conclusions, but history confirms them. Before the Divine Incarnation,
for almost two thousand years, the vast majority of mankind were left
destitute of even the external means of grace, being favored with no preaching
of God’s Word and with no written revelation of His will. For many long
centuries Israel was the only nation to whom the Deity vouchsafed any
special discovery of Himself—"Who in times past suffered all nations to
walk in their own ways" (Acts 14:16)—"You only (Israel) have I known of
all the families of the earth" (Amos 3:2). Consequently, as all other nations
were deprived of the preaching of God’s Word, they were strangers to the faith
that cometh thereby (Rom. 10:17). These nations were not only ignorant of God
Himself, but of the way to please Him, of the true manner of acceptance with
Him, and the means of arriving at the everlasting enjoyment of Himself.
Now if God had willed their salvation,
would He not have vouchsafed them the means of salvation? Would He not have
given them all things necessary to that end? But it is an undeniable matter of
fact that He did not. If, then, Deity can, consistently, with His
justice, mercy, and benevolence, deny to some the means of grace, and shut
them up in gross darkness and unbelief (because of the sins of their
forefathers, generations before), why should it be deemed incompatible with
His perfections to exclude some persons, many, from grace itself, and from
that eternal life which is connected with it? seeing that He is Lord and
sovereign Disposer both of the end to which the means lead, and the means
which lead to that end?
Coming down to our own day, and to those
in our own country—leaving out the almost innumerable crowds of unevangelized
heathen—is it not evident that there are many living in lands where the Gospel
is preached, lands which are full of churches, who die strangers to God and
His holiness? True, the means of grace were close to their hand, but many of
them knew it not. Thousands are born into homes where they are taught from
infancy to regard all Christians as hypocrites and preachers as arch-humbugs.
Others, are instructed from the cradle in Roman Catholicism, and are trained
to regard Evangelical Christianity as deadly heresy, and the Bible as a book
highly dangerous for them to read. Others, reared in "Christian Science"
families, know no more of the true Gospel of Christ than do the unevangelized
heathen. The great majority of these die in utter ignorance of the Way of
Peace. Now are we not obliged to conclude that it was not God’s will to
communicate grace to them? Had His will been otherwise, would He
not have actually communicated His grace to them? If, then, it was the
will of God, in time, to refuse to them His grace, it must have been
His will from all eternity, since His will is, as Himself, the same yesterday,
and today and forever. Let it not be forgotten that
God’s providences are but the manifestations of His decrees:
what God does in time is only what He purposed in eternity—His
own will being the alone cause of all His acts and works. Therefore
from His actually leaving some men in final impenitency and unbelief we
assuredly gather it was His everlasting determination so to do; and
consequently that He reprobated some from before the foundation of the world.
In the Westminster Confession it is
said, "God from all eternity did by the most wise and holy counsel of His own
will, freely and unchangeably foreordain whatsoever comes to pass". The
late Mr. F. W. Grant—a most careful and cautious student and writer—commenting
on these words said: "It is perfectly, divinely true, that God hath ordained
for His own glory whatsoever comes to pass." Now if these statements are true,
is not the doctrine of Reprobation established by them? What, in human
history, is the one thing which does come to pass every day? What, but
that men and women die, pass out of this world into a hopeless eternity, an
eternity of suffering and woe. If then God has foreordained
whatsoever comes to pass then He must have decreed that vast numbers of
human beings should pass out of this world unsaved to suffer eternally in the
Lake of Fire. Admitting the general premise, is not the specific conclusion
inevitable?
In reply to the preceding paragraphs the
reader may say, All this is simply reasoning, logical no doubt, but yet
mere inferences. Very well, we will now point out that in addition to the
above conclusions there are many passages in Holy Writ, which are most clear
and definite in their teaching on this solemn subject; passages which are too
plain to be misunderstood and too strong to be evaded. The marvel is that so
many good men have denied their undeniable affirmations.
"Joshua made war a long time with all
those kings. There was not a city that made peace with the children of Israel,
save the Hivites the inhabitants of Gibeon: all other they took in battle. For
it was of the Lord to harden their hearts, that they should come against
Israel in battle, that He might destroy them utterly, and that they might have
no favour, but that He might destroy them, as the Lord commanded Moses" (Josh.
11:18-20). What could be plainer than this? Here was a large number of
Canaanites whose hearts the Lord hardened, whom He had purposed to utterly
destroy, to whom He showed "no favour". Granted that they were
wicked, immoral, idolatrous; were they any worse than the immoral,
idolatrous cannibals of the South Sea Islands (and many other places), to whom
God gave the Gospel through John G. Paton! Assuredly not. Then why did not
Jehovah command Israel to teach the Canaanites His laws and instruct them
concerning sacrifices to the true God? Plainly, because He had marked them
out for destruction, and if so, that from all eternity.
"The Lord hath made all things for
Himself: yea, even the wicked for the day of evil." (Prov. 16:4). That the
Lord made all, perhaps every reader of this book will allow: that He
made all for Himself is not so widely believed. That God made us, not
for our own sakes, but for Himself; not for our own happiness, but for His
glory; is, nevertheless, repeatedly affirmed in Scripture—Revelation 4:11.
But Proverbs 16:4 goes even farther: it expressly
declares that the Lord made the wicked for the Day of Evil: that
was His design in giving them being. But why? Does
not Romans 9:17 tell us, "For the Scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this
purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew My power in thee, and that My
name might be declared throughout all the earth"! God
has made the wicked that, at the end, He may demonstrate "His
power"—demonstrate it by showing what an easy matter it is for Him to subdue
the stoutest rebel and to overthrow His mightiest enemy.
"And then will I profess unto them, I
never knew you: Depart from Me, ye that work iniquity" (Matt. 7:23). In
the previous chapter it has been shown that, the words "know" and
"foreknowledge" when applied to God in the Scriptures, have reference not
simply to His prescience (i.e. His bare knowledge beforehand), but to
His knowledge of approbation. When God said to Israel, "You only have I
known of all the families of the earth" (Amos 3:2), it is evident that
He meant, "You only had I any favorable regard to." When we read in Romans
11:2 "God hath not cast away His people (Israel) whom He foreknew,"
it is obvious that what was signified is, "God has not finally rejected
that people whom He has chosen as the objects of His love—cf.
Deuternomy 7:7, 8. In the same way (and it is the only possible way)
are we to understand Matthew 7:23. In the Day of Judgment the
Lord will say unto many, "I never knew you". Note, it is more than simply "I
know you not". His solemn declaration will be, "I never knew you"—you
were never the objects of My approbation. Contrast this with "I know
(love) My sheep, and am known (loved) of Mine" (John 10:14).
The "sheep", His elect, the "few", He does
"know"; but the reprobate, the non-elect, the "many" He knows not—no,
not even before the foundation of the world did He know them—He "NEVER" knew
them!
In Romans 9 the doctrine of God’s
sovereignty in its application to both the elect and the reprobate is treated
of at length. A detailed exposition of this important chapter would be beyond
our present scope; all that we can essay is to dwell upon the part of it which
most clearly bears upon the aspect of the subject which we are now
considering.
Verse 17: "For the Scripture saith
unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might
show My power in thee, and that My name might be declared throughout all the
earth." These words refer us back to verses 13 and 14. In verse 13
God’s love to Jacob and His hatred to Esau are declared. In verse 14 it is
asked "Is there unrighteousness with God?" and here in verse 17 the
apostle continues his reply to the objection. We cannot do better now
than quote from Calvin’s comments upon this verse. "There are here two things
to be considered,—the predestination of Pharaoh to ruin, which is to be
referred to the past and yet the hidden counsel of God,—and then, the design
of this, which was to make known the name of God. As many interpreters,
striving to modify this passage, pervert it, we must first observe, that for
the word ‘I have raised thee up’, or stirred up, in the Hebrew is, ‘I have
appointed’, by which it appears, that God, designing to show that the
contumacy of Pharaoh would not prevent Him to deliver His people, not only
affirms that his fury had been foreseen by Him, and that He had prepared means
for restraining it, but that He had also thus designedly ordained it
and indeed for this end,—that he might exhibit a more illustrious evidence of
His own power." It will be observed that Calvin gives as the force of the
Hebrew word which Paul renders "For this purpose have I raised thee up,"—"I
have appointed". As this is the word on which the doctrine
and argument of the verse turns we would further point out that in making this
quotation from Exodus 9:16 the apostle significantly departs from the
Septuagint—the version then in common use, and from which he most frequently
quotes—and substitutes a clause for the first that is given by the Septuagint:
instead of "On this account thou hast been preserved", he gives "For this very
end have I raised thee up"!
But we must now consider in more detail
the case of Pharaoh which sums up in concrete example the great controversy
between man and his Maker. "For now I will stretch out My hand, that I may
smite thee and thy people with pestilence; and thou shalt be cut off from the
earth. And in very deed for this cause have I raised thee up, for to
show in thee My power; and that My name may be declared throughout all the
earth" (Ex. 9:15, 16). Upon these words we offer the following comments:
First, we know from Exodus 14 and 15
that Pharaoh was "cut off", that he was cut off by God, that he was cut
off in the very midst of his wickedness, that he was cut off not by sickness
nor by the infirmities which are incident to old age, nor by what men term an
accident, but cut off by the immediate hand of God in judgment.
Second, it is clear that God raised up
Pharaoh for this very end—to "cut him off," which in the language of
the New Testament means "destroyed." God never does anything without a
previous design. In giving him being, in preserving him through infancy and
childhood, in raising him to the throne of Egypt, God had one end in view.
That such was God’s purpose is clear from His words to Moses before he
went down to Egypt, to demand of Pharaoh that Jehovah’s people should be
allowed to go a three days’ journey into the wilderness to worship Him—"And
the Lord said unto Moses, When thou goest to return into Egypt, see that thou
do all these wonders before Pharaoh, which I have put in thine hand: but I
will harden his heart, that he shall not let the people go" (Ex. 4:21).
But not only so, God’s design and purpose was declared long before this. Four
hundred years previously God had said to Abraham, "Know of a surety that thy
seed shall be a stranger in a land that is not theirs, and shall serve them;
and they shall afflict them four hundred years; and also that nation, whom
they shall serve, will I judge" (Gen. 15:13, 14). From these
words it is evident (a nation and its king being looked at as one in the O.
T.) that God’s purpose was formed long before He gave
Pharaoh being.
Third, an examination of God’s dealings
with Pharaoh makes it clear that Egypt’s king was indeed a "vessel of wrath
fitted to destruction." Placed on Egypt’s throne, with the reins of government
in his hands, he sat as head of the nation which occupied the first rank among
the peoples of the world. There was no other monarch on earth able to control
or dictate to Pharaoh. To such a dizzy height did God raise this reprobate,
and such a course was a natural and necessary step to prepare him for his
final fate, for it is a Divine axiom that "pride goeth before destruction and
a haughty spirit before a fall." Further,—and this is deeply important to note
and highly significant—God removed from Pharaoh the one outward restraint
which was calculated to act as a check upon him. The bestowing upon Pharaoh of
the unlimited powers of a king was setting him above all legal influence and
control. But besides this, God removed Moses from his presence and
kingdom. Had Moses, who not only was skilled in all the wisdom of the
Egyptians but also had been reared in Pharaoh’s household, been suffered to
remain in close proximity to the throne, there can be no doubt but that his
example and influence had been a powerful check upon the king’s wickedness and
tyranny. This, though not the only cause, was plainly one reason why God sent
Moses into Midian, for it was during his absence that Egypt’s inhuman
king framed his most cruel edicts. God designed, by removing this restraint,
to give Pharaoh full opportunity to fill up the full measure of his sins, and
ripen himself for his fully-deserved but predestined ruin.
Fourth, God "hardened" his heart as He
declared He would (Ex. 4:21). This is in full accord with the declarations of
Holy Scripture—"The preparations of the heart in man, and the answer of the
tongue, is from the Lord" (Prov. 16:1); "The king’s heart is in
the hand of the Lord, as the rivers of water, He turneth it whithersoever
He will" (Prov. 21:1). Like all other kings, Pharaoh’s heart was in
the hand of the Lord; and God had both the right and the power to turn it
whithersoever He pleased. And it pleased Him to turn it against all
good. God determined to hinder Pharaoh from granting his request through Moses
to let Israel go, until He had fully prepared him for his final overthrow, and
because nothing short of this would fully fit him, God hardened his
heart.
Finally, it is worthy of careful
consideration to note how the vindication of God in His dealings with
Pharaoh has been fully attested. Most remarkable it is to discover that we
have Pharaoh’s own testimony in favor of God and against himself! In
Exodus 9:15 and 16 we learn how God had told Pharaoh for what purpose He had
raised him up, and in verse 27 of the same chapter we are told that
Pharaoh said, "I have sinned this time: the Lord is righteous, and I
and my people are wicked." Mark that this was said by Pharaoh after he
knew that God had raised him up in order to "cut him off", after his
severe judgments had been sent upon him, after he had hardened his own
heart. By this time Pharaoh was fairly ripened for judgment, and fully
prepared to decide whether God had injured him, or whether he had sought to
injure God; and he fully acknowledges that he had "sinned" and that God was
"righteous". Again; we have the witness of Moses who was fully acquainted with
God’s conduct toward Pharaoh. He had heard at the beginning what was God’s
design in connection with Pharaoh; he had witnessed God’s dealings with him;
he had observed his "long-sufferance" toward this vessel of wrath fitted to
destruction; and at last he had beheld him cut off in Divine judgment at the
Red Sea. How then was Moses impressed?
Does he raise the cry of injustice? Does
he dare to charge God with unrighteousness? Far from it. Instead, he says,
"Who is like unto Thee, O Lord, among the gods? "Who is like Thee, glorious in
holiness, fearful in praises, doing wonders!" (Ex. 15:11).
Was Moses moved by a vindictive
spirit as he saw Israel’s arch-enemy "cut off" by the waters of the Red Sea?
Surely not. But to remove forever all doubt upon this score, it remains to be
pointed out how that saints in heaven, after they have witnessed
the sore judgments of God, join in singing "the song of Moses the
servant of God, and the song of the Lamb saying, Great and marvelous are Thy
works, Lord God Almighty; just and true are Thy ways, Thou King of
Nations" (Rev. 15:3). Here then is the climax, and the full and final
vindication of God’s dealings with Pharaoh. Saints in heaven join in singing
the Song of Moses, in which that servant of God celebrated Jehovah’s praise in
overthrowing Pharaoh and his hosts, declaring that in so acting God was not
unrighteous but just and true. We must
believe, therefore, that the Judge of all the earth did right in creating and
destroying this vessel of wrath, Pharaoh.
The case of
Pharaoh establishes the principle and illustrates the doctrine of
Reprobation. If God actually reprobated Pharaoh, we may justly conclude that
He reprobates all others whom He did not predestinate to be conformed to the
image of His Son. This inference the apostle Paul manifestly draws from
the fate of Pharaoh, for in Romans 9, after referring to God’s purpose in
raising up Pharaoh, he continues, "therefore". The case of
Pharaoh is introduced to prove the doctrine of Reprobation as the counterpart
of the doctrine of Election.
In conclusion, we
would say that in forming Pharaoh God displayed neither justice nor injustice,
but only His bare sovereignty. As the potter is sovereign in forming vessels,
so God is sovereign in forming moral agents.
Verse 18: "Therefore hath He mercy on
whom He will have mercy, and whom He will He hardeneth". The
"therefore" announces the general conclusion which the apostle draws from all
he had said in the three preceding verses in denying that God was unrighteous
in loving Jacob and hating Esau, and specifically it applies the principle
exemplified in God’s dealings with Pharaoh. It traces everything back to the
sovereign will of the Creator. He loves one and hates
another, He exercises mercy toward some and hardens others, without reference
to anything save His own sovereign will.
That which is most repellant to the
carnal mind in the above verse is the reference to hardening—"Whom
He will He hardeneth"— and it is just here that so many commentators and
expositors have adulterated the truth. The most common view is that the
apostle is speaking of nothing more than judicial hardening, i.e., a
forsaking by God because these subjects of His displeasure had
first rejected His truth and forsaken Him. Those who contend for this
interpretation appeal to such scriptures as Romans 1:19-26—"God gave them up",
that is (see context) those who "knew God" yet glorified Him not as God (v.
21). Appeal is also made to 2 Thessalonians 2:10-12. But it is to be noted
that the word "harden" does not occur in either of these passages. But
further. We submit that Romans 9:18 has no reference whatever to judicial
"hardening". The apostle is not there speaking of those who had already
turned their backs on God’s truth, but instead, he is dealing with God’s
sovereignty, God’s sovereignty as seen not only in showing mercy to
whom He wills, but also in hardening whom He pleases. The exact
words are "Whom He will"—not "all who have rejected His truth"—"He
hardeneth", and this, coming immediately after the mention of Pharaoh, clearly
fixes their meaning. The case of Pharaoh is plain enough, though
man by his glosses has done his best to hide
the truth.
Verse 18: "Therefore hath He mercy on
whom He will have mercy, and whom He will He hardeneth". This
affirmation of God’s sovereign "hardening" of sinners’ hearts—in
contradistinction from judicial hardening—is not alone. Mark the language of
John 12:37-40, "But though He had done so many miracles before them, yet they
believed not on Him: that the saying of Isaiah the prophet might be fulfilled,
which he spake, Lord, who hath believed our report? and to whom hath the arm
of the Lord been revealed? Therefore they could not believe (why?),
because that Isaiah said again, He hath blinded their eyes, and
hardened their hearts (why? Because they had refused to believe on Christ?
This is the popular belief, but mark the answer of Scripture)
that they should not
see with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I
should heal them." Now, reader, it is just a
question as to whether or not you will believe what God has revealed in His
Word. It is not a matter of prolonged searching or profound study, but a
childlike spirit which is needed, in order to understand this doctrine.
Verse 19: "Thou wilt say then unto
me, Why doth He yet find fault? For who hath resisted His will?"
Is not this the very objection which is urged today? The force of the
apostle’s questions here seems to be this: Since everything is dependent on
God’s will, which is irreversible, and since this will of God, according to
which He can do everything as sovereign—since He can have mercy on whom He
wills to have mercy, and can refuse mercy and inflict punishment on whom He
chooses to do so—why does He not will to have mercy on all, so as to make them
obedient, and thus put finding of fault out of court? Now it should be
particularly noted that the apostle does not repudiate the ground on which the
objection rests. He does not say God does not find fault. Nor does he
say, Men may resist His will. Furthermore; he does not explain away the
objection by saying: You have altogether misapprehended my meaning when I said
‘Whom He wills He treats kindly, and whom He wills He treats severely’. But he
says, "first, this is an objection you have no right to make; and then,
This is an objection you have no reason to make" (vide Dr. Brown).
The objection was utterly inadmissible, for it was a
replying against God. It was to complain about, argue against, what
God had done!
Verse 19: "Thou wilt say then unto
me, Why doth He yet find fault? For who hath resisted His will?"
The language which the apostle here puts into the mouth of the objector is
so plain and pointed, that misunderstanding ought to be impossible. Why doth
He yet find fault? Now, reader, what can these words mean?
Formulate your own reply before considering ours. Can the force of the
apostle’s question be any other than this: If it is true that God has "mercy"
on whom He wills, and also "hardens" whom He wills, then what
becomes of human responsibility? In such a case men are nothing better than
puppets, and if this be true then it would be unjust for God to
"find fault" with His helpless creatures. Mark the word "then"—Thou wilt say
then unto me—he states the (false) inference
or conclusion which the objector draws from what the apostle had
been saying. And mark, my reader, the apostle readily saw the doctrine
he had formulated would raise this very objection, and unless
what we have written throughout this book provokes, in some at least,
(all whose carnal minds are not subdued by divine grace) the same
objection, then it must be either because we have not presented the
doctrine which is set forth in Romans 9, or else because human nature has
changed since the apostle’s day. Consider now the remainder of the verse
(19). The apostle repeats the same objection in a slightly
different form—repeats it so that his meaning may not be misunderstood—namely,
"For who hath resisted His will?" It is clear then that the subject
under immediate discussion relates to God’s "will", i.e., His sovereign ways,
which confirms what we have said above upon verses 17 and 18, where we
contended that it is not judicial hardening which is in view (that is,
hardening because of previous rejection of the truth), but sovereign
"hardening", that is, the "hardening" of a fallen and sinful creature for no
other reason than that which inheres in the sovereign will of God. And hence
the question, "Who hath resisted His will?" What then does the
apostle say in reply to these objections?
Verse 20: "Nay but, O man, who art
thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that
formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?" The apostle, then, did not
say the objection was pointless and groundless, instead, he rebukes the
objector for his impiety. He reminds him that he
is merely a "man", a creature, and that as such it is most unseemly and
impertinent for him to "reply (argue, or reason) against God".
Furthermore, he reminds him that he is nothing more than a "thing formed", and
therefore, it is madness and blasphemy to rise up against the Former Himself.
Ere leaving this verse it should be pointed out that its closing words, "Why
hast thou made me thus" help us to determine, unmistakably, the
precise subject under discussion. In the light of the immediate context what
can be the force of the "thus"? What, but as in the case of Esau, why hast
thou made me an object of "hatred"? What, but as in the case of Pharaoh, Why
hast thou made me simply to "harden" me? What other meaning can, fairly,
be assigned to it?
It is highly important to keep clearly
before us that the apostle’s object throughout this passage is to treat of
God’s sovereignty in dealing with, on the one hand, those whom He
loves—vessels unto honor and vessels of mercy, and also, on the other
hand, with those whom He "hates" and "hardens"—vessels unto dishonor and
vessels of wrath.
Verses 21-23: "Hath not the potter
power over the clay, of the same lump, to make one vessel unto honour, and
another unto dishonour? What if God, willing to shew His wrath, and to
make His power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath
fitted to destruction: And that He might make known the riches of His glory on
the vessels of mercy, which He had afore prepared unto glory." In
these verses the apostle furnishes a full and final reply to the objections
raised in verse 19. First, he asks, "Hath not the potter power over the clay?"
etc. It is to be noted the word here translated "power" is a different one in
the Greek from the one rendered "power" in verse 22 where it can only
signify His might; but here in verse 21, the "power" spoken of must
refer to the Creator’s rights or sovereign prerogatives; that
this is so, appears from the fact that the same Greek word is employed
in John 1:12—"As many as received Him, to them gave He power to become the
sons of God"—which, as is well known, means the right or privilege to become
the sons of God. The R. V. employs "right" both in John 1:12 and Romans 9:21.
Verse 21: "Hath not the potter power
over the clay of the same lump, to make one vessel unto honour, and another
unto dishonour?" That the "potter" here is God Himself is certain
from the previous verse, where the apostle asks "Who art thou that repliest
against God?" and then, speaking in the terms of the figure he
was about to use, continues, "Shall the thing formed say to Him that
formed it" etc. Some there are who would rob these words
of their force by arguing that while the human potter makes certain vessels to
be used for less honorable purposes than others, nevertheless, they are
designed to fill some useful place. But the
apostle does not here say, Hath not the potter power over the clay of the same
lump, to make one vessel unto an honorable use and another to a less honorable
use, but he speaks of some "vessels" being made "unto dishonour". It is
true, of course, that God’s wisdom will yet be fully vindicated,
inasmuch as the destruction of the reprobate will promote His glory—in
what way the next verse tells us.
Ere passing to the next verse let us
summarize the teaching of this and the two previous ones. In verse 19 two
questions are asked, "Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth He yet find fault?
For who hath resisted His will?" To those questions a threefold answer
is returned. First, in verse 20 the apostle denies the
creature the right to sit in judgment upon the ways of the Creator—"Nay
but, O man who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say
to Him that formed it, Why hast Thou made me thus?"
The apostle insists that the rectitude of God’s will
must not be questioned. Whatever He
does must be right. Second, in verse 21
the apostle declares that the Creator has the right to dispose of His
creatures as He sees fit—"Hath not the Potter power over the clay, of
the same lump, to make one vessel unto honor, and another unto dishonor?" It
should be carefully noted that the word for "power" here is exousia—an
entirely different word from the one translated "power" in the following verse
("to make known His power"), where it is dunaton. In the words "Hath not the
Potter power over the clay?" it must be God’s power justly exercised,
which is in view—the exercise of God’s rights consistently with His
justice,—because the mere assertion of His omnipotency would be no such
answer as God would return to the questions asked in verse 19. Third, in
verses 22, 23, the apostle gives the reasons why God proceeds
differently with one of His creatures from another: on the one hand, it is to
"shew His wrath" and to "make His power known"; on the other hand, it is to
"make known the riches of His glory."
"Hath not the potter power over the clay
of the same lump, to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?"
Certainly God has the right to do this because He is the Creator.
Does He exercise this right? Yes, as verses 13 and 17 clearly show
us—"For this same purpose have I raised thee (Pharaoh) up".
Verse 22: "What if God, willing to
shew His wrath, and to make His power known, endured with much longsuffering
the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction". Here the apostle tells
us in the second place, why God acts thus, i.e., differently with
different ones—having mercy on some and hardening others, making one vessel
"unto honour" and another "unto dishonour". Observe, that here in verse 22
the apostle first mentions "vessels of wrath", before he refers in verse
23 to the "vessels of mercy". Why is this? The answer to this question is of
first importance: we reply, Because it is the "vessels of wrath"
who are the subjects in view before the objector in verse 19.
Two reasons are given why God makes some "vessels
unto dishonour": first, to "shew His wrath", and secondly "to make His power
known"—both of which were exemplified in the case of Pharaoh.
One point in the
above verse requires separate consideration—"Vessels of wrath fitted to
destruction". The usual explanation which is given of these words is that the
vessels of wrath fit themselves to destruction, that is, fit themselves
by virtue of their wickedness; and it is argued that there is no need for
God to "fit them to destruction", because they are already fitted
by their own depravity, and that this must be the real meaning of this
expression. Now if by "destruction" we understand punishment, it
is perfectly true that the non-elect do "fit themselves", for every one
will be judged "according to his works"; and further, we freely grant that
subjectively the non-elect do fit themselves for destruction. But
the point to be decided is, Is this what the apostle is here referring
to? And, without hesitation, we reply it is not. Go back
to verses 11-13: did Esau fit himself to be an object of God’s hatred,
or was he not such before he was born? Again; did Pharaoh fit
himself for destruction, or did not God harden his heart before the
plagues were sent upon Egypt?—see Exodus 4:21!
Romans 9:22 is clearly a
continuation in thought of verse 21, and verse 21 is part of the
apostle’s reply to the questions raised in verse 20: therefore, to
fairly follow out the figure, it must be God Himself who "fits" unto
destruction the vessels of wrath. Should it be asked how God does this,
the answer, necessarily, is, objectively,—He fits the non-elect unto
destruction by His fore-ordinating decrees. Should it be asked why God
does this, the answer must be, To promote His own glory, i.e., the glory of
His justice, power and wrath. "The sum of the apostle’s
answer here is, that the grand object of God, both in the election and the
reprobation of men, is that which is paramount to all things else in the
creation of men, namely, His own glory"
(Robert Haldane).
Verse 23: "And that He might
make known the riches of His glory on the vessels of mercy, which He had afore
prepared unto glory." The only point in this verse which demands
attention is the fact that the "vessels of mercy" are here said to be "afore
prepared unto glory". Many have pointed out that the previous verse does
not say the vessels of wrath were afore prepared unto destruction, and
from this omission they have concluded that we must understand the reference
there to the non-elect fitting themselves in time, rather than God
ordaining them for destruction from all eternity. But this conclusion by no
means follows. We need to look back to verse 21 and note the figure which is
there employed. "Clay" is inanimate matter, corrupt, decomposed, and
therefore a fit substance to represent fallen humanity. As then
the apostle is contemplating God’s sovereign dealings with humanity in view
of the Fall, He does not say the vessels of wrath were "afore" prepared
unto destruction, for the obvious and sufficient reason that, it was not until
after the Fall that they became (in themselves) what is here
symbolized by the "clay". All that is necessary to refute the erroneous
conclusion referred to above, is to point out that what is said of the vessels
of wrath is not that they are fit for destruction (which is the word
that would have been used if the reference had been to them fitting
themselves by their own wickedness), but fitted
to destruction; which, in the light of the whole context, must mean a
sovereign ordination to destruction by the Creator. We quote here
the pointed words of Calvin on this passage—"There are vessels prepared for
destruction, that is, given up and appointed to destruction; they are also
vessels of wrath, that is, made and formed for this end, that they may
‘be examples of God’s vengeance and displeasure.’ Though in the second clause
the apostle asserts more expressly, that it is God who prepared the elect for
glory, as he had simply said before that the reprobate are vessels prepared
for destruction, there is yet no doubt but that the preparation of both is
connected with the secret counsel of God. Paul might have otherwise said, that
the reprobate gave up or cast themselves into destruction, but he intimates
here, that before they are born they are destined to their lot". With this we
are in hearty accord. Romans 9:22 does not
say the vessels of wrath fitted themselves, nor does it say they are
fit for destruction, instead, it declares they are "fitted to
destruction", and the context shows plainly it is God who thus "fits"
them—objectively by His eternal decrees.
Though Romans 9 contains the fullest
setting forth of the doctrine of Reprobation, there are still other
passages which refer to it, one or two more of which we will now briefly
notice: —
"What then? That which Israel seeketh
for, that he obtained not, but the election obtained it,
and the rest were hardened" (Rom. 11:7 R. V.).
Here we have two distinct and clearly defined classes which are set in sharp
antithesis: the "election" and "the rest"; the one "obtained", the other is
"hardened". On this verse we quote from the comments of John Bunyan of
immortal memory:—"These are solemn words: they sever
between men and men—the election and the rest, the chosen and the left, the
embraced and the refused. By ‘rest’ here must needs be understood those not
elect, because set the one in opposition to the other, and if not elect,
whom then but reprobate?"
Writing to the saints at Thessalonica
the apostle declared "For God hath not appointed us to
wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ" (1 Thess.
5:9). Now surely it is patent to any impartial mind that this statement is
quite pointless if God has not "appointed" any to wrath. To say that
God "hath not appointed us to wrath", clearly
implies that there are some whom He has "appointed to
wrath", and were it not that the minds of so many professing Christians are so
blinded by prejudice, they could not fail to clearly see this.
"A Stone of stumbling, and a Rock or
offence, even to them who stumble at the Word, being disobedient,
whereunto also they were
appointed" (1 Pet. 2:8). The "whereunto" manifestly
points back to the stumbling at the Word, and their disobedience.
Here, then, God expressly affirms that there are
some who have been "appointed" (it is the same Greek word as in 1 Thess.
5:9) unto disobedience. Our business is not to reason about it,
but to bow to Holy Scripture. Our first duty is
not to understand, but to believe what God has said.
"But these, as natural brute beasts,
made to be taken and destroyed, speak evil of
the things that they understand not; and shall utterly perish in their own
corruption" (2 Pet. 2:12). Here, again, every effort is made to escape
the plain teaching of this solemn passage. We are told that it is the "brute
beasts" who are "made to be taken and destroyed", and not the persons here
likened to them. All that is needed to refute such sophistry is to inquire
wherein lies the point of analogy between the "these" (men) and the
"brute beasts"? What is the force of the "as"—but "these as brute
beasts"? Clearly, it is that "these" men as brute beasts, are the ones
who, like animals, are "made to be taken and destroyed": the closing words
confirming this by reiterating the same sentiment—"and
shall utterly perish in their own corruption."
"For there are certain men crept in
unawares, who were before of old ordained to this
condemnation; ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into
lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ"
(Jude 4). Attempts have been made to escape the obvious force of this verse by
substituting a different translation. The R.V. gives: "But there are certain
men crept in privily, even they who were of old written of beforehand
unto this condemnation." But this altered rendering by no means gets rid of
that which is so distasteful to our sensibilities. The question arises,
Where were these "of old written of beforehand"? Certainly not in
the Old Testament, for nowhere is there any reference there to wicked
men creeping into Christian assemblies. If "written of"
be the best translation of "prographo", the reference can only be to
the book of the Divine decrees. So whichever
alternative be selected there can be no evading the fact that certain men are
"before of old" marked out by God "unto condemnation."
"And all that dwell on the earth shall
worship him (viz. the Antichrist), every one whose name
hath not been written from the foundation of the world in the Book of
Life of the Lamb that hath been slain" (Rev. 13:8, R. V. compare Rev.
17:8). Here, then, is a positive statement affirming
that there are those whose names were not written in the Book of
Life. Because of this they shall render allegiance to and bow down
before the Antichrist.
Here, then, are no
less than ten passages which most plainly imply or expressly teach the fact of
reprobation. They affirm that the wicked are made for the Day of Evil;
that God fashions some vessels unto dishonor; and by His eternal decree
(objectively) fits them unto destruction; that they are like brute beasts,
made to be taken and destroyed, being of old ordained unto this condemnation.
Therefore in the face of these scriptures we unhesitatingly affirm (after
nearly twenty years careful and prayerful study of the subject) that the Word
of God unquestionably teaches both Predestination and Reprobation, or to use
the words of Calvin, "Eternal Election is God’s predestination of some to
salvation, and others to destruction".
Having thus stated the doctrine of
Reprobation, as it is presented in Holy Writ, let us now mention one or two
important considerations to guard it against abuse and prevent the reader from
making any unwarranted deductions:—
First, the doctrine of Reprobation does
not mean that God purposed to take innocent creatures, make them wicked, and
then damn them. Scripture says, "God hath made man upright, but they have
sought out many inventions" (Eccl. 7:29). God has not created sinful
creatures in order to destroy them, for God is not to be charged with the sin
of His creatures. The responsibility and criminality is man’s.
God’s decree of Reprobation contemplated
Adam’s race as fallen, sinful, corrupt, guilty. From it God purposed to save a
few as the monuments of His sovereign grace; the others He determined to
destroy as the exemplification of His justice and severity. In determining to
destroy these others, God did them no wrong. They had already fallen in Adam,
their legal representative; they are therefore born with a sinful nature, and
in their sins He leaves them. Nor can they complain. This is as they
wish; they have no desire for holiness; they love darkness rather than
light. Where, then, is there any injustice if God "gives them up to their
own hearts’ lusts" (Ps. 81:12)!
Second, the doctrine of Reprobation does
not mean that God refuses to save those who earnestly seek salvation.
The fact is that the reprobate have no longing for
the Saviour: they see in Him no beauty that they should desire Him.
They will not come to Christ—why then should God force them to? He turns away
none who do come—where then is the injustice of God
fore-determining their just doom? None will be punished but for their
iniquities; where then, is the supposed tyrannical cruelty of the Divine
procedure? Remember that God is the Creator of the wicked, not of their
wickedness; He is the Author of their being, but not the Infuser of their sin.
God does not (as we have been
slanderously reported to affirm) compel the wicked to sin, as the rider spurs
on an unwilling horse. God only says in effect that awful word, "Let them
alone" (Matt. 15:14). He needs only to slacken the reins of providential
restraint, and withhold the influence of saving grace, and apostate man will
only too soon and too surely, of his own accord, fall by his iniquities. Thus
the decree of reprobation neither interferes with the bent of man s own fallen
nature, nor serves to render him the less inexcusable.
Third, the decree of Reprobation in
nowise conflicts with God’s goodness. Though the non-elect are not the objects
of His goodness in the same way or to the same extent as the elect are, yet
are they not wholly excluded from a participation of it. They enjoy the good
things of Providence (temporal blessings) in common with God’s own children,
and very often to a higher degree. But how do they improve them? Does the
(temporal) goodness of God lead them to repent? Nay, verily, they do but
"despise His goodness, and forbearance, and longsuffering, and
after their hardness and impenitency of heart treasure up unto themselves
wrath against the day of wrath" (Rom. 2:4, 5). On what righteous ground, then,
can they murmur against not being the objects of His benevolence in the
endless ages yet to come? Moreover, if it did not clash with God’s mercy and
kindness to leave the entire body of the fallen angels (2 Pet. 2:4)
under the guilt of their apostasy; still less can it clash with the Divine
perfections to leave some of fallen mankind in their sins and punish them for
them.
Finally, let us interpose this necessary
caution: It is utterly impossible for any of us, during the present life, to
ascertain who are among the reprobate. We must not now so judge
any man, no matter how wicked he may be. The vilest sinner, may, for all we
know, be included in the election of grace and be one day quickened by
the Spirit of grace. Our marching orders are plain, and woe be unto us if we
disregard them—"Preach the Gospel to every creature". When we have done
so our skirts are clear. If men refuse to heed, their blood is on their own
heads; nevertheless "we are unto God a sweet savour of Christ, in them that
are saved, and in them that perish. To the one we are a savor of death unto
death; and to the other we are a savour of life unto life" (2 Cor. 2:15, 16).
We must now consider a number of
passages which are often quoted with the purpose of showing that God has
not fitted certain vessels to destruction or ordained certain ones to
condemnation. First, we cite Ezekiel 18:31—"Why will ye die, O house of
Israel?" On this passage we cannot do better than quote from the comments of
Augustas Toplady:—"This is a passage very frequently, but very idly, insisted
upon by Arminians, as if it were a hammer which would at one stroke crush the
whole fabric to powder. But it so happens that the "death" here alluded to is
neither spiritual nor eternal death: as is abundantly evident from the whole
tenor of the chapter. The death intended by the prophet is a political
death; a death of national prosperity, tranquillity, and security. The sense
of the question is precisely this: What is it that makes you in love with
captivity, banishment, and civil ruin? Abstinence from the worship of images
might, as a people, exempt you from these calamities, and once more render you
a respectable nation. Are the miseries of public devastation so alluring as to
attract your determined pursuit? Why will ye die? die as the house of Israel,
and considered as a political body? Thus did the prophet argue the case, at
the same time adding—"For I have no pleasure in the death of him that dieth
saith the Lord God, wherefore, turn yourselves, and live ye." This imports:
First, the national captivity of the Jews added nothing to the happiness of
God. Second, if the Jews turned from idolatry, and flung away their images,
they should not die in a foreign, hostile country, but live peaceably in their
own land and enjoy their liberties as an independent people." To the above we
may add: political death must be what is in view in Ezekiel
18:31, 32 for the simple but sufficient reason that they were already
spiritually dead!
Matthew 25:41 is often quoted to show
that God has not fitted certain vessels to destruction—"Depart from Me,
ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the Devil and his angels." This
is, in fact, one of the principal verses relied upon to disprove the doctrine
of Reprobation. But we submit that the emphatic word here is not "for"
but "Devil." This verse (see context) sets forth the severity of the
judgment which awaits the lost. In other words, the above Scripture expresses
the awfulness of the everlasting fire rather than the subjects
of it—if the fire be "prepared for the Devil and his angels" then how
intolerable it will be! If the place of eternal torment into which the damned
shall be cast is the same as that in which God’s arch-enemy will
suffer, how dreadful must that place be!
Again: if God has chosen only certain
ones to salvation, why are we told that God "now commandeth all men everywhere
to repent" (Acts 17:30)? That God commandeth "all men"
to repent is but the enforcing of His righteous claims as the moral Governor
of the world. How could He do less, seeing that all men everywhere have
sinned against Him? Furthermore; that God commandeth all men everywhere to
repent argues the universality of creature responsibility. But this Scripture
does not declare that it is God’s pleasure to "give repentance" (Acts 5:31) to
all men everywhere. That the apostle Paul did not believe God gave repentance
to every soul is clear from his words in 2 Timothy 2:25—"In meekness
instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure
will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth."
Again, we are asked, if God has
"ordained" only certain ones unto eternal life, then why do we read that He
"will have all men to be saved, and come to the knowledge of the truth"
(1 Tim. 2:4)? The reply is, that the words "all" and "all men", like
the term "world," are often used in a general and relative sense. Let the
reader carefully examine the following passages: Mark 1:5; John 6:45; 8:2;
Acts 21:28; 22:15; 2 Corinthians 3:2 etc., and he will find full proof of our
assertion. 1 Timothy 2:4 cannot teach that God wills the
salvation of all mankind, or otherwise all mankind would be saved—"What
His soul desireth even that He doeth" (Job 23:13)!
Again; we are asked, Does not Scripture
declare, again and again, that God is no "respecter of persons"? We answer, it
certainly does, and God’s electing grace proves it. The seven sons of
Jesse, though older and physically superior to David, are passed by, while the
young shepherd-boy is exalted to Israel’s throne. The scribes and lawyers pass
unnoticed, and ignorant fishermen are chosen to be the apostles of the Lamb.
Divine truth is hidden from the wise and prudent and is revealed to babes
instead. The great majority of the wise and noble are ignored, while the weak,
the base, the despised, are called and saved. Harlots and publicans are
sweetly compelled to come in to the gospel feast, while self-righteous
Pharisees are suffered to perish in their immaculate morality. Truly, God
is "no respecter" of persons or He would not have saved me.
That the Doctrine of Reprobation is a
"hard saying" to the carnal mind is readily acknowledged—yet, is it any
"harder" than that of eternal punishment? That it is clearly taught in
Scripture we have sought to demonstrate, and it is not for us to pick and
choose from the truths revealed in God’s Word. Let those
who are inclined to receive those doctrines which commend themselves to
their judgment, and who reject those which they cannot fully
understand, remember those scathing words of our Lord’s, "O fools, and slow of
heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken" (Luke 24:25): fools
because slow of heart; slow of heart, not dull of head!
Once more we would avail ourselves of
the language of Calvin: "But, as I have hitherto only recited such things as
are delivered without any obscurity or ambiguity in the Scriptures, let
persons who hesitate not to brand with ignominy those Oracles of heaven,
beware what kind of opposition they make. For, if they pretend ignorance, with
a desire to be commended for their modesty, what greater instance of pride can
be conceived, than to oppose one little word to the authority of God! as, ‘It
appears otherwise to me,’ or ‘I would rather not meddle with this subject.’
But if they openly censure, what will they gain by their puny attempts against
heaven? Their petulance, indeed, is no novelty; for in all ages there have
been impious and profane men, who have virulently opposed this doctrine.
But they shall feel the truth of what the Spirit long ago declared by the
mouth of David, that God ‘is clear when He judgeth’ (Ps. 51 :4). David
obliquely hints at the madness of men who display such excessive presumption
amidst their insignificance, as not only to dispute against God, but to
arrogate to themselves the power of condemning Him. In the meantime, he
briefly suggests, that God is unaffected by all the blasphemies which they
discharge against heaven, but that He dissipates the mists of calumny, and
illustriously displays His righteousness; our faith, also, being founded on
the Divine Word, and therefore, superior to all the world, from its exaltation
looks down with contempt upon those mists" (John Calvin).
In closing this chapter we propose to
quote from the writings of some of the standard theologians since the days of
the Reformation, not that we would buttress our own statements by an appeal to
human authority, however venerable or ancient, but in order to show that what
we have advanced in these pages is no novelty of the twentieth century, no
heresy of the ‘latter days’ but, instead, a doctrine which has been definitely
formulated and commonly taught by many of the most pious and scholarly
students of Holy Writ.
"Predestination we call the decree of
God, by which He has determined in Himself, what He would have to become of
every individual of mankind. For they are not all created with a similar
destiny: but eternal life is foreordained for some, and eternal damnation for
others. Every man, therefore, being created for one or the other of these
ends, we say, he is predestinated either to life or to death"—from John
Calvin’s "Institutes" (1536 A. D.) Book III, Chapter XXI entitled "Eternal
Election, or God’s Predestination of Some to Salvation and of Others to
Destruction."
We ask our readers to mark well the
above language. A perusal of it should show that what the present writer has
advanced in this chapter is not "Hyper-Calvinism" but real
Calvinism, pure and simple. Our purpose in making this remark is to show that
those who, not acquainted with Calvin’s writings, in their ignorance
condemn as ultra-Calvinism that which is simply a reiteration of what Calvin
himself taught—a reiteration because that prince of theologians as well as his
humble debtor have both found this doctrine in the Word of God itself.
Martin Luther is his most excellent work
"De Servo Arbitrio" (Free will a Slave), wrote: "All things whatsoever arise
from, and depend upon, the Divine appointments, whereby it was preordained who
should receive the Word of Life, and who should disbelieve it, who should be
delivered from their sins, and who should be hardened in them, who should be
justified and who should be condemned. This is the very truth which razes the
doctrine of freewill from its foundations, to wit, that God’s eternal love of
some men and hatred of others is immutable and cannot be reversed."
John Fox, whose Book of Martyrs was once
the best known work in the English language (alas that it is not so today,
when Roman Catholicism is sweeping upon us like a great destructive tidal
wave!), wrote:—"Predestination is the eternal decreement of God, purposed
before in Himself, what should befall all men, either to salvation, or
damnation".
The "Larger Westminster Catechism"
(1688)—adopted by the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church—declares,
"God, by an eternal and immutable decree, out of His mere love, for the praise
of His glorious grace, to be manifested in due time, hath elected some angels
to glory, and in Christ hath chosen some men to eternal life, and the means
thereof; and also, according to His sovereign power, and the unsearchable
counsel of His own will (whereby He extendeth or withholdeth favor as He
pleases), hath passed by, and fore-ordained the rest to dishonour and
wrath, to be for their sin inflicted, to the praise of the glory of His
justice".
John Bunyan, author of "The Pilgrim’s
Progress," wrote a whole volume on "Reprobation". From it we make one brief
extract:—"Reprobation is before the person cometh into the world, or hath done
good or evil. This is evidenced by Romans 9:11. Here you find twain in their
mother’s womb, and both receiving their destiny, not only before they
had done good or evil, but before they were in a capacity to do it, they being
yet unborn—their destiny, I say, the one unto, the other not unto the blessing
of eternal life; the one elect, the other reprobate; the one chosen, the other
refused". In his "Sighs from Hell", John Bunyan also wrote: "They that do
continue to reject and slight the Word of God are such, for the most part, as
are ordained to be damned".
Commenting upon Romans 9:22,
"What if God willing to shew His wrath, and to make His power known, endured
with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction" Jonathan
Edwards (Vol. 4, p. 306—1743 A.D.) says, "How awful doth the majesty of God
appear in the dreadfulness of His anger! This we may learn to be one end of
the damnation of the wicked."
Augustus Toplady, author of "Rock of
Ages" and other sublime hymns, wrote: "God, from all eternity decreed to leave
some of Adam’s fallen posterity in their sins, and to exclude them from the
participation of Christ and His benefits". And again; "We, with the
Scriptures, assert: That there is a predestination of some particular persons
to life, for the praise of the glory of Divine grace; and also a
predestination of other particular persons to death for the glory of
Divine justice—which death of punishment they shall inevitably undergo, and
that justly, on account of their sins
George Whitefield, that stalwart of the
eighteenth century, used by God in blessing to so many, wrote: "Without doubt,
the doctrine of election and reprobation must stand or fall together. . . . I
frankly acknowledge I believe the doctrine of Reprobation, that God intends to
give saving grace, through Jesus Christ, only to a certain number; and that
the rest of mankind, after the fall of Adam, being justly left of God to
continue in sin, will at last suffer that eternal death which is its
proper wages
"Fitted to destruction" (Rom. 9:22).
After declaring this phrase admits of two interpretations, Dr.
Hodge—perhaps the best known and most widely read commentator on Romans—says,
"The other interpretation assumes that the reference is to God and that the
Greek word for ‘fitted’ has its full participle force; prepared (by
God) for destruction." This, says Dr. Hodge, "Is adopted not
only by the majority of Augustinians, but also by many
Lutherans".
Were it necessary we are prepared to
give quotations from the writings of Wycliffe, Huss, Ridley, Hooper, Cranmer,
Ussher, John Trapp, Thomas Goodwin, Thomas Manton (Chaplain to Cromwell), John
Owen, Witsius, John Gill (predecessor of Spurgeon), and a host of others. We
mention this simply to show that many of the most eminent saints in bye-gone
days, the men most widely used of God, held and taught this doctrine which is
so bitterly hated in these last days, when men will no longer "endure sound
doctrine"; hated by men of lofty pretensions, but who, notwithstanding their
boasted orthodoxy and much advertised piety, are not worthy to unfasten the
shoes of the faithful and fearless servants of God of other days.
"O the depth of
the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are His
judgments and His ways past finding out! For who hath known the mind of the
Lord? or who hath been His counsellor? or who hath first given to Him, and it
shall be recompensed unto him again? For of Him, and through Him, and to Him,
are all things: to whom be glory forever, Amen" (Rom. 11:33-36).[1]
ENDNOTES:
[1]
“Of Him”—His will is the origin of
all existence; “through” or “by Him”—He is the Creator and Controller of all;
“to Him”—all things promote His glory in their final end.
Chapter 6
THE SOVEREIGNTY OF GOD IN OPERATION
"For of Him, and thro’ Him, and to Him, are all things:
to whom be glory for ever. Amen" (Romans 11:36).
Has God foreordained everything that
comes to pass? Has He decreed that what is, was to have been? In the final
analysis this is only another way of asking, Is God now governing the
world and everyone and everything in it? If God is governing the world,
then is He governing it according to a definite purpose, or aimlessly and at
random? If He is governing it according to some purpose, then when was that
purpose made? Is God continually changing His purpose and making a new one
every day, or was His purpose formed from the beginning? Are God’s actions,
like ours, regulated by the change of circumstances, or are they the outcome
of His eternal purpose? If God formed a purpose before man was created, then
is that purpose going to be executed according to His original designs and is
He now working toward that end? What saith the Scriptures? They declare God is
One "who worketh all things after the counsel of His own will" (Eph.
1:11).
Few who read this book are likely to
call into question the statement that God knows and foreknows all things,
but perhaps many would hesitate to go further than this. Yet is it not
self-evident that if God foreknows all things, He has also
fore-ordained all things? Is it not clear that God foreknows what will be
because He has decreed what shall be? God’s foreknowledge is not the
cause of events, rather are events the effects of His eternal purpose.
When God has decreed a thing shall be, He knows it will be. In
the nature of things there cannot be anything known as what shall be, unless
it is certain to be, and there is nothing certain to be unless God has
ordained it shall be. Take the Crucifixion as an illustration. On this
point the teaching of Scripture is as clear as a sunbeam. Christ as the Lamb
whose blood was to be shed, was "foreordained before the foundation of the
world" (1 Pet. 1:20). Having then "ordained" the slaying of the Lamb, God
knew He would be "led to the slaughter", and therefore made it known
accordingly through Isaiah the prophet. The Lord Jesus was not "delivered" up
by God fore-knowing it before it took place, but by His fixed counsel and
fore-ordination (Acts 2:23). Fore-knowledge of future events then is
founded upon God’s decrees, hence if God foreknows everything that is to be,
it is because He has determined in Himself from all eternity everything which
will be—"Known unto God are all His works from the beginning of the world"
(Acts 15:18), which shows that God has a plan, that God did not begin
His work at random or without a knowledge of how His plan would succeed.
God created all things. This truth no
one, who bows to the testimony of Holy Writ, will question; nor would any such
be prepared to argue that the work of creation was an accidental work.
God first formed the purpose to create, and then put forth the creative act in
fulfillment of that purpose. All real Christians will readily adopt the words
of the Psalmist and say, "O Lord, how manifold are Thy works! in wisdom
hast Thou made them all." Will any who endorse what we have just said, deny
that God purposed to govern the world which He created? Surely the
creation of the world was not the end of God’s purpose concerning it.
Surely He did not determine simply to create the world and place man in it.
and then leave both to their fortunes. It must be apparent that God has some
great end or ends in view, worthy of His infinite perfections, and that He is
now governing the world so as to accomplish these ends—"The counsel of the
Lord standeth for ever, the thoughts of His heart to all generations" (Ps.
33:11).
"Remember the former things of old: for
I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like Me,
declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that
are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all My
pleasure" (Isa. 46:9, 10). Many other passages might be adduced to show that
God has many counsels concerning this world and concerning man, and that all
these counsels will most surely be realized. It is only when they are thus
regarded that we can intelligently appreciate the prophecies of Scripture. In
prophecy the mighty God has condescended to take us into the secret chamber of
His eternal counsels, and make known to us what He has purposed to do in the
future. The hundreds of prophecies which are found in the Old and New
Testaments are not so much predictions of what will come to pass, as
they are revelations to us of what God has purposed shall come to pass.
Do we know from prophecy that this present age, like all preceding ones, is to
end with a full demonstration of man’s failure; do we know that there is to be
a universal turning away from the truth, a general apostasy; do we know that
the Antichrist is to be manifested, and that he will succeed in deceiving the
whole world; do we know that Antichrist’s career will be cut short, and an end
made of man’s miserable attempts to govern himself, by the return of God’s
Son; then it is all because these and a hundred other things are included
among God’s eternal decrees, now made known to us in the sure Word of
Prophecy, and because it is infallibly certain that all God has
purposed "must shortly come to pass" (Rev. 1:1).
What then was the great purpose for
which this world and the human race were created? The answer of Scripture is,
"The Lord hath made all things for Himself" (Prov. 16:4). And
again, "Thou hast created all things, and for Thy pleasure they are and
were created" (Rev. 4:11). The great end of creation was the manifestation of
God’s glory. The heavens declare the glory of God and the firmament sheweth
His handiwork; but it was by man, originally made in His own image and
likeness, that God designed chiefly to manifest His glory. But how was the
great Creator to be glorified by man? Before his creation, God foresaw the
fall of Adam and the consequent ruin of his race, therefore He could not have
designed that man should glorify Him by continuing in a state of innocency.
Accordingly, we are taught that Christ was "fore-ordained before the
foundation of the world" to be the Saviour of fallen men. The redemption of
sinners by Christ was no mere after-thought of God: it was no expediency to
meet an unlooked-for calamity. No; it was a Divine provision, and
therefore when man fell, he found mercy walking hand in hand with justice.
From all eternity God designed that our
world should be the stage on which He would display His manifold grace and
wisdom in the redemption of lost sinners: "To the intent that now unto the
principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known by the Church the
manifold wisdom of God, according to the eternal purpose which He
purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord" (Eph. 3:11). For the accomplishment of this
glorious design God has governed the world from the beginning, and will
continue it to the end. It has been well said, "We can never understand the
providence of God over our world, unless we regard it as a complicated machine
having ten thousand parts, directed in all its operations to one glorious
end—the display of the manifold wisdom of God in the salvation of the
Church," i.e., the "called out" ones. Everything else down here is
subordinated to this central purpose. It was the apprehension of this basic
truth that the apostle, moved by the Holy Spirit, was led to write, "Wherefore
I endure all things for the elect’s sake, that they may also
obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory" (2 Tim.
2:10). What we would now contemplate is the operation of God’s
sovereignty in the government of this world.
In regard to the operation of God’s
government over the material world little needs now be said. In
previous chapters we have shown that inanimate matter and all irrational
creatures are absolutely subject to their Creator’s pleasure. While we freely
admit that the material world appears to be governed by laws that are stable
and more or less uniform in their operations, yet Scripture, history, and
observation, compel us to recognize the fact that God suspends these laws and
acts apart from them whenever it pleaseth Him to do so. In sending His
blessings or judgments upon His creatures He may cause the sun itself to stand
still, and the stars in their courses to fight for His people (Judges 5:20) He
may send or withhold "the early and the latter rains" according to the
dictates of His own infinite wisdom; He may smite with plague or bless with
health; in short, being God, being absolute Sovereign, He is bound and tied by
no laws of Nature, but governs the material world as seemeth Him best.
But what of God’s government of the
human family? What does Scripture reveal in regard to the modus
operandi of the operations of His governmental administration over
mankind? To what extent and by what influences does God control the sons of
men? We shall divide our answer to this question into two parts and consider
first God’s method of dealing with the righteous, His elect; and then His
method of dealing with the wicked.
God’s Method of Dealing with the
Righteous:
1. God exerts upon His own elect a
quickening influence or power.
By nature they are spiritually dead,
dead in trespasses and sins, and their first need is spiritual life, for
"Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God" (John
3:3). In the new birth God brings us from death unto life (John 5:24). He
imparts to us His own nature (2 Pet. 1:4). He delivers us from the
power of darkness and translates us into the kingdom of His dear Son (Col.
1:13). Now, manifestly, we could not do this ourselves, for we were "without
strength" (Rom. 5:6), hence it is written, "we are His workmanship
created in Christ Jesus" (Eph. 2:10).
In the new birth we are made partakers
of the Divine nature: a principle, a "seed," a life, is communicated to us
which is "born of the Spirit," and therefore "is spirit;" is born of
the Holy Spirit, and therefore is holy. Apart from this Divine and holy
nature which is imparted to us at the new birth, it is utterly impossible for
any man to generate a spiritual impulse, form a spiritual concept, think a
spiritual thought, understand spiritual things, still less engage in spiritual
works. "Without holiness no man shall see the Lord," but the natural man has
no desire for holiness, and the provision that God has made he does not want.
Will then a man pray for, seek for, strive after, that which he dislikes?
Surely not. If then a man does "follow after" that which by nature he
cordially dislikes, if he does now love the One he once hated, it is because a
miraculous change has taken place within him; a power outside of himself has
operated upon him, a nature entirely different from his old one has been
imparted to him, and hence it is written, "Therefore if any man be in Christ,
he is a new creation: old things are passed away, behold all things are
become new" (2 Cor. 5:17). Such an one as we have just described has
passed from death unto life, has been turned from darkness to light, and from
the power of Satan unto God (Acts 26:18). In no other way can the great change
be accounted for.
The new birth is very, very much more
than simply shedding a few tears due to a temporary remorse over sin. It is
far more than changing our course of life, the leaving off of bad habits and
the substituting of good ones. It is something different from the mere
cherishing and practicing of noble ideals. It goes infinitely deeper than
coming forward to take some popular evangelist by the hand, signing a
pledge-card, or "joining the church." The new birth is no mere turning over a
new leaf, but is the inception and reception of a new life. It is no mere
reformation but a Complete transformation. In short, the new birth is a
miracle, the result of the supernatural operation of God. It is radical,
revolutionary, lasting.
Here then is the first thing, in time,
which God does in His own elect. He lays hold of those who are spiritually
dead and quickens them into newness of life. He takes up one who was shapen in
iniquity and conceived in sin, and conforms him to the image of His Son. He
seizes a captive of the Devil and makes him a member of the household of
faith. He picks up a beggar and makes him joint-heir with Christ. He comes to
one who is full of enmity against Him, and gives him a new heart that is full
of love for Him. He stoops to one who by nature is a rebel, and works in him
both to will and to do of His good pleasure. By His irresistible power He
transforms a sinner into a saint, an enemy into a friend, a slave of the Devil
into a child of God. Surely then we are moved to say,
"When all Thy mercies O my God
My wondering soul surveys,
Transported with the view I’m lost
In wonder, love and praise."
2. God exerts upon His own elect
an energizing influence or power.
The apostle prayed to God for the
Ephesian saints that the eyes of their understanding might be enlightened in
order that, among other things, they might know "what is the exceeding
greatness of His power to usward who believe" (Eph. 1:18), and
that they might be "strengthened with might "by His Spirit in the inner man"
(3:16). It is thus that the children of God are enabled to fight the good
fight of faith, and battle with the adverse forces which constantly war
against them. In themselves they have no strength: they are but "sheep," and
sheep are one of the most defenceless animals there is; but the promise is
sure—"He giveth power to the faint, and to them that have no might He
increaseth strength" (Isa. 40:29).
It is this energizing power that God
exerts upon and within the righteous which enables them to serve Him
acceptably. Said the prophet of old, "But truly I am full of power by the
Spirit of the Lord" (Micah 3:8). And said our Lord to His apostles,
"Ye shall receive power after that the Holy Spirit is come upon you"
(Acts 1:8), and thus it proved, for of these same men we read subsequently,
"And with great power gave the apostles witness of the resurrection of the
Lord Jesus: and great grace was upon them all" (Acts 4:33). So it was, too,
with the apostle Paul, "And my speech and my preaching was not with enticing
words of man’s wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power" (1
Cor. 2:4). But the scope of this power is not confined to service, for we read
in 2 Peter 1:3, "According as His Divine power bath given unto us all
things that pertain unto life and godliness, through the knowledge of Him
that hath called us to glory and virtue." Hence it is that the various graces
of the Christian character, "love, joy, peace, long-suffering, gentleness,
goodness, faith, meekness, temperance," are ascribed directly to God Himself,
being denominated "the fruit of the Spirit" (Gal. 5:22).
Compare Ephesians 5:9.
3. God exerts upon His own elect a
directing influence or power.
Of old He led His people across the
wilderness, and directing their steps by a pillar of cloud by day and a pillar
of fire by night; and today He still directs His saints, though now from
within rather than from without. "For this God is our God for ever and
ever: He will be our Guide even unto death" (Ps. 48:14), but He
"guides" us by working in us both to will and to do of His good pleasure. That
He does so guide us is clear from the words of the apostle in Ephesians
2:10—"For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works,
which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them." Thus
all ground for boasting is removed, and God gets all the glory, for with the
prophet we have to say, "Lord, Thou wilt ordain peace for us: for Thou also
hast wrought all our works in us" (Isa. 26:12). How true then that
"A man’s heart deviseth his way: hut the Lord directeth his steps"
(Prov. 16:9)! Compare Psalm 65:4, Ezekiel 36:27.
4. God exerts upon His own elect a
preserving influence or power.
Many are the scriptures which set forth
this blessed truth. "He preserveth the souls of His saints; He delivereth them
out of the hand of the wicked" (Ps. 97:10). "For the Lord loveth judgment, and
forsaketh not His saints; they are preserved for ever: but the seed of
the wicked shall be cut off" (Ps. 37:28). "The Lord preserveth all them
that love Him: but all the wicked will He destroy" (Ps. 145:20). It is
needless to multiply texts or to raise an argument at this point respecting
the believer’s responsibility and faithfulness—we can no more "persevere"
without God preserving us, than we can breathe when God ceases to give us
breath; we are "kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation
ready to be revealed in the last time" (1 Pet. 1:5). Compare 1 Chronicles
18:6. It remains for us now to consider,
God’s Method of Dealing with the Wicked:
In contemplating God’s governmental
dealings with the non-elect we find that He exerts upon them a fourfold
influence or power. We adopt the clear-cut divisions suggested by Dr. Rice:
1. God exerts upon the wicked a
restraining influence by which they are prevented from doing what
they are naturally inclined to do.
A striking example of this is seen in
Abimelech king of Gerar. Abraham came down to Gerar and fearful lest he might
be slain on account of his wife he instructed her to pose as his sister.
Regarding her as an unmarried woman, Abimelech sent and took Sarah unto
himself; and then we learn how God put forth His power to protect her
honor—"And God said unto him in a dream, Yea, I know that thou didst this in
the integrity of thy heart; for I also withheld thee from sinning against
Me: therefore suffered I thee not to touch her" (Gen. 20:6).
Had not God interposed, Abimelech would have grievously wronged Sarah, but the
Lord restrained him and allowed him not to carry out the intentions of his
heart.
A similar instance is found in
connection with Joseph and his brethren’s treatment of Him. Owing to Jacob’s
partiality for Joseph, his brethren "hated him," and when they thought they
had him in their power, "they conspired against him to slay him" (Gen.
37:18). But God did not allow them to carry out their evil designs. First He
moved Reuben to deliver him out of their hands, and next he caused Judah to
suggest that Joseph should be sold to the passing Ishmaelites, who carried him
down into Egypt. That it was God who thus restrained them is clear from
the words of Joseph himself, when some years later he made known himself to
his brethren: said he, "So now it was not you that sent me hither, but God"
(Gen. 45:8)!
The restraining influence which God
exerts upon the wicked was strikingly exemplified in the person of Balaam, the
prophet hired by Balak to curse the Israelites. One cannot read the inspired
narrative without discovering that, left to himself, Balaam had readily and
certainly accepted the offer of Balak. How evidently God restrained the
impulses of his heart is seen from his own acknowledgment—"How shall I curse,
whom God hath not cursed? or how shall I defy, whom the Lord hath not defied?
Behold I have received commandment to bless: and He bath blessed; and I
cannot reverse it" (Num. 23:8, 20).
Not only does God exert a restraining
influence upon wicked individuals, but He does so upon whole peoples as well.
A remarkable illustration of this is found in Ex. 34:24—"For I will cast out
the nations before thee, and enlarge thy borders: neither shall any man
desire thy land, when thou shalt go up to appear before the Lord thy God
thrice in the year." Three times every male Israelite, at the command of God,
left his home and inheritance and journeyed to Jerusalem to keep the Feasts of
the Lord; and in the above scripture we learn He promised them that, while
they were at Jerusalem, He would guard their unprotected homes by
restraining the covetous designs and desires of their heathen neighbors.
2. God exerts upon the wicked a
softening influence disposing them contrary to their natural
inclinations to do that which will promote His cause.
Above, we referred to Joseph’s history
as an illustration of God exerting a restraining influence upon the
wicked, let us note now his experiences in Egypt as exemplifying our assertion
that God also exerts a softening influence upon the unrighteous. We are
told that while he was in the house of Potiphar, "The Lord was with Joseph,
and his master saw the Lord was with him," and in consequence, "Joseph found
favor in his sight and he made him overseer over his house" (Gen. 39:3, 4).
Later, when Joseph was unjustly cast into prison, we are told, "But the Lord
was with Joseph, and shewed him mercy, and gave him favor in the sight of
the keeper of the prison" (Gen. 39:21), and in consequence the
prison-keeper shewed him much kindness and honor. Finally, after his release
from prison, we learn from Acts 7:10 that the Lord "gave him favor and
wisdom in the sight of Pharaoh king of Egypt; and he made him governor
over Egypt and all his house."
An equally striking evidence of God’s
power to melt the hearts of his enemies, was seen in Pharaoh’s daughter’s
treatment of the infant Moses. The incident is well known. Pharaoh had issued
an edict commanding the destruction of every male child of the Israelites. A
certain Levite had a son born to him who for three months was kept hidden by
his mother. No longer able to conceal the infant Moses, she placed him in an
ark of bulrushes, and laid him by the river’s brink. The ark was discovered by
none less than the king’s daughter who had come down to the river to bathe,
but instead of heeding her father’s wicked decree and casting the child into
the river, we are told that "she hod compassion on him" (Ex.
2:6)! Accordingly, the young life was spared and later Moses became the
adopted son of this princess!
God has access to the hearts of all men
and He softens or hardens them according to His sovereign purpose. The profane
Esau swore vengeance upon his brother for the deception which he had practiced
upon his father, yet when next he met Jacob, instead of slaying him we are
told that Esau "fell on his neck and kissed him" (Gen. 32:4)! Ahab, the weak
and wicked consort of Jezebel, was highly enraged against Elijah the prophet,
at whose word the heavens had been shut up for three years and a half: so
angry was he against the one whom he regarded as his enemy that, we are told
he searched for him in every nation and kingdom, and when he could not be
found "he took an oath" (1 Kings 18:10). Yet, when they met, instead of
killing the prophet, Ahab meekly obeyed Elijah’s behest and "sent unto all the
children of Israel and gathered the prophets together unto Mount Carmel" (v.
20). Again; Esther the poor Jewess is about to enter the
presence-chamber of the august Medo-Persian monarch which, said she, "is not
according to the law" (Est. 4:16). She went in expecting to "perish," but we
are told "She obtained favor in his sight, and the king held out to
Esther the golden scepter" (5:2). Yet again; the boy Daniel is a captive in a
foreign court. The king "appointed" a daily provision of meat and drink for
Daniel and his fellows. But Daniel purposed in his heart that he would not
defile himself with the allotted portion, and accordingly made known his
purpose to his master, the prince of the eunuchs. What happened? His master
was a heathen, and "feared" the king. Did he turn then upon Daniel and angrily
demand that his orders be promptly carried out? No; for we read, "Now God
had brought Daniel into favor and tender love with the prince of the eunuchs"
(Dan. 1:9)!
"The king’s heart is in the hand of the
Lord, as the rivers of water: He turneth it whithersoever He will" (Prov.
21:1). A remarkable illustration of this is seen in Cyrus, the heathen king of
Persia. God’s people were in captivity, but the predicted end of their
captivity was almost reached. Meanwhile the Temple at Jerusalem lay in ruins,
and, as we have said, the Jews were in bondage in a distant land. What hope
was there then that the Lord’s house would be re-built? Mark now what God did,
"Now in the first year of Cyrus king of Persia, that the word of the Lord by
the mouth of Jeremiah might be fulfilled, the Lord stirred up the spirit of
Cyrus king of Persia, that he made a proclamation throughout all his
kingdom, and put it in writing, saying, Thus saith Cyrus king of Persia, The
Lord God of heaven hath given me all the kingdoms of the earth; and He hath
charged me to build Him a house at Jerusalem, which is in Judah" (Ezra 1:1,
2). Cyrus, be it remembered, was a pagan, and as secular history bears
witness, a very wicked man, yet the Lord moved him to issue this edict, that
His Word through Jeremiah seventy years before might be fulfilled. A similar
and further illustration is found in Ezra 7:27, where we find Ezra
returning thanks for what God had caused king Artaxerxes to do in completing
and beautifying the house which Cyrus had commanded to be erected—"Blessed be
the Lord God of our fathers which hath put such a thing as this in the
king’s heart, to beautify the house of the Lord which is in Jerusalem"
(Ezra 7:27).
3. God exerts upon the wicked a
directing influence so that good is made to result from their intended
evil.
Once more we revert to the history of
Joseph as a case in point. In selling Joseph to the Ishmaelites, his brethren
were actuated by cruel and heartless motives. Their object was to make away
with him, and the passing of these travelling traders furnished an easy way
out for them. To them the act was nothing more than the enslaving of a noble
youth for the sake of gain. But now observe how God was secretly working and
over-ruling their wicked actions. Providence so ordered it that these
Ishmaelites passed by just in time to prevent Joseph being murdered, for his
brethren had already taken counsel together to put him to death. Further;
these Ishmaelites were journeying to Egypt, which was the very country to
which God had purposed to send Joseph, and He ordained they
should purchase Joseph just when they did. That the hand of God was in this
incident, that it was something more than a fortunate co-incidence, is clear
from the words of Joseph to his brethren at a later date, "God sent me
before you to preserve you a posterity in the earth, and to save your lives by
a great deliverance" (Gen. 45:7).
Another equally striking illustration of
God directing the wicked is found in Isaiah 10:5-7—"O Assyrian, the rod
of Mine anger, and the staff in their hand is Mine indignation. I will send
him against a hypocritical nation, and against the people of My wrath will
I give him a charge, to take the spoil, and to take the prey, and to tread
them down like the mire of the streets. Howbeit he meaneth not so, neither
doth his heart think so; but it is in his heart to destroy and cut off
nations not a few." Assyria’s king had determined to be a world-conqueror, to
"cut off nations not a few." But God directed and controlled his
military lust and ambition, and caused him to confine his attention to the
conquering of the insignificant nation of Israel. Such a task was not in the
proud king’s heart—"he meant it not so"—but God gave him this charge
and he could do nothing but fulfill it. Compare also Judges 7:22.
The supreme example of the controlling,
directing influence, which God exerts upon the wicked, is the Cross of
Christ with all its attending circumstances. If ever the superintending
providence of God was witnessed, it was there. From all eternity God had
predestined every detail of that event of all events. Nothing was left to
chance or the caprice of man. God had decreed when and where and how His
blessed Son was to die. Much of what He had purposed concerning the
Crucifixion had been made known through the Old Testament prophets, and in the
accurate and literal fulfillment of these prophecies we have clear
proof, full demonstration, of the controlling and directing influence which
God exerts upon the wicked. Not a thing occurred except as God had ordained,
and all that He had ordained took place exactly as He purposed. Had it
been decreed (and made known in Scripture) that the Saviour should be betrayed
by one of His own disciples—by His "familiar friend"—see Psalm 41:9 and
compare Matthew 26:50—then the apostle Judas is the one who sold Him. Had it
been decreed that the betrayer should receive for his awful perfidy thirty
pieces of silver, then are the chief priests moved to offer him this very sum.
Had it been decreed that this betrayal sum should be put to a particular use,
namely, purchase the potter’s field, then the hand of God directs Judas to
return the money to the chief priests and so guided their "counsel" (Matt.
27:7) that they did this very thing. Had it been decreed that there
should be those who bore "false witness" against our Lord (Ps. 35:11), then
accordingly such were raised up. Had it been decreed that the Lord of glory
should be "spat upon and scourged" (Is. 50:6), then there were not found
wanting those who were vile enough to do so. Had it been decreed that the
Saviour should be "numbered with the transgressors," then unknown to himself,
Pilate, directed by God, gave orders for His crucifixion along with two
thieves. Had it been decreed that vinegar and gall should be given Him to
drink while He hung upon the Cross, then this decree of God was executed to
the very letter. Had it been decreed that the heartless soldiers should gamble
for His garments, then sure enough they did this very thing. Had it been
decreed that not a bone of Him should be broken (Ps. 34:20), then the
controlling hand of God which suffered the Roman soldier to break the legs of
the thieves, prevented him from doing the same with our Lord. Ah! there were
not enough soldiers in all the Roman legions, there were not sufficient demons
in all the hierarchies of Satan, to break one bone in the body of Christ. And
why? Because the Almighty Sovereign had decreed that not a bone should be
broken. Do we need to extend this paragraph any farther? Does not the
accurate and literal fulfillment of all that Scripture had predicted in
connection with the Crucifixion, demonstrate beyond all controversy that an
Almighty power was directing and superintending everything that
was done on that Day of days?
4. God also hardens the hearts of
wicked men and blinds their minds.
"God hardens men’s hearts! God
blinds men’s minds!" Yes, so Scripture represents Him. In developing this
theme of the sovereignty of God in Operation we recognize that we have now
reached its most solemn aspect of all, and that here especially, we need to
keep very close indeed to the words of Holy Writ. God forbid that we should go
one fraction further than His Word goes; but may He give us grace to go
as far as His Word goes. It is true that secret things belong unto the
Lord, but it is also true that those things which are revealed in Scripture
belong unto us and to our children.
"He turned their heart to hate
His people, to deal subtly with His servants" (Ps. 105:25).
The reference here is to the sojourn of the descendants of Jacob in the land
of Egypt when, after the death of the Pharaoh who had welcomed the old
patriarch and his family, there "arose up a new king who knew not Joseph;" and
in his days the children of Israel had "increased greatly" so that they
outnumbered the Egyptians; then it was that God "turned their heart to hate
His people."
The consequence of the Egyptians’
"hatred" is well known: they brought them into cruel bondage and placed them
under merciless taskmasters, until their lot became unendurable. Helpless and
wretched the Israelites cried unto Jehovah, and in response, He appointed
Moses to be their deliverer. God revealed Himself unto His chosen servant,
gave him a number of miraculous signs which he was to exhibit at the Egyptian
court, and then bade him go to Pharaoh, and demand that the Israelites should
be allowed to go a three days journey into the wilderness, that they might
worship the Lord. But before Moses started out on his journey God warned him
concerning Pharaoh, "I will harden his heart that he shall not let the
people go" (Ex. 4:21). If it be asked, Why did God harden Pharaoh’s
heart? the answer furnished by Scripture itself is, In order that God might
show forth His power in him (Rom. 9:17); in other words, it was so that
the Lord might demonstrate that it was just as easy for Him to overthrow this
haughty and powerful monarch as it was for Him to crush a worm. If it should
be pressed further, Why did God select such a method of displaying His
power? then the answer must be, that being sovereign God reserves to Himself
the right to act as He pleases.
Not only are we told that God hardened
the heart of Pharaoh so that he would not let the Israelites go, but after God
had plagued his land so severely that he reluctantly gave a qualified
permission, and after that the first-born of all the Egyptians had been slain,
and Israel had actually left the land of bondage, God told Moses, "And I,
behold, I will harden the hearts of the Egyptians, and they shall
follow them: and I will get Me honor upon Pharaoh, upon his chariots, and upon
his horsemen. And the Egyptians shall know that I am the Lord, when I have
gotten Me honor upon Pharaoh, upon his chariots, and upon his horsemen" (Ex.
14:17, 18).
The same thing happened subsequently in
connection with Sihon king of Heshbon, through whose territory Israel had to
pass on their way to the promised Land. When reviewing their history, Moses
told the people, "But Sihon king of Heshbon would not let us pass by him:
for the Lord thy God hardened his spirit, and made his heart obstinate,
that He might deliver him into thy hand" (Deut. 2:30)!
So it was also after that Israel had
entered Canaan. We read, "There was not a city that made peace with the
children of Israel, save the Hivites the inhabitants of Gibeon: all other they
took in battle. For it was of the Lord to harden their hearts, that they
should come against Israel in battle, that He might destroy them utterly,
and that they might have no favor, but that He might destroy them, as the Lord
commanded Moses" (Josh. 11:19,20). From other scriptures we learn why God
purposed to "destroy utterly" the Canaanites—it was because of their awful
wickedness and corruption.
Nor is the revelation of this solemn
truth confined to the Old Testament. In John 12:37-40 we read, "But though He
had done so many miracles before them, yet they believed not on Him: that
(in order that) the saying of Isaiah the prophet might be fulfilled,
which he spake, Lord, who hath believed our report? and to whom hath the
arm of the Lord been revealed? Therefore they could not believe,
because that Isaiah said again, HE hath blinded their eyes, and hardened
their heart; that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with
their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them." It needs to be
carefully noted here that these whose eyes God "blinded" and whose heart He
"hardened," were men who had deliberately scorned the Light and rejected the
testimony of God’s own Son.
Similarly we read in 2
Thessalonians 2:11, 12, "And for this cause God shall send them
strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: that they all might be
damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness". The
fulfillment of this scripture is yet future. What God did unto the Jews of old
He is yet going to do unto Christendom. Just as the Jews of Christ’s day
despised His testimony, and in consequence, were "blinded," so a guilty
Christendom which has rejected the Truth shall yet have sent them from God a
"strong delusion" that they may believe a lie.
Is God really governing the world? Is He
exercising rule over the human family? What is the modus operandi of
His governmental administration over mankind? To what extent and by what means
does He control the sons of men? How does God exercise an influence
upon the wicked, seeing their hearts are at enmity against Him? These are some
of the questions we have sought to answer from Scripture in the previous
sections of this chapter. Upon His own elect God exerts a quickening, an
energizing, a directing, and a preserving power. Upon the wicked God exerts a
restraining, softening, directing, and hardening and blinding power, according
to the dictates of His own infinite wisdom and unto the outworking of His own
eternal purpose. God’s decrees are being executed. What He has ordained
is being accomplished. Man’s wickedness is bounded. The limits of
evil-doing and of evil-doers has been Divinely defined and cannot be exceeded.
Though many are in ignorance of it, all men, good and bad, are under the
jurisdiction of and are absolutely subject to the administration of the
Supreme Sovereign.—"Alleluia: for the Lord God omnipotent reigneth" (Rev.
19:6)—reigneth over all.
Chapter 7
THE SOVEREIGNTY OF GOD AND THE HUMAN WILL
"It is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of
His good pleasure"
Philippians 2:13
Concerning the nature and the power of
fallen man s will, the greatest confusion prevails today, and the most
erroneous views are held, even by many of God’s children. The popular idea now
prevailing, and which is taught from the great majority of pulpits, is that
man has a "free will", and that salvation comes to the sinner through his
will co-operating with the Holy Spirit. To deny the "free will" of man,
i.e. his power to choose that which is good, his native ability to accept
Christ, is to bring one into disfavor at once, even before most of those who
profess to be orthodox. And yet Scripture emphatically says, "It is not
of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that showeth mercy"
(Rom. 9:16). Which shall we believe: God, or the preachers?
But some one may reply, Did not Joshua
say to Israel, "Choose you this day whom ye will serve"? Yes, he did; but why
not complete his sentence?—"whether the gods that your fathers
served which were on the other side of the flood, or the gods of the
Amorites, in whose land ye dwell" (Josh. 24:15)! But why attempt to pit
scripture against scripture? The Word of God never contradicts itself,
and the Word expressly declares, "There is none that seeketh after God"
(Rom. 3:11). Did not Christ say to the men of His day, "Ye will not
come to Me, that ye might have life" (John 5:40)? Yes, but some did
"come" to Him, some did receive Him. True and who were they? John 1:12,
13 tells us; "But as many as received Him, to them gave He power to become the
sons of God, to them that believe on His name: which were born, not of
blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of
God"!
But does not Scripture say, "Whosoever
will may come"? It does, but does this signify that everybody has the will
to come? What of those who won’t come? "Whosoever will may come" no
more implies that fallen man has the power (in himself) to come, than
"Stretch forth thine hand" implied that the man with the withered arm had
ability (in himself) to comply. In and of himself the natural man has power to
reject Christ; but in and of himself he has not the power to receive Christ.
And why? Because he has a mind that is "enmity against" Him (Rom. 8:7);
because he has a heart that hates Him (John 15:18). Man chooses that which is
according to his nature, and therefore before he will ever choose or prefer
that which is divine and spiritual, a new nature must be imparted to him; in
other words, he must be born again.
Should it be asked, But does not the
Holy Spirit overcome a man’s enmity and hatred when He convicts the
sinner of his sins and his need of Christ; and does not the Spirit of God
produce such conviction in many that perish? Such language betrays confusion
of thought: were such a man’s enmity really "overcome", then he
would readily turn to Christ; that he does not come to the Saviour,
demonstrates that his enmity is not overcome. But that many are, through the
preaching of the Word, convicted by the Holy Spirit, who nevertheless die in
unbelief, is solemnly true. Yet, it is a fact which must not be lost sight of
that, the Holy Spirit does something more in each of God’s elect than
He does in the non-elect: He works in them "both to will and to do of God’s
good pleasure" (Phil. 2:13).
In reply to what we have said above,
Arminians would answer, No; the Spirit’s work of conviction is the same both
in the converted and in the unconverted, that which distinguishes the one
class from the other is that the former yielded to His strivings,
whereas the latter resist them. But if this were the case, then
the Christian would make himself to "differ", whereas the Scripture
attributes the "differing" to God’s discriminating grace (1 Cor. 4:7). Again;
if such were the case, then the Christian would have ground for
boasting and self-glorying over his cooperation with the Spirit; but
this would flatly contradict Ephesians 2:8, "For by grace are ye saved through
faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God".
Let us appeal to the actual experience
of the Christian reader. Was there not a time (may the remembrance of it bow
each of us into the dust) when you were unwilling to come to Christ? There
was. Since then you have come to Him. Are you now prepared to give Him
all the glory for that (Ps. 115:1)? Do you not acknowledge you came to
Christ because the Holy Spirit brought you from unwillingness to willingness?
You do. Then is it not also a patent fact that the Holy Spirit has not done in
many others what He has in you! Granting that many others have heard
the Gospel, been shown their need of Christ, yet, they are still unwilling to
come to Him. Thus He has wrought more in you, than in them. Do you
answer, Yet I remember well the time when the Great Issue was presented to me,
and my consciousness testifies that my will acted and that I yielded to the
claims of Christ upon me. Quite true. But before you "yielded", the
Holy Spirit overcame the native enmity of your mind against God, and this
"enmity" He does not overcome in all. Should it be said, That is because they
are unwilling for their enmity to be overcome. Ah, none are thus "willing"
till He has put forth His all-mighty power and wrought a miracle of
grace in the heart.
But let us now inquire, What is
the human Will? Is it a self-determining agent, or is it, in turn, determined
by something else? Is it sovereign or servant? Is the will superior to every
other faculty of our being so that it governs them, or is it moved by their
impulses and subject to their pleasure? Does the will rule the mind, or does
the mind control the will? Is the will free to do as it pleases, or is it
under the necessity of rendering obedience to something outside of itself?
"Does the will stand apart from the other great faculties or powers of the
soul, a man within a man, who can reverse the man and fly against the
man and split him into segments, as a glass snake breaks in pieces? Or, is the
will connected with the other faculties, as the tail of the serpent is with
his body, and that again with his head, so that where the head goes, the whole
creature goes, and, as a man thinketh in his heart, so is he?
First thought, then heart (desire or aversion), and then act. Is it this way,
the dog wags the tail? Or, is it the will, the tail, wags the dog? Is the will
the first and chief thing in the man, or is it the last thing—to be kept
subordinate, and in its place beneath the other faculties? and, is the true
philosophy of moral action and its process that of Gen. 3:6: ‘And when the
woman saw that the tree was good for food’ (sense-perception, intelligence),
‘and a tree to be desired’ (affections), ‘she took and ate thereof’ (the
will)." (G. S. Bishop). These are questions of more than academical interest.
They are of practical importance. We believe that we do not go too far when we
affirm that the answer returned to these questions is a fundamental test of
doctrinal soundness.[1]
1. The Nature of the Human Will.
What is the Will? We answer, the will is
the faculty of choice, the immediate cause of all action. Choice necessarily
implies the refusal of one thing and the acceptance of another. The positive
and the negative must both be present to the mind before there can be any
choice. In every act of the will there is a preference—the desiring of one
thing rather than another. Where there is no preference, but complete
indifference, there is no volition. To will is to choose, and to choose is to
decide between two or more alternatives. But there is something which
influences the choice; something which determines the decision.
Hence the will cannot be sovereign because it is the servant of that
something. The will cannot be both sovereign and servant. It cannot be both
cause and effect. The will is not causative, because, as we have said,
something causes it to choose, therefore that something must be the
causative agent. Choice itself is affected by certain considerations, is
determined by various influences brought to bear upon the individual
himself, hence, volition is the effect of these considerations and
influences, and if the effect, it must be their servant; and if the
will is their servant then it is not sovereign, and if the will is not
sovereign, we certainly cannot predicate absolute "freedom" of it. Acts of the
will cannot come to pass of themselves—to say they can, is to postulate an
uncaused effect. Ex nihilo nihil fit—nothing cannot produce
something.
In all ages, however, there have been
those who contended for the absolute freedom or sovereignty of the human will.
Men will argue that the will possesses a self-determining power. They
say, for example, I can turn my eyes up or down, the mind is quite indifferent
which I do, the will must decide. But this is a contradiction in terms. This
case supposes that I choose one thing in preference to another, while I am in
a state of complete indifference. Manifestly, both cannot be true. But it may
be replied, the mind was quite indifferent until it came to have a preference.
Exactly; and at that time the will was quiescent, too! But the moment
indifference vanished, choice was made, and the fact that indifference gave
place to preference, overthrows the argument that the will is capable of
choosing between two equal things. As we have said, choice implies the
acceptance of one alternative and the rejection of the other or others.
That which determines the will is that
which causes it to choose. If the will is determined, then there must be a
determiner. What is it that determines the will? We reply, The
strongest motive power which is brought to bear upon it. What this motive
power is, varies in different cases. With one it may be the logic of reason,
with another the voice of conscience, with another the impulse of the
emotions, with another the whisper of the Tempter, with another the power of
the Holy Spirit; whichever of these presents the strongest motive power
and exerts the greatest influence upon the individual himself,
is that which impels the will to act. In other words, the action of the will
is determined by that condition of mind (which in turn is influenced by the
world, the flesh, and the Devil, as well as by God), which has the greatest
degree of tendency to excite volition. To illustrate what we have just said
let us analyze a simple example—On a certain Lord’s day afternoon a friend of
ours was suffering from a severe headache. He was anxious to visit the sick,
but feared that if he did so his own condition would grow worse, and as the
consequence, be unable to attend the preaching of the Gospel that evening. Two
alternatives confronted him: to visit the sick that afternoon and risk being
sick himself, or, to take a rest that afternoon (and visit the sick the next
day), and probably arise refreshed and fit for the evening service. Now what
was it that decided our friend in choosing between these two alternatives? The
will? Not at all. True, that in the end, the will made a choice,
but the will itself was moved to make the choice. In the above case
certain considerations presented strong motives for selecting either
alternative; these motives were balanced the one against the other by the
individual himself, i.e., his heart and mind, and the one alternative
being supported by stronger motives than the other, decision was formed
accordingly, and then the will acted. On the one side, our friend felt
impelled by a sense of duty to visit the sick; he was moved with compassion to
do so, and thus a strong motive was presented to his mind. On the other hand,
his judgment reminded him that he was feeling far from well himself, that he
badly needed a rest, that if he visited the sick his own condition would
probably be made worse, and in such case he would be prevented from attending
the preaching of the Gospel that night; furthermore, he knew that on the
morrow, the Lord willing, he could visit the sick, and this being so, he
concluded he ought to rest that afternoon. Here then were two sets of
alternatives presented to our Christian brother: on the one side was a sense
of duty plus his own sympathy, on the other side was a sense of his own need
plus a real concern for God’s glory, for he felt that he ought to
attend the preaching of the Gospel that night. The latter prevailed. Spiritual
considerations outweighed his sense of duty. Having formed his decision the
will acted accordingly, and he retired to rest. An analysis of the above case
shows that the mind or reasoning faculty was directed by spiritual
considerations, and the mind regulated and controlled the will. Hence we say
that, if the will is controlled, it is neither sovereign nor free, but
is the servant of the mind.
It is only as we see the real nature of
freedom and mark that the will is subject to the motives brought to bear upon
it, that we are able to discern there is no conflict between two statements of
Holy Writ which concern our blessed Lord. In Matthew 4:1 we read, "Then was
Jesus led up of the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted of the
Devil;" but in Mark 1:12, 13 we are told, "And immediately the Spirit
driveth Him into the wilderness. And He was there in the wilderness forty
days, tempted of Satan". It is utterly impossible to harmonize these two
statements by the Arminian conception of the will. But really there is no
difficulty. That Christ was "driven", implies it was by a forcible motive or
powerful impulse, such as was not to be resisted or refused; that He was "led"
denotes His freedom in going. Putting the two together we learn, that He was
driven, with a voluntary condescension thereto. So, there is the
liberty of man’s will and the victorious efficacy of God’s grace united
together: a sinner may be "drawn" and yet "come" to Christ—the "drawing"
presenting to him the irresistible motive, the "coming" signifying the
response of his will—as Christ was "driven" and "led" by the Spirit into the
wilderness.
Human philosophy insists that it is the
will which governs the man, but the Word of God teaches that it is the
heart which is the dominating center of our being. Many scriptures might
be quoted in substantiation of this. "Keep thy heart with all diligence; for
out of it are the issues of life" (Prov. 4:23). "For from within,
out of the heart of men, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications,
murders," etc. (Mark 7:21). Here our Lord traces these sinful
acts back to their source, and declares that their fountain is the "heart,"
and not the will! Again; "This people draweth nigh unto Me with their lips,
but their heart is far from Me" (Matt. 15:8). If further proof were
required we might call attention to the fact that the word "heart" is found in
the Bible more than three times oftener than is the word "will," even though
nearly half of the references to the latter refer to God’s will!
When we affirm that it is the heart
and not the will which governs the man, we are not merely striving about
words, but insisting on a distinction that is of vital importance. Here is an
individual before whom two alternatives are placed; which will he choose? We
answer, the one which is most agreeable to himself, i.e., his "heart"—the
innermost core of his being. Before the sinner is set a life of virtue and
piety, and a life of sinful indulgence; which will he follow? The latter. Why?
Because this is his choice. But does that prove the will is sovereign? Not at
all. Go back from effect to cause. Why does the sinner choose a life of
sinful indulgence? Because he prefers it—and he does prefer it,
all arguments to the contrary notwithstanding, though of course he does not
enjoy the effects of such a course. And why does he prefer it? Because
his heart is sinful. The same alternatives, in like manner, confront
the Christian, and he chooses and strives after a life of piety and virtue.
Why? Because God has given him a new heart or nature. Hence we say it
is not the will which makes the sinner impervious to all appeals to
"forsake his way," but his corrupt and evil heart. He will not come to
Christ, because be does not want to, and he does not want to because
his heart hates Him and loves sin: see Jeremiah 17 :9!
In defining the will we have said above,
that "the will is the faculty of choice, the immediate cause of all action."
We say the immediate cause, for the will is not the primary cause of
any action, any more than the hand is. Just as the hand is controlled by the
muscles and nerves of the arm, and the arm by the brain; so the will is the
servant of the mind, and the mind, in turn, is affected by various influences
and motives which are brought to bear upon it. But, it may be asked, Does not
Scripture make its appeal to man’s will? Is it not written, "And
whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely" (Rev. 22:17)?
And did not our Lord say, "ye will not come to Me that ye might
have life" (John 5:40)? We answer; the appeal of Scripture is not always made
to man’s "will"; other of his faculties are also addressed. For example: "He
that hath ears to hear, let him hear." "Hear and your soul shall
live." "Look unto Me and be ye saved." "Believe on the Lord
Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved." "Come now and let us reason
together," "with the heart man believeth unto righteousness," etc.,
etc.
2. The Bondage of the Human Will.
In any treatise that proposes to deal
with the human will, its nature and functions, respect should be had to the
will in three different men, namely, unfallen Adam, the sinner, and the Lord
Jesus Christ. In unfallen Adam the will was free, free in both
directions, free toward good and free toward evil. Adam was created in a state
of Innocency, but not in a state of holiness, as is so often assumed
and asserted. Adam’s will was therefore in a condition of moral equipoise:
that is to say, in Adam there was no constraining bias in him toward
either good or evil, and as such, Adam differed radically from all his
descendants, as well as from "the Man Christ Jesus." But with the sinner it is
far otherwise. The sinner is born with a will that is not in a
condition of moral equipoise, because in him there is a heart that is
"deceitful above all things and desperately wicked," and this gives him a
bias toward evil. So, too, with the Lord Jesus it was far otherwise: He
also differed radically from unfallen Adam. The Lord Jesus Christ could not
sin because He was "the Holy One of God." Before He was born into this
world it was said to Mary, "The Holy Spirit shall come upon thee, and the
power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that Holy Thing
which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God" (Luke 1:35).
Speaking reverently then, we say, that the will of the Son of Man was not
in a condition of moral equipoise, that is, capable of turning toward
either good or evil. The will of the Lord Jesus was biased toward that
which is good because, side by side with His sinless, holy, perfect
humanity, was His eternal Deity. Now in contradistinction from the will of the
Lord Jesus which was biased toward good, and Adam’s will which, before his
fall, was in a condition of moral equipoise—capable of turning toward either
good or evil—the sinner’s will is biased toward evil, and
therefore is free in one direction only, namely, in the direction of evil. The
sinner’s will is enslaved because it is in bondage to and is the
servant of a depraved heart.
In what does the sinner’s freedom
consist? This question is naturally suggested by what we have just said above.
The sinner is ‘free’ in the sense of being unforced from without. God
never forces the sinner to sin. But the sinner is not free to do
either good or evil, because an evil heart within is ever inclining him
toward sin. Let us illustrate what we have in mind. I hold in my hand a book.
I release it; what happens? It falls. In which direction? Downwards; always
downwards. Why? Because, answering the law of gravity, its own weight sinks
it. Suppose I desire that book to occupy a position three feet higher; then
what? I must lift it; a power outside of that book must raise it. Such is the
relationship which fallen man sustains toward God. Whilst Divine power upholds
him, he is preserved from plunging still deeper into sin; let that power be
withdrawn, and he falls—his own weight (of sin) drags him down. God does not
push him down, anymore than I did that book. Let all Divine restraint be
removed, and every man is capable of becoming, would become, a Cain, a
Pharaoh, a Judas. How then is the sinner to move heavenwards? By an act of his
own will? Not so. A power outside of himself must grasp hold of him and lift
him every inch of the way. The sinner is free, but free in one
direction only—free to fall, free to sin. As the Word expresses it: "For when
ye were the servants of sin, ye were free from righteousness" (Rom.
6:20). The sinner is free to do as he pleases, always as he pleases (except as
he is restrained by God), but his pleasure is to sin.
In the opening paragraph of this chapter
we insisted that a proper conception of the nature and function of the will is
of practical importance, nay, that it constitutes a fundamental test of
theological orthodoxy or doctrinal soundness. We wish to amplify this
statement and attempt to demonstrate its accuracy. The freedom or bondage of
the will was the dividing line between Augustinianism and Pelagianism, and in
more recent times between Calvinism and Arminianism. Reduced to simple terms,
this means, that the difference involved was the affirmation or denial of the
total depravity of man. In taking the affirmative we shall now consider,
3. The Impotency of the Human Will.
Does it lie within the province of man’s
will to accept or reject the Lord Jesus Christ as Saviour? Granted that the
Gospel is preached to the sinner, that the Holy Spirit convicts him of his
lost condition, does it, in the final analysis, lie within the power of his
own will to resist or to yield himself up to God? The answer to this question
defines our conception of human depravity. That man is a fallen creature all
professing Christians will allow, but what many of them mean by "fallen" is
often difficult to determine. The general impression seems to be that man is
now mortal, that he is no longer in the condition in which he left the hands
of his Creator, that he is liable to disease, that he inherits evil
tendencies; but, that if he employs his powers to the best of his ability,
somehow he will be happy at last. O, how far short of the sad truth!
Infirmities, sickness, even corporeal death, are but trifles in comparison
with the moral and spiritual effects of the Fall! It is only by consulting the
Holy Scriptures that we are able to obtain some conception of the extent of
that terrible calamity.
When we say that man is totally
depraved, we mean that the entrance of sin into the human constitution has
affected every part and faculty of man’s being. Total depravity means that man
is, in spirit and soul and body, the slave of sin and the captive of the
Devil—walking "according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit
that now worketh in the children of disobedience" (Eph. 2 :2). This
statement ought not to need arguing: it is a common fact of human experience.
Man is unable to realize his own aspirations and materialize his own
ideals. He cannot do the things that he would. There is a moral
inability which paralyzes him. This is proof positive that he is no free man,
but instead, the slave of sin and Satan. "Ye are of your father the Devil, and
the lusts (desires) of your father ye will do" (John 8:44). Sin is more than
an act or a series of acts; it is a state or condition: it is that which lies
behind and produces the acts. Sin has penetrated and permeated the whole of
man’s make-up. It has blinded the understanding, corrupted the heart, and
alienated the mind from God. And the will has not escaped. The will is
under the dominion of sin and Satan. Therefore, the will is not free. In
short, the affections love as they do and the will chooses as it does because
of the state of the heart, and because the heart is deceitful above all
things and desperately wicked "There is none that seeketh after
God" (Rom. 3:11).
We repeat our question; Does it lie
within the power of the sinner’s will to yield himself up to God? Let us
attempt an answer by asking several others: Can water (of itself) rise above
its own level? Can a clean thing come out of an unclean? Can the will reverse
the whole tendency and strain of human nature? Can that which is under the
dominion of sin originate that which is pure and holy? Manifestly not. If ever
the will of a fallen and depraved creature is to move Godwards, a Divine power
must be brought to bear upon it which will overcome the influences of sin that
pull in a counter direction. This is only another way of saying, "No man can
come to Me, except the Father which hath sent Me, draw him"
(John 6:44). In other words, God’s people must be made willing in the
day of His power (Ps. 110:3). As said Mr. Darby, "If Christ came to save that
which is lost, free will has no place. Not that God prevents men from
receiving Christ—far from it. But even when God uses all possible inducements,
all that is capable of exerting influence in the heart of man, it only serves
to show that man will have none of it, that so corrupt is his heart, and so
decided his will not to submit to God (however much it may be the devil who
encourages him to sin) that nothing can induce him to receive the Lord, and to
give up sin. If by the words, ‘freedom of man,’ they mean that no one forces
him to reject the Lord, this liberty fully exists. But if it is said that, on
account of the dominion of sin, of which he is the slave, and that
voluntarily, he cannot escape from his condition, and make choice of the
good—even while acknowledging it to be good, and approving of it—then he
has no liberty whatever (italics ours). He is not subject to the law,
neither indeed can be; hence, they that are in the flesh cannot please God."
The will is not sovereign; it is a servant, because influenced and controlled
by the other faculties of man’s being. The sinner is not a free agent because
he is a slave of sin—this was clearly implied in our Lord’s words, "If the Son
shall therefore make you free, ye shall be free indeed" (John 8:36).
Man is a rational being and as such responsible and accountable to God, but to
affirm that he is a free moral agent is to deny that he is totally
depraved—i.e., depraved in will as in everything else. Because man’s will
is governed by his mind and heart, and because these have been vitiated and
corrupted by sin, then it follows that if ever man is to turn or move in a
Godward direction, God Himself must work in him "both to will and to do
of His good pleasure" (Phil. 2:13). Man’s boasted freedom is in truth "the
bondage of corruption"; he "serves divers lusts and pleasures." Said a
deeply taught servant of God, "Man is impotent as to his will. He has no will
favorable to God. I believe in free will; but then it is a will only free
to act according to nature (italics ours). A dove has no will to eat
carrion; a raven no will to eat the clean food of the dove. Put the nature of
the dove into the raven and it will eat the food of the dove. Satan could have
no will for holiness. We speak it with reverence, God could have no will for
evil. The sinner in his sinful nature could never have a will according to
God. For this he must be born again" (J. Denham Smith). This is just what we
have contended for throughout this chapter—the will is regulated by the
nature.
Among the "decrees" of the Council of
Trent (1563), which is the avowed standard of Popery, we find the following:—
"If any one shall affirm, that man’s
free-will, moved and excited by God, does not, by consenting, co-operate with
God, the mover and exciter, so as to prepare and dispose itself
for the attainment of justification; if moreover, anyone shall say,
that the human will cannot refuse complying, if it pleases, but that it
is inactive, and merely passive; let such an one be accursed"!
"If anyone shall affirm, that since the
fall of Adam, man’s free-will is lost and extinguished; or, that it is
a thing titular, yea a name, without a thing, and a fiction introduced by
Satan into the Church; let such an one be accursed"!
Thus, those who today insist on the
free-will of the natural man believe precisely what Rome teaches on the
subject! That Roman Catholics and Arminians walk hand in hand may be seen from
others of the decrees issued by the Council of Trent:—"If any one shall affirm
that a regenerate and justified man is bound to believe that he is certainly
in the number of the elect (which, 1 Thess. 1:4, 5 plainly teaches. A.W.P.)
let such an one be accursed"! "If any one shall affirm with positive and
absolute certainty, that he shall surely have the gift of perseverance to the
end (which John 10:28-30 assuredly guarantees, A.W.P.); let him be accursed"!
In order for any sinner to be saved
three things were indispensable: God the Father had to purpose his
salvation, God the Son had to purchase it, God the Spirit has to
apply it. God does more than "propose" to us: were He only to
"invite", every last one of us would be lost. This is strikingly illustrated
in the Old Testament. In Ezra 1:1-3 we read, "Now in the first year of Cyrus
king of Persia, that the word of the Lord by the mouth of Jeremiah might be
fulfilled, the Lord stirred up the spirit of Cyrus king of Persia, that he
made a proclamation throughout all his kingdom, and put it also in writing
saying, Thus saith Cyrus king of Persia, the Lord God of heaven hath given me
all the kingdoms of the earth, and He hath charged me to build Him an house at
Jerusalem, which is in Judah. Who is there among you of all His people? his
God be with him, and let him go up to Jerusalem which is in Judah, and build
the house of the Lord God of Israel." Here was an "offer" made,
made to a people in captivity, affording them opportunity to leave and return
to Jerusalem—God’s dwelling-place. Did all Israel eagerly respond to
this offer? No indeed. The vast majority were content to remain in the enemy’s
land. Only an insignificant "remnant" availed themselves of this overture of
mercy! And why did they? Hear the answer of Scripture: "Then
rose up the chief of the fathers of Judah and Benjamin, and the priests, and
the Levites, with all whose spirit God had stirred up, to go up to
build the house of the Lord which is in Jerusalem" (Ezra I :5) ! In like
manner, God "stirs up" the spirits of His elect when the effectual call
comes to them, and not till then do they have any willingness to
respond to the Divine proclamation.
The superficial work of many of the
professional evangelists of the last fifty years is largely responsible for
the erroneous views now current upon the bondage of the natural man,
encouraged by the laziness of those in the pew in their failure to "prove
all things" (1 Thess. 5:21). The average evangelical pulpit conveys the
impression that it lies wholly in the power of the sinner whether or not he
shall be saved. It is said that "God has done His part, now man must do his."
Alas, what can a lifeless man do, and man by nature is "dead in
trespasses and sins" (Eph. 2:1)! If this were really believed, there would be
more dependence upon the Holy Spirit to come in with His miracle-working
power, and less confidence in our attempts to "win men for Christ."
When addressing the unsaved, preachers
often draw an analogy between God’s sending of the Gospel to the sinner, and a
sick man in bed, with some healing medicine on a table by his side: all he
needs to do is reach forth his hand and take it. But in order for this
illustration to be in any wise true to the picture which Scripture gives us of
the fallen and depraved sinner, the sick man in bed must be described as one
who is blind (Eph. 4:18) so that he cannot see the medicine, his hand
paralyzed (Rom. 5:6) so that he is unable to reach forth for it, and his heart
not only devoid of all confidence in the medicine but filled with hatred
against the physician himself (John 15:18). O what superficial views of man’s
desperate plight are now entertained! Christ came here not to help those who
were willing to help themselves, but to do for His people what they were
incapable of doing for themselves: "To open the blind eyes, to bring out the
prisoners from the prison, and them that sit in darkness out of the prison
house" (Isa. 42:7).
Now in conclusion let us anticipate and
dispose of the usual and inevitable objection—Why preach the Gospel if man
is powerless to respond? Why bid the sinner come to Christ if sin has so
enslaved him that he has no power in himself to come? Reply:—We do not
preach the Gospel because we believe that men are free moral agents,
and therefore capable of receiving Christ, but we preach it because we are
commanded to do so (Mark 16:15); and though to them that perish it is
foolishness, yet, "unto us which are saved it is the power of God"
(1 Cor. 1:18). "The foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness
of God is stronger than men" (1 Cor. 1:25). The sinner is dead in trespasses
and sins (Eph. 2:1), and a dead man is utterly incapable of willing anything,
hence it is that "they that are in the flesh (the unregenerate) cannot please
God" (Rom. 8:8).
To fleshly wisdom it appears the height
of folly to preach the Gospel to those that are dead, and therefore
beyond the reach of doing anything themselves. Yes, but God’s ways are
different from ours. It pleases God "by the foolishness of preaching to
save them that believe" (1 Cor. 1:21). Man may deem it folly to prophesy to "dead
bones" and to say unto them, "O, ye dry bones, hear the Word of the
Lord" (Ezek. 37:4). Ah! but then it is the Word of the Lord, and the
words He speaks "they are spirit, and they are life" (John 6:63). Wise
men standing by the grave of Lazarus might pronounce it an evidence of
insanity when the Lord addressed a dead man with the words, "Lazarus,
Come forth." Ah! but He who thus spake was and is Himself the Resurrection and
the Life, and at His word even the dead live! We go forth to preach the
Gospel, then, not because we believe that sinners have within themselves the
power to receive the Saviour it proclaims, but because the Gospel itself is
the power of God unto salvation to everyone that believeth, and because we
know that "as many as were ordained to eternal life" (Acts 13:48), shall
believe (John 6:37; 10:16—note the "shall’s"!) in God’s appointed time,
for it is written, "Thy people shall be willing in the day of Thy
power" (Ps. 110:3)!
What we have set forth in this chapter
is not a product of "modern thought"; no indeed, it is at direct variance with
it. It is those of the past few generations who have departed so far
from the teachings of their scripturally-instructed fathers. In the
thirty-nine Articles of the Church of England we read, "The condition of man
after the fall of Adam is such, that he cannot turn and prepare himself by his
own natural strength and good works to faith, and calling upon God: Wherefore
we have no power to do good works, pleasant and acceptable to God,
without the grace of God by Christ preventing us (being before-hand with us),
that we may have a good will, and working with us, when we have that good
will" (Article 10). In the Westminster Catechism of Faith (adopted by the
Presbyterians) we read, "The sinfulness of that state whereinto man fell,
consisteth in the guilt of Adam’s first sin, the wont of that righteousness
wherein he was created, and the corruption of his nature, whereby he is
utterly indisposed, disabled, and made opposite unto all that is
spiritually good, and wholly inclined to all evil, and that
continually" (Answer to question 25). So in the Baptists’ Philadelphian
Confession of Faith, 1742, we read, "Man, by his fall into a state of
sin, hath wholly lost all ability of will to any spiritual good
accompanying salvation; so as a natural man, being altogether averse from
good, and dead in sin, is not able by his own strength to convert himself, or
to prepare himself thereunto" (Chapter 9).
[1]
Since writing the above we have
read an article by the late J. N. Darby entitled, “Man’s so-called freewill,”
that opens with these words: “This re-appearance of the doctrine of freewill
serves to support that of the pretension of the natural man to be not
irremediably fallen, for this is what such doctrine tends to. All who have
never been deeply convicted of sin, all persons in whom this conviction is
based on gross external sins, believe more or less in freewill.”
Chapter 8
GOD’S SOVEREIGNTY AND HUMAN RESPONSIBILITY
"So then every one of us shall give account of himself to
God"
Romans 14:12
In our last chapter we considered at
some length the much debated and difficult question of the human will. We have
shown that the will of the natural man is neither sovereign nor free but,
instead, a servant and slave. We have argued that a right conception of the
sinner’s will— its servitude— is essential to a just estimate of his
depravity and ruin. The utter corruption and degradation of human nature is
something which man hates to acknowledge, and which he will hotly and
insistently deny, until he is "taught of God." Much, very much, of the unsound
doctrine which we now hear on every hand is the direct and logical outcome of
man’s repudiation of God’s expressed estimate of human depravity. Men are
claiming that they are "increased with goods, and have need of nothing," and
know not that they are "wretched and miserable, and poor, and blind, and
naked" (Rev. 3:17). They prate about the ‘Ascent of Man,’ and deny his Fall.
They put darkness for light and light for darkness. They boast of the ‘free
moral agency’ of man when, in fact, he is in bondage to sin and enslaved by
Satan—"taken captive by him at his will" (2 Tim. 2:26).
But if the natural man is not a ‘free moral agent,’ does it also follow
that he is not accountable?
‘Free moral agency’ is an expression of
human invention and, as we have said before, to talk of the freedom of the
natural man is to flatly repudiate his spiritual ruin. Nowhere does Scripture
speak of the freedom or moral ability of the sinner, on the contrary, it
insists on his moral and spiritual inability.
This is, admittedly, the most difficult
branch of our subject. Those who have ever devoted much study to this theme
have uniformly recognized that the harmonizing of God’s Sovereignty with Man’s
Responsibility is the gordian knot[1] of theology.
The main difficulty encountered is to
define the relationship between God’s sovereignty and man’s
responsibility. Many have summarily disposed of the difficulty by denying its
existence. A certain class of theologians, in their anxiety to maintain man’s
responsibility, have magnified it beyond all due proportions, until God’s
sovereignty has been lost sight of, and in not a few instances flatly denied.
Others have acknowledged that the Scriptures present both the
sovereignty of God and the responsibility of man, but affirm that in our
present finite condition and with our limited knowledge it is impossible
to reconcile the two truths, though it is the bounden duty of the believer
to receive both. The present writer believes that it has been too readily
assumed that the Scriptures themselves do not reveal the several points
which show the conciliation of God’s sovereignty and man’s responsibility.
While perhaps the Word of God does not clear up all the mystery (and this is
said with reserve), it does throw much light upon the problem, and it
seems to us more honoring to God and His Word to prayerfully search the
Scriptures for the complete solution of the difficulty, and even though others
have thus far searched in vain, that ought only to drive us more and
more to our knees. God has been pleased to reveal many things out of His Word
during the last century which were hidden from earlier students. Who then dare
affirm that there is not much to be learned yet respecting our present
inquiry!
As we have said above, our chief
difficulty is to determine the meeting-point of God’s sovereignty and
man’s responsibility. To many it has seemed that for God to assert His
sovereignty, for Him to put forth His power and exert a direct
influence upon man, for Him to do anything more than warn or invite, would be
to interfere with man’s freedom, destroy his responsibility, and reduce him to
a machine. It is sad indeed to find one like the late Dr. Pierson—whose
writings are generally so scriptural and helpful—saying, "It is a tremendous
thought that even God Himself cannot control my moral frame, or constrain my
moral choice. He cannot prevent me defying and denying Him, and would not
exercise His power in such directions if He could, and could not if He would"
(A Spiritual Clinique). It is sadder still to discover that many other
respected and loved brethren are giving expression to the same sentiments.
Sad, because directly at variance with the Holy Scriptures.
It is our desire to face honestly the
difficulties involved, and to examine them carefully in what light God has
been pleased to grant us. The chief difficulties might be expressed thus:
first, How is it possible for God to so bring His power to bear upon men that
they are prevented from doing what they desire to do, and impelled
to do other things they do not desire to do, and yet to preserve their
responsibility? Second, How can the sinner be held responsible for the
doing of what he is unable to do? And how can he be justly condemned
for not doing what he could not do? Third, How is it possible
for God to decree that men shall commit certain sins, hold them
responsible in the committal of them, and adjudge them guilty
because they committed them? Fourth, How can the sinner be held
responsible to receive Christ, and be damned for rejecting Him, when God had
foreordained him to condemnation? We shall now deal with these several
problems in the above order. May the Holy Spirit Himself be our Teacher, so
that in His light we may see light.
I. How is it possible for God to so bring His power to
bear upon men that they are PREVENTED from doing what they desire to do, and
IMPELL to do other things they do not desire to do, and yet to preserve
their responsibility?
It would seem that if God put forth His
power and exerted a direct influence upon men their freedom would be
interfered with. It would appear that if God did anything wore than
warn and invite men their responsibility would be infringed upon. We are told
that God must not coerce man, still less compel him, or otherwise he would be
reduced to a machine. This sounds very plausible; it appears to be good
philosophy, and based upon sound reasoning; it has been almost universally
accepted as an axiom in ethics; nevertheless, it is refuted by Scripture!
Let us turn first to Genesis 20:6—"And
God said unto him in a dream, Yea, I know that thou didst this in the
integrity of thy heart; for I also withheld thee from sinning against
Me: therefore suffered I thee not to touch her." It is argued, almost
universally, that God must not interfere with man’s liberty, that he
must not coerce or compel him, lest he be reduced to a machine. But the
above scripture proves, unmistakably proves, that it is not impossible
for God to exert His power upon man without destroying his responsibility.
Here is a case where God did exert His power, restrict man’s freedom,
and prevent him from doing that which he otherwise would have done.
Ere turning from this scripture, let us
note how it throws light upon the case of the first man. Would-be
philosophers, who sought to be wise above that which was written, have argued
that God could not have prevented Adam’s fall without reducing him to a
mere automaton. They tell us, constantly, that God must not coerce or compel
His creatures, otherwise He would destroy their accountability. But the answer
to all such philosophizing is, that Scripture records a number of instances
where we are expressly told God did prevent certain of His creatures
from sinning both against Himself and against His people, in view of which all
men’s reasonings are utterly worthless. If God could "withhold" Abimelech from
sinning against Him, then why was He unable to do the same with Adam?
Should someone ask, Then why did not God do so? we might return the
question by asking, Why did not God "withhold" Satan from falling? or, Why did
not God "withhold" the Kaiser from starting the recent War? The usual reply
is, as we have said, God could not without interfering with man’s
"freedom" and reducing him to a machine. But the case of Abimelech proves
conclusively that such a reply is untenable and erroneous—we might add
wicked and blasphemous, for who are we to limit the Most
High! How dare any finite creature take it upon him to say what the Almighty
can and cannot do? Should we be pressed further as to why God
refused to exercise His power and prevent Adam’s fall, we should say,
Because Adam’s fall better served His own wise and blessed purpose—among other
things, it provided an opportunity to demonstrate that where sin had abounded
grace could much more abound. But we might ask further; Why did God place in
the garden the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, when He foresaw
that man would disobey His prohibition and eat of it; for mark, it was
God and not Satan who made that tree. Should someone respond, Then is God the
Author of Sin? We would have to ask, in turn, What is meant by "Author"?
Plainly it was God’s will that sin should enter this world,
otherwise it would not have entered, for nothing happens save as God
has eternally decreed. Moreover, there was more than a bare permission,
for God only permits that which He has purposed. But we leave now the origin
of sin, insisting once more, however, that God could have "withheld"
Adam from sinning without destroying his responsibility.
The case of Abimelech does not stand
alone. Another illustration of the same principle is seen in the history of
Balaam, already noticed in the last chapter, but concerning which a
further word is in place. Balak the Moabite sent for this heathen prophet to
"curse" Israel. A handsome reward was offered for his services, and a careful
reading of Numbers 22-24 will show that Balaam was willing, yea,
anxious, to accept Balak’s offer and thus sin against God and His people. But
Divine power "withheld" him. Mark his own admission, "And Balaam said unto
Balak, Lo, I am come unto thee: have I now any power at all to say
anything? the word that God putteth in my mouth, that shall I
speak" (Num. 22:38). Again, after Balak had remonstrated with Balaam,
we read, "He answered and said, Must I not take heed to speak that which the
Lord hath put in my mouth? . . . Behold, I have received commandment to bless:
and He hath blessed; and I cannot reverse it" (23:12, 20).
Surely these verses show us God’s power, and Balaam’s powerlessness: man’s
will frustrated, and God’s will performed. But was Balaam’s "freedom" or
responsibility destroyed? Certainly not, as we shall yet seek to show.
One more illustration: "And the fear of
the Lord fell upon all the kingdoms of the lands that were round about Judah,
so that they made no war against Jehoshaphat" (2 Chron.
17:10). The implication here is clear. Had not the "fear of the Lord"
fallen upon these kingdoms, they would have made war upon Judah.
God’s restraining power alone prevented them. Had their own will been
allowed to act, "war" would have been the consequence. Thus we see that
Scripture teaches that God "withholds" nations as well as individuals, and
that when it pleaseth Him to do so He interposes and prevents war. Compare
further Genesis 35:5.
The question which now demands our
consideration is, How is it possible for God to "withhold" men from sinning
and yet not to interfere with their liberty and responsibility—a question
which so many say is incapable of solution in our present finite condition.
This question causes us to ask, In what does moral "freedom," real moral
freedom, consist? We answer, it is the being delivered from the bondage
of sin. The more any soul is emancipated from the thralldom of sin, the
more does he enter into a state of freedom—"If the Son therefore shall make
you free, ye shall be free indeed" (John 8:36). In the above
instances God "withheld" Abimelech, Balaam, and the heathen kingdoms from
sinning, and therefore we affirm that He did not in anywise interfere with
their real freedom. The nearer a soul approximates to sinlessness, the
nearer does he approach to God’s holiness. Scripture tells us that God "cannot
lie," and that He "cannot be tempted," but is He any the
less free because He cannot do that which is evil? Surely not. Then is
it not evident that the more man is raised up to God, and the more he be
"withheld" from sinning, the greater is his real freedom!
A pertinent example setting forth the
meeting-place of God’s sovereignty and man’s responsibility, as it relates
to the question of moral freedom, is found in connection with the giving to us
of the Holy Scriptures. In the communication of His Word God was pleased to
employ human instruments, and in the using of them He did not reduce them to
mere mechanical amanuenses: "Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the
Scripture is of any private interpretation (Greek: of its own origination).
For the prophecy came not at any time by the will of man: but holy men of God
spake moved by the Holy Spirit" (2 Pet. 1:20, 21). Here
we have man’s responsibility and God’s sovereignty placed in juxtaposition.
These holy men were moved" (Greek: "borne along") by the Holy Spirit, yet was
not their moral responsibility disturbed nor their "freedom" impaired. God
enlightened their minds, enkindled their hearts, revealed to them His truth,
and so controlled them that error on their part was, by Him, made
impossible, as they communicated His mind and will to men. But what was it
that might have, would have, caused error, had not God controlled as He
did the instruments which He employed? The answer is sin, the sin which was in
them. But as we have seen, the holding in check of sin, the preventing of the
exercise of the carnal mind in these "holy men," was not a destroying
of their "freedom," rather was it the inducting of them into real freedom.
A final word should be added here
concerning the nature of true liberty. There are three chief things
concerning which men in general greatly err: misery and happiness, folly and
wisdom, bondage and liberty. The world counts none miserable but the
afflicted, and none happy but the prosperous, because they judge by
the present ease of the flesh. Again; the world is pleased with a false show
of wisdom (which is "foolishness" with God), neglecting that which makes wise
unto salvation. As to liberty, men would be at their own disposal, and live as
they please. They suppose the only true liberty is to be at the command and
under the control of none above themselves, and live according to their
heart’s desire. But this is a thralldom and bondage of the worst kind. True
liberty is not the power to live as we please, but to live as we ought!
Hence, the only One Who has ever trod this earth since Adam’s fall that has
enjoyed perfect freedom was the Man Christ Jesus, the Holy Servant of God,
Whose meat it ever was to do the will of the Father.
We now turn to consider the question.
II. How can the sinner be held responsible FOR the doing
of what he is UNABLE to do? And how can he be justly condemned for NOT DOING
what he COULD NOT do?
As a creature the natural man is
responsible to love, obey, and serve God; as a sinner he is responsible
to repent and believe the Gospel. But at the outset we are confronted with the
fact that the natural man is unable to love and serve God, and that the
sinner, of himself, cannot repent and believe. First, let us prove what
we have just said. We begin by quoting and considering John 6:44 "No man
can come to Me, except the Father which bath sent Me draw him". The heart
of the natural man (every man) is so "desperately wicked" that if he is left
to himself he will never ‘come to Christ.’ This statement would not be
questioned if the full force of the words "Coming to Christ" were properly
apprehended. We shall therefore digress a little at this point to define and
consider what is implied and involved in the words "No man can come to Me"—cf.
John 5:40, "Ye will not come to Me that ye might have life."
For the sinner to come to Christ that he
might have life, is for him to realize the awful danger of his situation; is
for him to see that the sword of Divine justice is suspended over his head; is
to awaken to the fact that there is but a step betwixt him and death, and that
after death is the "judgment; " and in consequence of this discovery, is for
him to be in real earnest to escape, and in such earnestness
that he shall flee from the wrath to come, cry unto God for
mercy, and agonize to enter in at the "strait gate."
To come to Christ for life, is for the
sinner to feel and acknowledge that he is utterly destitute of any claim upon
God’s favor; is to see himself as "without strength," lost and undone; is to
admit that he is deserving of nothing but eternal death, thus taking side with
God against himself; it is for him to cast himself into the dust before God,
and humbly sue for Divine mercy.
To come to Christ for life, is for the
sinner to abandon his own righteousness and be ready to be made the
righteousness of God in Christ; it is to disown his own wisdom and be guided
by His; it is to repudiate his own will and be ruled by His; it is to
unreservedly receive the Lord Jesus as his Saviour and Lord, as his All in
all.
Such, in part and in brief, is what is
implied and involved in "Coming to Christ." But is the sinner willing
to take such an attitude before God? No; for in the first place, he
does not realize the danger of his situation, and in consequence is not in
real earnest after his escape; instead, men are for the most part at ease,
and apart from the operations of the Holy Spirit whenever they are
disturbed by the alarms of conscience or the dispensations of providence, they
flee to any other refuge but Christ. In the second place, they will not
acknowledge that all their righteousnesses are as filthy rags but, like the
Pharisee, will thank God they are not as the Publican. And in the third place,
they are not ready to receive Christ as their Saviour and Lord, for they are
unwilling to part with their idols: they had rather hazard their
soul’s eternal welfare than give them up. Hence we say that, left to himself,
the natural man is so depraved at heart that he cannot come to Christ.
The words of our Lord quoted above by no
means stand alone. Quite a number of Scriptures set forth the moral and
spiritual inability of the natural man. In Joshua 24:19 we read, "And
Joshua said unto the people, Ye cannot serve the Lord: for He is a holy
God." To the Pharisees Christ said, "Why do ye not understand My speech? Even
because ye cannot hear My word" (John 8:43). And again: "The carnal
mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God,
neither indeed can be. So then they that are in the flesh cannot
please God" (Rom. 8:7, 8).
But now the question returns, How can
God hold the sinner responsible for failing to do what he is unable to
do? This necessitates a careful definition of terms. Just what is meant by
"unable" and "cannot"?
Now let it be clearly understood that,
when we speak of the sinner’s inability, we do not mean that if
men desired to come to Christ they lack the necessary power to carry
out their desire. No; the fact is that the sinner’s inability or absence of
power is itself due to lack of willingness to come to Christ,
and this lack of willingness is the fruit of a depraved heart. It is of first
importance that we distinguish between natural inability and moral and
spiritual inability. For example, we read, "But Abijah could not see;
for his eyes were set by reason of his age" (1 Kings 14:4); and again, "The
men rowed hard to bring it to the land; but they could not: for the sea
wrought, and was tempestuous against them" (Jonah 1:13). In both of these
passages the words "could not" refer to natural inability. But when we
read, "And when his brethren saw that their father loved him (Joseph) more
than all his brethren, they hated him, and could not speak peaceably
unto him" (Gen. 37:4), it is clearly moral inability that is in view.
They did not lack the natural ability to "speak peaceably unto him",
for they were not dumb. Why then was it that they "could not speak
peaceably unto him"? The answer is given in the same verse: it was because
"they hated him." Again; in 2 Peter 2:14 we read of a certain
class of wicked men "having eyes full of adultery, and that cannot cease
from sin." Here again it is moral inability that is in view.
Why is it that these men "cannot cease from sin"? The answer is, Because their
eyes were full of adultery. So of Romans 8:8.—"They that are in the flesh
cannot please God": here it is spiritual inability. Why is it that
the natural man "cannot please God"? Because he is "alienated from the
life of God" (Eph. 4:18). No man can choose that from which his heart is
averse—"O generation of vipers how can ye, being evil, speak
good things?" (Matt. 12:34). "No man can come to Me, except the Father
which hath sent Me draw him" (John 6:44). Here again it is moral and
spiritual inability which is before us. Why is it the sinner cannot come
to Christ unless he is "drawn"? The answer is, Because his wicked heart
loves sign and hates Christ.
We trust we have made it clear that the
Scriptures distinguish sharply between natural inability and moral and
spiritual inability. Surely all can see the difference between the blindness
of Bartimeus, who was ardently desirous of receiving his sight, and the
Pharisees, whose eyes were closed, "lest at any time they should see with
their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart,
and should be converted" (Matt. 13:15). But should it be said, The natural man
could come to Christ if he wished to do so, we answer, Ah! but
in that IF lies the hinge of the whole matter. The inability of the sinner
consists of the want of moral power to wish and will so as to
actually perform.
What we have contended for above is of
first importance. Upon the distinction between the sinner’s natural Ability,
and his moral and spiritual Inability, rests his Responsibility. The
depravity of the human heart does not destroy man s accountability to God; so
far from this being the case the very moral inability of the sinner only
serves to increase his guilt. This is easily proven by a reference to
the scriptures cited above. We read that Joseph’s brethren "could not speak
peaceably unto him," and why? It was because they "hated" Him. But was this
moral inability of theirs any excuse? Surely not: in this very moral inability
consisted the greatness of their sin. So of those concerning whom it is said,
"They cannot cease from sin" (2 Pet. 2:14), and why? Because "their
eyes were full of adultery," but that only made their case worse. It was a
real fact that they could not cease from sin, yet this did not excuse them—it
only made their sin the greater.
Should some sinner here object, I cannot
help being born into this world with a depraved heart, and therefore I am not
responsible for my moral and spiritual inability which accrue from it, the
reply would be, Responsibility and Culpability lie in the indulgence of
the depraved propensities, the free indulgence, for God does not force
any to sin. Men might pity me, but they certainly would not excuse me
if I gave vent to a fiery temper, and then sought to extenuate myself on the
ground of having inherited that temper from my parents. Their own
common sense is sufficient to guide their judgment in such a case as this.
They would argue I was responsible to restrain my temper. Why then cavil
against this same principle in the case supposed above? "Out of thine own
mouth will I judge thee thou wicked servant" surely applies here! What
would the reader say to a man who had robbed him, and who later argued in
defence, "I cannot help being a thief, that is my nature"? Surely the reply
would be, Then the penitentiary is the proper place for that man. What then
shall be said to the one who argues that he cannot help following the bent of
his sinful heart? Surely, that the Lake of Fire is where such an one
must go. Did ever murderer plead that he hated his victim so much that he
could not go near him without slaying him. Would not that only
magnify the enormity of his crime! Then what of the one who loves sin so much
that he is "at enmity against God"!
The fact of man’s responsibility
is almost universally acknowledged. It is inherent in man’s moral nature. It
is not only taught in Scripture but witnessed to by the natural conscience.
The basis or ground of human responsibility is human ability.
What is implied by this general term "ability" must now be defined. Perhaps a
concrete example will be more easily grasped by the average reader than an
abstract argument.
Suppose a man owed me $100 and could
find plenty of money for his own pleasures but none for me, yet pleaded that
he was unable to pay me. What would I say? I would say that the only
ability that was lacking was an honest heart. But would it not be an
unfair construction of my words if a friend of my dishonest debtor should say
I had stated that an honest heart was that which constituted the ability
to pay the debt? No; I would reply: the ability of my debtor lies in the
power of his hand to write me a check, and this he has, but what is
lacking is an honest principle. It is his power to write me a check
which makes him responsible to do so, and the fact that he lacks an honest
heart does not destroy his accountability.[2]
Now, in like manner, the sinner while
altogether lacking in moral and spiritual ability does, nevertheless,
possess natural ability, and this it is which renders him accountable
unto God. Men have the same natural faculties to love God with as they
have to hate Him with, the same hearts to believe with which they disbelieve,
and it is their failure to love and believe which constitutes their
guilt. An idiot or an infant is not personally responsible to God, because
lacking in natural ability. But the normal man who is endowed with
rationality, who is gifted with a conscience that is capable of distinguishing
between right and wrong, who is able to weigh eternal issues is a
responsible being, and it is because he does possess these very
faculties that he will yet have to "give account of himself to God" (Rom.
14:12).
We say again that the above distinction
between the natural ability and the moral and spiritual inability of the
sinner is of prime importance. By nature he possesses natural ability but
lacks moral and spiritual ability. The fact that he does not possess
the latter, does not destroy his responsibility, because his
responsibility rests upon the fact that he does possess the former. Let
me illustrate again. Here are two men guilty of theft: the first is an idiot,
the second perfectly sane but the offspring of criminal parents. No just judge
would sentence the former; but every right-minded judge would the latter. Even
though the second of these thieves possessed a vitiated moral nature inherited
from criminal parents, that would not excuse him, providing he was a
normal rational being. Here then is the ground of human
accountability—the possession of rationality plus the gift of conscience.
It is because the sinner is endowed with these natural faculties that
he is a responsible creature; because he does not use his
natural powers for God’s glory, constitutes his guilt.
How can it remain consistent with His
mercy that God should require the debt of obedience from him that is not able
to pay? In addition to what has been said above, it should be pointed out that
God has not lost His right, even though man has lost his power.
The creature’s impotence does not cancel his obligation. A drunken servant is
a servant still, and it is contrary to all sound reasoning to argue that his
master loses his rights through his servant’s default. Moreover, it is of
first importance that we should ever bear in mind that God contracted with us
in Adam, who was our federal head and representative, and in him, God gave us
a power which we lost through our first parent’s fall; but though our power be
gone, nevertheless, God may justly demand His due of obedience and of service.
We turn now to ponder,
III. How is it possible for God to DECREE that men SHOULD
commit certain sins, hold them RESPONSIBLE in the committal of them, and
adjudge them GUILTY because they committed them?
Let us now consider the extreme case of
Judas. We hold that it is clear from Scripture that God decreed from
all eternity that Judas should betray the Lord Jesus. If anyone should
challenge this statement we refer him to the prophecy of Zechariah, through
whom God declared that His Son should be sold for "Thirty pieces of silver"
(Zech. 11:12). As we have said in earlier pages, in prophecy God makes known
what will be, and in making known what will be, He is but revealing to
us what He has ordained shall be. That Judas was the one through whom
the prophecy of Zechariah was fulfilled needs not to be argued. But now the
question we have to face is, Was Judas a responsible agent in
fulfilling this decree of God? We reply that he was. Responsibility attaches
mainly to the motive and intention of the one committing the
act. This is recognized on every hand. Human law distinguishes between a blow
inflicted by accident (without evil design), and a blow delivered with
‘malice aforethought.’ Apply then this same principle to the case of
Judas. What was the design of his heart when he bargained with the
priests? Manifestly he had no conscious desire to fulfil any decree of
God, though unknown to himself he was actually doing so. On the contrary,
his intention was evil only, and therefore, though God had decreed and
directed his act, nevertheless, his own evil intention rendered him
justly guilty as he afterwards acknowledged himself—"I have betrayed
innocent blood." It was the same with the Crucifixion of Christ. Scripture
plainly declares that He was "delivered up by the determinate counsel
and foreknowledge of God" (Acts 2:23), and that though "the kings of
the earth stood up, and the rulers were gathered together against the Lord,
and against His Christ" yet, notwithstanding, it was but "for to do whatsoever
Thy hand and Thy counsel determined before to be done" (Acts
4:26, 28); which verses teach very much more than a bare permission
by God, declaring, as they do, that the Crucifixion and all its details
had been decreed by God. Yet, nevertheless, it was by "wicked hands,"
not merely "human hands", that our Lord was "crucified and slain" (Acts
2:23). "Wicked" because the intention, of His crucifiers was
only evil.
But it might be objected that, if God
had decreed that Judas should betray Christ, and that the Jews and
Gentiles should crucify Him, they could not do otherwise, and
therefore, they were not responsible for their intentions. The answer is, God
had decreed that they should perform the acts they did, but in the
actual perpetration of these deeds they were justly guilty,
because their own purposes in the doing of them was evil only. Let it
be emphatically said that God does not produce the sinful dispositions
of any of His creatures, though He does restrain and direct them
to the accomplishing of His own purposes. Hence He is neither the Author nor
the Approver of sin. This distinction was expressed thus by Augustine: "That
men sin proceeds from themselves; that in sinning they perform this or that
action, is from the power of God who divideth the darkness according to His
pleasure." Thus it is written, "A man’s heart deviseth his way: but the Lord
directeth his steps" (Prov. 16:9). What we would here insist
upon is, that God’s decrees are not the necessitating cause of the sins
of men, but the fore-determined and prescribed boundings and
directings of men’s sinful acts. In connection with the betrayal of
Christ, God did not decree that He should be sold by one of His creatures and
then take up a good man, instill an evil desire into his heart and thus
force him to perform the terrible deed in order to execute His
decree. No; not so do the Scriptures represent it. Instead, God decreed the
act and selected the one who was to perform the act, but He did not make
him evil in order that he should perform the deed; on the contrary,
the betrayer was a "devil" at the time the Lord Jesus chose him as one of the
twelve (John 6:70), and in the exercise and manifestation of his
own devilry God simply directed his actions, actions which were
perfectly agreeable to his own vile heart, and performed with
the most wicked intentions. Thus it was with the Crucifixion.
IV. How can the sinner be held responsible to receive
Christ, and be damned for rejecting Him, when God FOREORDAINED him TO
condemnation?
Really, this question has been covered
in what has been said under the other queries, but for the benefit of those
who are exercised upon this point we give it a separate, though brief,
examination. In considering the above difficulty the following points should
be carefully weighed:
In the first place, no sinner, while he
is in this world, knows for certain, nor can he know, that he is a
"vessel of wrath fitted to destruction". This belongs to the hidden counsels
of God, to which he has not access. God’s secret will is no business of
his; God’s revealed will (in the Word) is the standard of human
responsibility. And God’s revealed will is plain. Each sinner is among
those whom God now "commandeth to repent" (Acts 17:30). Each sinner who hears
the Gospel is "commanded" to believe (1 John 3:23). And all who do
truly repent and believe are saved. Therefore, is every sinner responsible
to repent and believe.
In the second place, it is the duty
of every sinner to search the Scriptures which "are able to make wise unto
salvation" (2 Tim. 3:15). It is the sinner’s "duty" because the Son of
God has commanded him to search the Scriptures (John 5:39). If he
searches them with a heart that is seeking after God, then does he put himself
in the way where God is accustomed to meet with sinners. Upon this point the
Puritan Manton has written very helpfully.
"I cannot say to every one that ploweth,
infallibly, that he shall have a good crop; but this I can say to him, It is
God’s use to bless the diligent and provident. I cannot say to every one that
desireth posterity, Marry, and you shall have children; I cannot say
infallibly to him that goeth forth to battle for his country’s good that he
shall have victory and success; but I can say, as Joab, (1 Chron. 19:13) ‘Be
of good courage, and let us behave ourselves valiantly for our people and the
cities of our God, and let the Lord do what is good in His sight’. I cannot
say infallibly you shall have grace; but I can say to every one, Let him
use the means, and leave the success of his labor and his own salvation to the
will and good pleasure of God. I cannot say this infallibly, for there is
no obligation upon God. And still this work is made the fruit of God’s will
and mere arbitrary dispensation—‘Of His own will begat He us by the Word of
Truth’ (James 1:18). Let us do what God hath commanded, and let God do what He
will. And I need not say so; for the whole world in all their actings are and
should be guided by this principle. Let us do our duty, and refer the success
to God, Whose ordinary practice it is to meet with the creature that seeketh
after Him; yea, He is with us already; this earnest importunity in the use of
means proceeding from the earnest impression of His grace. And therefore,
since He is beforehand with us, and bath not showed any backwardness to our
good, we have no reason to despair of His goodness and mercy, but rather to
hope for the best" (Vol. XXI, page 312).
God has been pleased to give to men the
Holy Scriptures which "testify" of the Saviour, and make known the way of
salvation. Every sinner has the same natural faculties for the reading
of the Bible as he has for the reading of the newspaper; and if he is
illiterate or blind so that he is unable to read, he has the same mouth with
which to ask a friend to read the Bible to him, as he has to inquire
concerning other matters. If, then, God has given to men His Word, and in that
Word has made known the way of salvation, and if men are commanded to search
those Scriptures which are able to make them wise unto salvation, and they
refuse to do so, then is it plain that they are justly censurable,
that their blood lies on their own heads, and that God can
righteously cast them into the Lake of Fire.
In the third place, should it be
objected, Admitting all you have said above, Is it not still a fact that each
of the non-elect is unable to repent and believe? The reply is, Yes. Of
every sinner it is a fact that, of himself, he cannot come to Christ.
And from God’s side the "cannot" is absolute. But we are now dealing with the
responsibility of the sinner (the sinner foreordained to condemnation,
though he knows it not), and from the human side the inability
of the sinner is a moral one, as previously pointed out. Moreover, it
needs to be borne in mind that in addition to the moral inability of
the sinner there is a voluntary inability, too. The sinner must be
regarded not only as impotent to do good, but as delighting in evil.
From the human side, then, the "cannot" is a will not; it is a
voluntary impotence. Man’s impotence lies in his obstinacy. Hence, is
everyone left "without excuse", And hence, is God "clear" when He judgeth (Ps.
51:4), and righteous in damning all who "love darkness rather than
light".
That God does require what is
beyond our own power to render is clear from many scriptures. God gave the
Law to Israel at Sinai and demanded a full compliance with it, and
solemnly pointed out what would be the consequences of their disobedience (see
Deut. 28). But will any readers be so foolish as to affirm that Israel were
capable of fully obeying the Law! If they do, we would refer them to
Romans 8:3 where we are expressly told, "For what the law could not do,
in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending His own Son in the likeness
of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh".
Come now to the New Testament. Take such
passages as Matthew 5:48, "Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which
is in heaven is perfect". 1 Corinthians 15:34, "Awake to righteousness and sin
not". 1 John 2:1, "My little children, these things I write unto you, that ye
sin not". Will any reader say he is capable in himself of complying
with these demands of God? If so, it is useless for us to argue with
him.
But now the question arises, Why has God
demanded of man that which he is incapable of performing? The first
answer is, Because God refuses to lower His standard to the level of our
sinful infirmities. Being perfect, God must set a perfect standard before us.
Still we must ask, if man is incapable of measuring up to God’s standard,
wherein lies his responsibility? Difficult as seems the problem it
is nevertheless capable of a simple and satisfactory solution.
Man is responsible to (1st)
acknowledge before God his inability, and (2nd) to cry unto Him for
enabling grace. Surely this will be admitted by every Christian reader. It is
my bounden duty to own before God my ignorance, my weakness, my sinfulness, my
impotence to comply with His holy and just requirements. It is also my
bounden duty, as well as blessed privilege, to earnestly beseech God to give
me the wisdom, strength, grace, which will enable me to do that which
is pleasing in His sight; to ask Him to work in me "both to will and to
do of His good pleasure" (Phil. 2:13).
In like manner, the sinner, every
sinner, is responsible to call upon the Lord. Of himself he can
neither repent nor believe. He can neither come to Christ, nor turn from his
sins. God tells him so; and his first duty is to "set to his seal that
God is true". His second duty is to cry unto God for His enabling
power—to ask God in mercy to overcome his enmity, and "draw" him to Christ; to
bestow upon him the gifts of repentance and faith. If he will do so,
sincerely from the heart, then most surely God will respond to his
appeal, for it is written—"For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord
shall be saved" (Rom. 10:13).
Suppose, I had slipped on the icy
pavement, late at night, and had broken my hip. I am unable to arise;
if I remain on the ground, I must freeze to death. What, then, ought Ito do?
If I am determined to perish, I shall lie there silent—but I shall be to blame
for such a course. If I am anxious
to be rescued, I shall lift up my voice
and cry for help. So the sinner, though unable of himself to
rise and take the first step toward Christ, is responsible to cry to
God, and if he does (from the heart), there is a Deliverer to hand. God is
"not far from every one of us" (Acts 17:27); yea, "He is a very
present help in trouble" (Ps. 46:1). But if the sinner refuses to
cry unto the Lord, if he is determined to perish, then his blood is on his own
head, and his "damnation is just" (Rom. 3:8).
A brief word now concerning the
extent of human responsibility.
It is obvious that the measure of
human responsibility varies in different cases, and is greater or less
with particular individuals. The standard of measurement was given in the
Saviour’s words, "For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall much be
required" (Luke 12:48). Surely God did not require as much from those living
in Old Testament times as He does from those who have been born during the
Christian dispensation. Surely God will not require as much from those who
lived during the ‘dark ages,’ when the Scriptures were accessible to but a
few, as He will from those of this generation, when practically every family
in the land own a copy of His Word for themselves. In the same way, God will
not demand from the heathen what He will from those in Christendom. The
heathen will not perish because they have not believed in Christ, but because
they failed to live up to the light which they did have—the testimony of God
in nature and conscience.
To sum up. The fact of man’s
responsibility rests upon his natural ability, is witnessed to by conscience,
and is insisted on throughout the Scriptures. The ground of man’s
responsibility is that he is a rational creature capable of weighing eternal
issues, and that he possesses a written Revelation from God, in which his
relationship with and duty toward his Creator is plainly defined. The
measure of responsibility varies in different individuals, being
determined by the degree of light each has enjoyed from God. The problem
of human responsibility receives at least a partial solution in the Holy
Scriptures, and it is our solemn obligation as well as privilege to search
them prayerfully and carefully for further light, looking to the Holy Spirit
to guide us "into all truth." It is written, "The meek will He
guide in judgment: and the meek will He teach His way" (Ps. 25:9).
In conclusion it remains to point out
that it is the responsibility of every man to use the means which God has
placed to his hand. An attitude of fatalistic inertia, because I know that God
has irrevocably decreed whatsoever comes to pass, is to make a sinful and
hurtful use of what God has revealed for the comfort of my heart. The same God
who has decreed that a certain end shall be accomplished, has also decreed
that that end shall be attained through and as the result of His own appointed
means. God does not disdain the use of means, nor must I. For example: God has
decreed that "while the earth remaineth, seed-time and harvest. . . shall not
cease" (Gen. 8:22); but that does not mean man’s ploughing of the ground and
sowing of the seed are needless. No; God moves men to do those very
things, blesses their labours, and so fulfills His own ordination. In like
manner, God has, from the beginning, chosen a people unto salvation; but that
does not mean there is no need for evangelists to preach the Gospel, or for
sinners to believe it; it is by such means that His eternal counsels
are effectuated.
To argue that, because God has
irrevocably determined the eternal destiny of every man, relieves us of all
responsibility for any concern about our souls, or any diligent use of the
means to salvation, would be on a par with refusing to perform my temporal
duties because God has fixed my earthly lot. And that He has is
clear from Acts 17:26, Job 7:1; 14:5, etc. If then the foreordination
of God may consist with the respective activities of man in present concerns,
why not in the future? What God has joined together we must not cut asunder.
Whether we can or cannot see the link which unites the one to the other, our
duty is plain: "The secret things belong unto the Lord our God: but those
things which are revealed belong unto us and to our children forever, that
we may do all the words of this law" (Deut. 29:29).
In Acts 27:22 God made known that
He had ordained the temporal preservation of all who accompanied Paul in the
ship; yet the apostle did not hesitate to say, "Except these abide in the
ship, ye cannot be saved" (v. 31); God appointed that means for the execution
of what He had decreed. From 2 Kings 20 we learn that God was absolutely
resolved to add fifteen years to Hezekiah’s life, yet he must take a
lump of figs and lay it on his boil! Paul knew that he was eternally secure in
the hand of Christ (John 10:28), yet he "kept under his body" (1 Cor. 9:26).
The apostle John assured those to whom he wrote, "Ye shall abide in
Him", yet in the very next verse he exhorted them, "And now, little children,
abide in Him" (1 John 2:27, 28). It is only by taking heed to
this vital principle, that we are responsible to use the means of God’s
appointing, that we shall be enabled to preserve the balance of Truth,
and be saved from a paralyzing fatalism.
ENDNOTES:
[1] Gordian knot: 1. An intricate knot
tied by King Gordius of Phrygia and cut by Alexander the Great with his sword
after hearing an oracle promise that whoever could undo it would be the next
ruler of Asia. 2. An exceedingly complicated problem of deadlock (The American
Heritage Dictionary, ed).
[2]
The terms of this example are
suggested by an illustration used by the late Andrew Fuller.
Chapter 9
GOD’S SOVEREIGNTY AND PRAYER
"If we ask anything according to His will, He heareth us"
1 John 5:14
Throughout this book it has been our
chief aim to exalt the Creator and abase the creature. The well-nigh universal
tendency, now, is to magnify man and dishonor and degrade God. On every hand
it will be found that, when spiritual things are under discussion, the human
side and element is pressed and stressed, and the Divine side, if not
altogether ignored, is relegated to the background. This holds true of very
much of the modern teaching about prayer. In the great majority of the books
written and in the sermons preached upon prayer, the human element fills the
scene almost entirely: it is the conditions which we must meet, the
promises we must "claim", the things we must do, in order to get
our requests granted; and God’s claims, God’s rights, God’s
glory are disregarded.
As a fair sample of what is being given
out today we subjoin a brief editorial which appeared recently in one of the
leading religious weeklies entitled "Prayer, or Fate?"
"God in His sovereignty has ordained that human destinies
may be changed and moulded by the will of man. This is at the heart of the
truth that prayer changes things, meaning that God changes things when men
pray. Some one has strikingly expressed it this way: ‘There are certain
things that will happen in a man’s life whether he prays or not. There are
other things that will happen if he prays, and will not happen if he does
not pray’. A Christian worker was impressed by these sentences as he entered
a business office, and he prayed that the Lord would open the way to speak
to some one about Christ, reflecting that things would be changed because he
prayed. Then his mind turned to other things and the prayer was forgotten.
The opportunity came to speak to the business man on whom he was calling,
but he did not grasp it, and was on his way out when he remembered his
prayer of a half hour before, and God’s answer. He promptly returned and had
a talk with the business man, who, though a church-member, had never in his
life been asked whether he was saved. Let us give ourselves to prayer, and
open the way for God to change things. Let us beware lest we become virtual
fatalists by failing to exercise our God-given wills in praying".
The above illustrates what is now being
taught on the subject of prayer, and the deplorable thing is that scarcely a
voice is lifted in protest. To say that "human destinies may be changed
and moulded by the will of man" is rank infidelity—that is the
only proper term for it. Should any one challenge this classification, we
would ask them whether they can find an infidel anywhere who would dissent
from such a statement, and we are confident that such an one could not be
found. To say that "God has ordained that human destinies may be
changed and moulded by the will of man", is absolutely untrue. "Human destiny"
is settled not by "the will of man," but by the will of God. That which
determines human destiny is whether or not a man has been born again, for it
is written, "Except a man be born again he cannot see the kingdom of God". And
as to whose will, whether God’s or man’s, is responsible for the new
birth is settled, unequivocally, by John 1:13—"Which were born, not of blood,
nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but OF GOD". To
say that "human destiny" may be changed by the will of man, is to make
the creature’s will supreme, and that is, virtually, to dethrone
God. But what saith the Scriptures? Let the Book answer: "The Lord killeth,
and maketh alive: He bringeth down to the grave, and bringeth up. The
Lord maketh poor, and maketh rich: He bringeth low, and lifteth up.
He raiseth up the poor out of the dust, and lifteth up the beggar from the
dunghill, to set them among princes, and to make them inherit the throne of
glory" (1 Sam. 2:6-8).
Turning back to the Editorial here under
review, we are next told, "This is at the heart of the truth that prayer
changes things, meaning that God changes things when men pray." Almost
everywhere we go today one comes across a motto-card bearing the inscription
"Prayer Changes Things". As to what these words are designed to signify is
evident from the current literature on prayer—we are to persuade God to
change His purpose. Concerning this we shall have more to say below.
Again, the Editor tells us, "Some one
has strikingly expressed it this way: ‘There are certain things that will
happen in a man’s life whether he prays or not. There are other things that
will happen if he prays, and will not happen if he does not pray.’" That
things happen whether a man prays or not is exemplified daily in the lives of
the unregenerate, most of whom never pray at all. That ‘other things will
happen if he prays’ is in need of qualification. If a believer prays in faith
and asks for those things which are according to God’s will, he will most
certainly obtain that for which he has asked. Again, that other things will
happen if he prays, is also true in respect to the subjective benefits derived
from prayer: God will become more real to him and His promises more precious.
That other things ‘will not happen if he does not pray’ is true so far as his
own life is concerned—a prayerless life means a life lived out of communion
with God and all that is involved by this. But to affirm that God will not and
cannot bring to pass His eternal purpose unless we pray, is utterly erroneous,
for the same God who has decreed the end has also decreed that His end shall
be reached through His appointed means, and one of these is prayer. The God
who has determined to grant a blessing, also gives a spirit of supplication
which first seeks the blessing.
The example cited in the above Editorial
of the Christian Worker and the business man is a very unhappy one to say the
least, for according to the terms of the illustration the Christian Worker’s
prayer was not answered by God at all, inasmuch as, apparently, the way was
not opened to speak to the business man about his soul. But on leaving the
office and recalling his prayer the Christian Worker (perhaps in the energy of
the flesh) determined to answer the prayer for himself, and instead of
leaving the Lord to "open the way" for him, took matters into his own
hand.
We quote next from one of the latest
books issued on Prayer. In it the author says, "The possibilities and
necessity of prayer, its power and results, are manifested in arresting and
changing the purposes of God and in relieving the stroke of His power".
Such an assertion as this is a horrible reflection upon the character of the
Most High God, who "doeth according to His will in the army of heaven, and
among the inhabitants of the earth: and none can stay His hand, or say
unto Him, What doest Thou?"(Dan. 4:35). There is no need whatever
for God to change His designs or alter His purpose, for the all-sufficient
reason that these were framed under the influence of perfect goodness and
unerring wisdom. Men may have occasion to alter their purposes,
for in their short-sightedness they are frequently unable to anticipate what
may arise after their plans are formed. But not so with God, for He
knows the end from the beginning. To affirm that God changes His
purpose is either to impugn His goodness or to deny His eternal wisdom.
In the same book we are told, "The
prayers of God’s saints are the capital stock in heaven by which Christ
carries on His great work upon earth. The great throes and mighty convulsions
on earth are the results of these prayers. Earth is changed, revolutionized,
angels move on more powerful, more rapid wing, and God’s policy is shaped
as the prayers are more numerous, more efficient". If possible, this is
even worse, and we have no hesitation in denominating it as blasphemy. In the
first place, it flatly denies Ephesians 3:11, which speaks of God’s having an
"eternal purpose". If God’s purpose is an eternal one, then His
"policy" is not being "shaped" today. In the second place, it
contradicts Ephesians 1:11 which expressly declares that God "worketh all
things after the counsel of His own will," therefore it follows
that, "God’s policy" is not being "shaped" by man’s prayers. In the
third place, such a statement as the above makes the will of the creature
supreme, for if our prayers shape God’s policy, then is the Most
High subordinate to worms of the earth. Well might the Holy Spirit ask through
the apostle, "For who hath known the mind of the Lord? or who hath been His
counsellor?" (Rom. 11:34).
Such thoughts on prayer as we have been
citing are due to low and inadequate conceptions of God Himself. It ought to
be apparent that there could be little or no comfort in praying to a God that
was like the chameleon, which changes its color every day. What encouragement
is there to lift up our hearts to One who is in one mind yesterday and another
today? What would be the use of petitioning an earthly monarch, if we knew he
was so mutable as to grant a petition one day and deny it another? Is it not
the very unchangeableness of God which is our greatest encouragement
to pray? It is because He is "without variableness or shadow of
turning" we are assured that if we ask anything according to His will we are
most certain of being heard. Well did Luther remark, "Prayer is not overcoming
God’s reluctance, but laying hold of His willingness."
And this leads us to offer a few remarks
concerning the design of prayer. Why has God appointed that we
should pray? The vast majority of people would reply, In order that we may
obtain from God the things which we need. While this is one of the
purposes of prayer, it is by no means the chief one. Moreover, it considers
prayer only from the human side, and prayer sadly needs to be viewed
from the Divine side. Let us look, then, at some of the reasons why
God has bidden us to pray.
First and foremost, prayer has been
appointed that the Lord God Himself should be honored. God requires we
should recognize that He is, indeed, "the high and lofty One
that inhabiteth eternity" (Isa. 57:17). God requires that we shall own His
universal dominion: in petitioning God for rain, Elijah did but confess
His control over the elements; in praying to God to deliver a poor sinner from
the wrath to come, we acknowledge that "salvation is of the Lord" (Jonah 2:9)
; in supplicating His blessing on the Gospel unto the uttermost parts of the
earth, we declare His rulership over the whole world.
Again; God requires that we shall
worship Him, and prayer, real prayer, is an act of worship. Prayer is an
act of worship inasmuch as it is the prostrating of the soul before Him;
inasmuch as it is a calling upon His great and holy name; inasmuch as it is
the owning of His goodness, His power, His immutability, His grace, and
inasmuch as it is the recognition of His sovereignty, owned by a submission to
His will. It is highly significant to notice in this connection that the
Temple was not termed by Christ the House of Sacrifice, but instead, the House
of Prayer.
Again; prayer redounds to God’s
glory, for in prayer we do but acknowledge our dependency upon Him. When
we humbly supplicate the Divine Being we cast ourselves upon His power and
mercy. In seeking blessings from God we own that He is the Author and Fountain
of every good and perfect gift. That prayer brings glory to God is further
seen from the fact that prayer calls faith into exercise, and nothing from us
is so honoring and pleasing to Him as the confidence of our hearts.
In the second place, prayer is appointed
by God for our spiritual blessing, as a means for our growth in
grace. When seeking to learn the design of prayer, this should ever
occupy us before we regard prayer as a means for obtaining the supply
of our need. Prayer is designed by God for our humbling. Prayer, real
prayer, is a coming into the Presence of God, and a sense of His awful majesty
produces a realization of our nothingness and unworthiness. Again; prayer is
designed by God for the exercise of our faith. Faith is begotten in the
Word (Rom. 10:17), but it is exercised in prayer; hence, we read of "the
prayer of faith". Again; prayer calls love into action. Concerning the
hypocrite the question is asked, "Will he delight himself in the Almighty?
Will he always call upon God?" (Job 27:10). But they that love the Lord cannot
be long away from Him, for they delight in unburdening themselves to
Him. Not only does prayer call love into action, but through the direct
answers vouchsafed to our prayers, our love to God is increased—"I love the
Lord, because He hath heard my voice and my supplications" (Ps. 116:1).
Again; prayer is designed by God to teach us the value of the blessings
we have sought from Him, and it causes us to rejoice the more when He has
bestowed upon us that for which we supplicate Him.
Third, prayer is appointed by God for
our seeking from Him the things which we are in need of. But here a difficulty
may present itself to those who have read carefully the previous chapters of
this book. If God has foreordained, before the foundation of the world,
everything which happens in time, what is the use of prayer? If it is true
that "of Him and through Him and to Him are all things" (Rom.
11:36), then why pray? Ere replying directly to these queries it should be
pointed out how that there is just as much reason to ask, What is the use of
me coming to God and telling Him what He already knows? wherein is the use of
me spreading before Him my need, seeing He is already acquainted with it? as
there is to object, What is the use of praying for anything when everything
has been ordained beforehand by God? Prayer is not for the purpose of
informing God, as if He were ignorant, (the Saviour expressly declared "for
your Father knoweth what things ye have need of, before ye ask Him"—Matt.
6:8), but it is to acknowledge He does know what we are in need of.
Prayer is not appointed for the furnishing of God with the knowledge of what
we need, but it is designed as a confession to Him of our sense of the
need. In this, as in everything, God’s thoughts are not as ours. God requires
that His gifts should be sought for. He designs to be honored by our
asking, just as He is to be thanked by us after He has bestowed His
blessing.
However, the question still returns on
us, If God be the Predestinator of everything that comes to pass, and the
Regulator of all events, then is not prayer a profitless exercise? A
sufficient answer to these questions is, that God bids us to pray—"Pray
without ceasing" (1 Thess. 5:17). And again, "men ought always to
pray" (Luke 18:1). And further: Scripture declares that, "the prayer of faith
shall save the sick", and, "the effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man
availeth much" (James 5:15, 16); while the Lord Jesus Christ—our perfect
Example in all things—was pre-eminently a Man of Prayer. Thus, it is evident,
that prayer is neither meaningless nor valueless. But still this does not
remove the difficulty nor answer the question with which we started
out. What then is the relationship between God’s sovereignty and
Christian prayer?
First of all, we would say with
emphasis, that prayer is not intended to change God’s purpose,
nor is it to move Him to form fresh purposes. God has decreed that certain
events shall come to pass, but He has also decreed that these events
shall come to pass through the means He has appointed for their
accomplishment. God has elected certain ones to be saved, but He has also
decreed that these ones shall be saved through the preaching of the
Gospel. The Gospel, then, is one of the appointed means for the working out of
the eternal counsel of the Lord; and prayer is another. God has decreed the
means as well as the end, and among the means is prayer. Even the prayers of
His people are included in His eternal decrees. Therefore, instead of prayers
being in vain, they are among the means through which God exercises His
decrees. "If indeed all things happen by a blind chance, or a fatal necessity,
prayers in that case could be of no moral efficacy, and of no use; but since
they are regulated by the direction of Divine wisdom, prayers have a place in
the order of events" (Haldane).
That prayers for the execution of the
very things decreed by God are not meaningless, is clearly
taught in the Scriptures. Elijah knew that God was about to give
rain, but that did not prevent him from at once betaking himself to prayer,
(James 5:17, 18). Daniel "understood" by the writings of the prophets that the
captivity was to last but seventy years, yet when these seventy years were
almost ended, we are told that he "set his face unto the Lord God, to seek
by prayer and supplications, with fasting and sackcloth and ashes" (Dan.
9:2, 3). God told the prophet Jeremiah "For I know the thoughts that I think
toward you, saith the Lord, thoughts of peace, and not of evil, to give you an
expected end"; but instead of adding, there is, therefore, no need for you to
supplicate Me for these things, He said, "Then shall ye call upon Me,
and ye shall go and pray unto Me, and I will hearken unto you" (Jer. 29:12).
Once more; in Ezekiel 36 we read of the
explicit, positive, and unconditional promises which God has made concerning
the future restoration of Israel, yet in verse 37 of this same chapter we are
told, "Thus saith the Lord God; I will vet for this be enquired of by
the house of Israel, to do it for then;"! Here then is the design of
prayer: not that God’s will may be altered, but that it may be
accomplished in His own good time and way. It is because God has
promised certain things, that we can ask for them with the full assurance of
faith. It is God’s purpose that His will shall be brought about by His own
appointed means, and that He may do His people good upon His own terms,
and that is, by the ‘means’ and ‘terms’ of entreaty and supplication. Did not
the Son of God know for certain that after His death and resurrection
He would be exalted by the Father? Assuredly He did. Yet we find Him
asking for this very thing: "O Father, glorify Thou Me with Thine Own Self
with the glory which I had with Thee before the world was" (John 17:5)! Did
not He know that none of His people could perish? yet He besought the Father
to "keep" them (John 17:11)!
Finally; it should be said that God’s
will is immutable, and cannot be altered by our crying. When the mind of God
is not toward a people to do them good, it cannot be turned to them by the
most fervent and importunate prayers of those who have the greatest interest
in Him—"Then said the Lord unto me, Though Moses and Samuel stood before Me,
yet My mind could not be toward this people: cast them out of My
sight, and let them go forth" (Jer. 15:1). The prayers of Moses to enter the
promised land is a parallel case.
Our views respecting prayer need to be
revised and brought into harmony with the teaching of Scripture on the
subject. The prevailing idea seems to be, that I come to God and ask
Him for something that I want, and that I expect Him to give me that
which I have asked. But this is a most dishonoring and degrading conception.
The popular belief reduces God to a servant, our servant: doing our
bidding, performing our pleasure, granting our desires. No; prayer is a coming
to God, telling Him my need, committing my way unto the Lord, and
leaving Him to deal with it as seemeth Him best. This makes my
will subject to His, instead of, as in the former case, seeking to bring His
will into subjection to mine. No prayer is pleasing to God unless the spirit
actuating it is, "not my will, but thine be done". "When God bestows
blessings on a praying people, it is not for the sake of their prayers, as if
He was inclined and turned by them; but it is for His own sake, and of His own
sovereign will and pleasure. Should it be said, to what purpose then is
prayer? it is answered, This is the way and means God has appointed, for the
communication of the blessing of His goodness to His people. For though He has
purposed, provided, and promised them, yet He will be sought unto, to give
them, and it is a duty and privilege to ask. When they are blessed with a
spirit of prayer, it forebodes well, and looks as if God intended to bestow
the good things asked, which should be asked always with submission to the
will of God, saying, Not my will but Thine be done" (John Gill).
The distinction just noted above is of
great practical importance for our peace of heart. Perhaps the one thing that
exercises Christians as much as anything else is that of unanswered prayers.
They have asked God for something: so far as they are able to judge, they have
asked in faith believing they would receive that for which they had
supplicated the Lord: and they have asked earnestly and repeatedly, but
the answer has not come. The result is that, in many cases, faith in the
efficacy of prayer becomes weakened, until hope gives way to despair and the
closet is altogether neglected. Is it not so?
Now will it surprise our readers when we
say that every real prayer of faith that has ever been offered to God
has been answered? Yet we unhesitatingly affirm it. But in saying this
we must refer back to our definition of prayer. Let us repeat it. Prayer is a
coming to God, telling Him my need (or the need of others), committing
my way unto the Lord, and then leaving Him to deal with the case as seemeth
Him best. This leaves God to answer the prayer in whatever way He sees fit,
and often, His answer may be the very opposite of what would be most
acceptable to the flesh; yet, if we have really LEFT our need in His
hands, it will be His answer, nevertheless. Let us look at two
examples.
In John 11 we read of the sickness of
Lazarus. The Lord "loved" him, but He was absent from Bethany. The sisters
sent a messenger unto the Lord acquainting Him of their brother’s condition.
And note particularly how their appeal was worded—"Lord, behold, he
whom Thou lovest is sick." That was all. They did not ask Him to heal Lazarus.
They did not request Him to hasten at once to Bethany. They simply spread
their need before Him, committed the case into His hands, and left Him to act
as He deemed best! And what was our Lord’s reply? Did He respond to
their appeal and answer their mute request? Certainly He did, though not,
perhaps, in the way they had hoped. He answered by abiding "two days still in
the same place where He was" (John 11:6), and allowing Lazarus to die! But in
this instance, that was not all. Later, He journeyed to Bethany and raised
Lazarus from the dead. Our purpose in referring here to this case, is to
illustrate the proper attitude for the believer to take before God in the hour
of need. The next example will emphasize, rather, God’s method of responding
to His needy child.
Turn to 2 Corinthians 12. The
apostle Paul had been accorded an unheard-of privilege. He had been
transported into Paradise. His ears have listened to and his eyes have gazed
upon that which no other mortal had heard or seen this side of death. The
wondrous revelation was more than the apostle could endure. He was in danger
of becoming "puffed up" by his extraordinary experience. Therefore, a thorn in
the flesh, the messenger of Satan, was sent to buffet him lest he be exalted
above measure. And the apostle spreads his need before the Lord; he thrice
beseeches Him that this thorn in the flesh should be removed. Was his
prayer answered? Assuredly, though not in the manner he had desired. The
"thorn" was not removed, but grace was given to bear it. The burden was not
lifted, but strength was vouchsafed to carry it.
Does someone object that it is our
privilege to do more than spread our need before God? Are we reminded that God
has, as it were, given us a blank check and invited us to fill it in? Is it
said that the promises of God are all-inclusive, and that we may ask God
for what we will? If so, we must call attention to the fact that it is
necessary to compare scripture with scripture if we are to learn the full mind
of God on any subject, and that as this is done we discover God has
qualified the promises given to praying souls by saying, "If we ask
anything according to His will He heareth us" (1 John 5:14). Real
prayer is communion with God, so that there will be common thoughts between
His mind and ours. What is needed is for Him to fill our hearts with His
thoughts, and then His desires will become our desires flowing back
to Him. Here then is the meeting-place between God’s sovereignty and Christian
prayer: If we ask anything according to His will He heareth us, and if
we do not so ask, He does not hear us; as saith the apostle
James, "Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye might
consume it upon your lusts" or desires (4:3)
But did not the Lord Jesus tell His
disciples, "Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall ask the
Father in My name, He will give it you" (John 16:23)? He did; but this promise
does not give praying souls carte blanche. These words of our Lord are
in perfect accord with those of the apostle John—"If we ask anything according
to His will He heareth us." What is it to ask "in the name of Christ"? Surely
it is very much more than a prayer formula, the mere concluding of our
supplications with the words "in the name of Christ." To apply to God
for anything in the name of Christ, it must needs be in keeping with what
Christ is! To ask God in the name of Christ is as though Christ Himself were
the suppliant. We can only ask God for what Christ would ask. To ask in
the name of Christ, is therefore, to set aside our own wills, accepting
God’s!
Let us now amplify our definition of
prayer. What is prayer? Prayer is not so much an act as it is an attitude—
an attitude of dependency, dependency upon God. Prayer is a
confession of creature weakness, yea, of helplessness. Prayer is the
acknowledgment of our need and the spreading of it before God. We do not say
that this is all there is in prayer, it is not: but it is the
essential, the primary element in prayer. We freely admit that we are quite
unable to give a complete definition of prayer within the compass of a
brief sentence, or in any number of words. Prayer is both an attitude and
an act, a human act, and yet there is the Divine element in
it too, and it is this which makes an exhaustive analysis impossible as well
as impious to attempt. But admitting this, we do insist again, that prayer is
fundamentally an attitude of dependency upon God. Therefore, prayer is the
very opposite of dictating to God. Because prayer is an attitude of
dependency, the one who really prays is submissive, submissive to the
Divine will; and submission to the Divine will means, that we are content for
the Lord to supply our need according to the dictates of His own sovereign
pleasure. And hence it is that we say, every prayer that is offered to
God in this spirit is sure of meeting with an answer or response from
Him.
Here then is the reply to our opening
question, and the scriptural solution to the seeming difficulty. Prayer is not
the requesting of God to alter His purpose or for Him to form a new one.
Prayer is the taking of an attitude of dependency upon. God, the spreading of
our need before Him, the asking for those things which are in accordance with
His will, and therefore there is nothing whatever inconsistent between
Divine sovereignty and Christian prayer.
In closing this chapter we would utter a
word of caution to safeguard the reader against drawing a false conclusion
from what has been said. We have not here sought to epitomize the whole
teaching of Scripture on the subject of prayer, nor have we even attempted to
discuss in general the problem of prayer; instead, we have confined
ourselves, more or less, to a consideration of the relationship between
God’s Sovereignty and Christian Prayer. What we have written is intended
chiefly as a protest against much of the modern teaching, which so
stresses the human element in prayer, that the Divine side is almost
entirely lost sight of.
In Jeremiah 10:23 we are told "It is not
in man that walketh to direct his steps" (cf. Prov. 16:9); and yet in many of
his prayers, man impiously presumes to direct the Lord as to His way,
and as to what He ought to do: even implying that if only he had
the direction of the affairs of the world and of the Church, he would
soon have things very different from what they are. This cannot be denied: for
anyone with any spiritual discernment at all could not fail to detect this
spirit in many of our modern prayer-meetings where the flesh holds sway. How
slow we all are to learn the lesson that the haughty creature needs to be
brought down to his knees and humbled into the dust. And this is where the
very act of prayer is intended to put us. But man (in his usual
perversity) turns the footstool into a throne, from whence he would fain
direct the Almighty as to what He ought to do! giving the onlooker the
impression that if God had half the compassion that those who pray (?) have,
all would quickly be put right! Such is the arrogance of the old nature even
in a child of God.
Our main purpose in this chapter has
been to emphasize the need for submitting, in prayer, our wills to God’s.
But it must also be added, that prayer is much more than a pious exercise,
and far otherwise than a mechanical performance. Prayer is, indeed, a Divinely
appointed means whereby we may obtain from God the things we ask, providing
we ask for those things which are in accord with His will. These
pages will have been penned in vain unless they lead both writer and reader to
cry with a deeper earnestness than heretofore, "Lord, teach us to pray"
(Luke 11:1).
Chapter 10
OUR ATTITUDE TOWARD GOD’S SOVEREIGNTY
"Even so, Father: for so it seemed good in Thy sight"
(Matthew 11:26
In the present chapter we shall
consider, somewhat briefly, the practical application to ourselves of the
great truth which we have pondered in its various ramifications in earlier
pages. In chapter twelve we shall deal more in detail with the value of
this doctrine, but here we would confine ourselves to a definition of what
ought to be our attitude toward the sovereignty of God.
Every truth that is revealed to us in
God’s Word is there not only for our information but also for our inspiration.
The Bible has been given to us not to gratify an idle curiosity but to edify
the souls of its readers. The sovereignty of God is something more than an
abstract principle which explains the rationale of the Divine
government: it is designed as a motive for godly fear, it is made known to us
for the promotion of righteous living, it is revealed in order to bring into
subjection our rebellious hearts. A true recognition of God’s
sovereignty humbles as nothing else does or can humble, and brings the heart
into lowly submission before God, causing us to relinquish our own self-will
and making us delight in the perception and performance of the Divine will.
When we speak of the sovereignty of God
we mean very much more than the exercise of God’s governmental power,
though, of course, that is included in the expression. As we have remarked in
an earlier chapter, the sovereignty of God means the Godhood of God. In its
fullest and deepest meaning the title of this book signifies the Character
and Being of the One whose pleasure is performed and whose will is
executed. To truly recognize the sovereignty of God is, therefore, to
gaze upon the Sovereign Himself. It is to come into the presence of the august
"Majesty on High." it is to have a sight of the thrice holy God in His
excellent glory. The effects of such a sight may be learned from those
scriptures which describe the experience of different ones who obtained a view
of the Lord God.
Mark the experience of Job—the one of
whom the Lord Himself said, "There is none like him in the earth, a perfect
and an upright man, one that feareth God, and escheweth evil" (Job 1:8). At
the close of the book which bears his name we are shown Job in the Divine
presence, and how does he carry himself when brought face to face with
Jehovah? Hear what he says: "I have heard of Thee by the hearing of the ear;
but now mine eye seeth Thee: Wherefore I abhor myself, and repent
in dust and ashes" (Job 42:5, 6). Thus, a sight of God, God revealed in
awesome majesty, caused Job to abhor himself, and not only so, but to abase
himself before the Almighty.
Take note of Isaiah. In the sixth
chapter of his prophecy a scene is brought before us which has few equals even
in Scripture. The prophet beholds the Lord upon the Throne, a Throne, "high
and lifted up." Above this Throne stood the seraphim with veiled faces,
crying, "Holy, holy, holy, is the Lord of hosts." What is the effect of
this sight upon the prophet? We read, "Then said I, Woe is me! for I am
undone; because I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a
people of unclean lips: for mine eyes have seen the King, the Lord of hosts" (Isa.
6:5). A sight of the Divine King humbled Isaiah into the dust, bringing
him, as it did, to a realization of his own nothingness.
Once more. Look at the prophet Daniel.
Toward the close of his life this man of God beheld the Lord in theophanic
manifestation. He appeared to His servant in human form "clothed in linen" and
with loins "girded with fine gold"—symbolic of holiness and Divine glory. We
read that, "His body also was like the beryl, and His face as the appearance
of lightning, and His eyes as lamps of fire, and His arms and His feet like in
color to polished brass, and the voice of His words like the voice of a
multitude." Daniel then tells the effect this vision had upon him and those
who were with him—"And I Daniel alone saw the vision: for the men that were
with me saw not the vision; but a great quaking fell upon them, so that they
fled to hide themselves. Therefore I was left alone, and saw this great
vision, and there remained no strength in me: for my comeliness was
turned in me into corruption, and I retained no strength. Yet heard I the
voice of His words: and when I heard the voice of His words, then was I in a
deep sleep on my face, and my face toward the ground" (Dan. 10:6-9).
Once more, then, we are shown that to obtain a sight of the Sovereign God is
for creature strength to wither up, and results in man being humbled into the
dust before his Maker. What then ought to be our attitude toward the
Supreme Sovereign? We reply,
1. One of Godly fear.
Why is it that, today, the masses are so
utterly unconcerned about spiritual and eternal things, and that they are
lovers of pleasure more than lovers of God? Why is it that even on the
battlefields multitudes were so indifferent to their soul’s welfare? Why is it
that defiance of heaven is becoming more open, more blatant, more daring? The
answer is, Because "There is no fear of God before their eyes" (Rom. 3:18).
Again; why is it that the authority of the Scriptures has been lowered so
sadly of late? Why is it that even among those who profess to be the Lord’s
people there is so little real subjection to His Word, and that its precepts
are so lightly esteemed and so readily set aside? Ah! what needs to be
stressed to-day is that God is a God to be feared.
"The fear of the Lord is the
beginning of wisdom" (Pro. 1:7). Happy the soul that has been awed by a view
of God’s majesty, that has had a vision of God’s awful greatness, His
ineffable holiness, His perfect righteousness, His irresistible power, His
sovereign grace. Does someone say, "But it is only the unsaved, those
outside of Christ, who need to fear God"? Then the sufficient
answer is that the saved, those who are in Christ, are admonished to
work out their own salvation with "fear and trembling." Time was, when it was
the general custom to speak of a believer as a "God-fearing man"—that such an
appellation has become nearly extinct only serves to show whither we have
drifted. Nevertheless, it still stands written, "Like as a father pitieth his
children, so the Lord pitieth them that fear Him" (Ps. 103:13)!
When we speak of godly fear, of course,
we do not mean a servile fear, such as prevails among the heathen in
connection with their gods. No; we mean that spirit which Jehovah is pledged
to bless, that spirit to which the prophet referred when he said, "To this man
will I (the Lord) look, even to him that is poor and of a contrite spirit,
and trembleth at My Word" (Isa. 66:2). It was this the apostle had
in view when he wrote, "Honor all men. Love the brotherhood. Fear God.
Honor the king" (1 Pet. 2:17). And nothing will foster this godly fear like a
recognition of the sovereign Majesty of God.
What ought to be our attitude toward the
Sovereignty of God? We answer again,
2. One of Implicit Obedience.
A sight of God leads to a realization of
our littleness and nothingness, and issues in a sense of dependency and of
casting ourselves upon God. Or, again; a view of the Divine Majesty promotes
the spirit of godly fear and this, in turn, begets an obedient walk. Here then
is the Divine antidote for the native evil of our hearts. Naturally, man is
filled with a sense of his own importance, with his greatness and
self-sufficiency; in a word, with pride and rebellion. But, as we remarked,
the great corrective is to behold the Mighty God, for this alone will really
humble him. Man will glory either in himself or in God. Man will live either
to serve and please himself, or he will seek to serve and please the Lord.
None can serve two masters.
Irreverence begets disobedience. Said
the haughty monarch of Egypt, "Who is the Lord that I should obey His voice to
let Israel go? I know not the Lord; neither will I let Israel go" (Ex.
5:2). To Pharaoh, the God of the Hebrews was merely a god, one
among many, a powerless entity who needed not to be feared or served. How
sadly mistaken he was, and how bitterly he had to pay for his mistake, he soon
discovered; but what we are here seeking to emphasize is that, Pharaoh’s
defiant spirit was the fruit of irreverence, and this irreverence was the
consequence of his ignorance of the majesty and authority of the Divine
Being.
Now if irreverence begets disobedience,
true reverence will produce and promote obedience. To realize that the Holy
Scriptures are a revelation from the Most High, communicating to us His mind
and defining for us His will, is the first step toward practical godliness. To
recognize that the Bible is God’s Word, and that its precepts are the
precepts of the Almighty, will lead us to see what an awful thing it is to
despise and ignore them. To receive the Bible as addressed to our own souls,
given to us by the Creator Himself, will cause us to cry with the Psalmist, "Incline
my heart unto Thy testimonies. . . .Order my steps in Thy Word" (Ps.
119:36, 133). Once the sovereignty of the Author of the Word is apprehended,
it will no longer be a matter of picking and choosing from the precepts and
statutes of that Word, selecting those which meet with our approval;
but it will be seen that nothing less than an unqualified and whole-hearted
submission becomes the creature.
What ought to be our attitude toward the
Sovereignty of God? We answer, once more,
3. One of entire resignation.
A true recognition of God’s Sovereignty
will exclude all murmuring. This is self-evident, yet the thought
deserves to be dwelt upon. It is natural to murmur against afflictions and
losses. It is natural to complain when we are deprived of those things upon
which we had set our hearts. We are apt to regard our possessions as ours
unconditionally. We feel that when we have prosecuted our plans with prudence
and diligence that we are entitled to success; that when by dint of
hard work we have accumulated a ‘competence,’ we deserve to keep and
enjoy it; that when we are surrounded by a happy family, no power may lawfully
enter the charmed circle and strike down a loved one; and if in any of these
cases disappointment, bankruptcy, death, actually comes, the perverted
instinct of the human heart is to cry out against God. But in the one who, by
grace, has recognized God’s sovereignty, such murmuring is silenced, and
instead, there is a bowing to the Divine will, and an acknowledgment that He
has not afflicted us as sorely as we deserve.
A true recognition of God’s sovereignty
will avow God’s perfect right to do with us as He wills. The one who bows to
the pleasure of the Almighty will acknowledge His absolute right to do with us
as seemeth Him good. If He chooses to send poverty, sickness, domestic
bereavements, even while the heart is bleeding at every pore, it will say,
Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right! Often there will be a struggle,
for the carnal mind remains in the believer to the end of his earthly
pilgrimage. But though there may be a conflict within his breast,
nevertheless, to the one who has really yielded himself to this blessed truth,
there will presently be heard that Voice saying, as of old it said to the
turbulent Gennesareth, "Peace be still"; and the tempestuous flood within will
be quieted and the subdued soul will lift a tearful but confident eye to
heaven and say, "Thy will be done."
A striking illustration of a soul bowing
to the sovereign will of God is furnished by the history of Eli the high
priest of Israel. In 1 Samuel 3 we learn how God revealed to the young child
Samuel that He was about to slay Eli’s two sons for their wickedness, and on
the morrow Samuel communicates this message to the aged priest. It is
difficult to conceive of more appalling intelligence for the heart of a pious
parent. The announcement that his child is going to be stricken down by sudden
death is, under any circumstances, a great trial to any father, but to learn
that his two sons—in the prime of their manhood, and utterly unprepared
to die—were to be cut off by a Divine judgment, must have been overwhelming.
Yet, what was the effect upon Eli when he learned from Samuel the tragic
tidings? What reply did he make when he heard the awful news? "And he said, It
is the Lord: let Him do what seemeth Him good" (1 Sam. 3:18).
And not another word escaped him. Wonderful submission! Sublime resignation!
Lovely exemplification of the power of Divine grace to control the strongest
affections of the human heart and subdue the rebellious will, bringing it into
unrepining acquiescence to the sovereign pleasure of Jehovah.
Another example, equally striking, is
seen in the life of Job. As is well known, Job was one that feared God and
eschewed evil. If ever there was one who might reasonably expect Divine
providence to smile upon him—we speak as a man—it was Job. Yet, how fared it
with him? For a time, the lines fell unto him in pleasant places. The Lord
filled his quiver by giving him seven sons and three daughters. He prospered
him in his temporal affairs until he owned great possessions. But of a sudden,
the sun of life was hidden behind dark clouds. In a single day Job lost not
only his flocks and herds, but his sons and daughters as well. News arrived
that his cattle had been carried off by robbers, and his children slain by a
cyclone. And how did he receive this intelligence? Hearken to his sublime
words: "The Lord gave, and the Lord hath taken away." He bowed
to the sovereign will of Jehovah. He traced his afflictions back to their
First Cause. He looked behind the Sabeans who had stolen his cattle, and
beyond the winds that had destroyed his children, and saw the hand of God.
But not only did Job recognize God’s sovereignty, he rejoiced
in it, too. To the words, "The Lord gave, and the Lord bath taken away,"
he added, "Blessed be the name of the Lord" (Job 1:21). Again we
say, Sweet submission! Sublime resignation!
A true recognition of God’s sovereignty
causes us to hold our every plan in abeyance to God’s will. The writer well
recalls an incident which occurred in England over twenty years ago. Queen
Victoria was dead, and the date for the coronation of her eldest son, Edward,
had been set for April 1902. In all the announcements which were sent out, two
little letters were omitted—D. V.—Deo Volente: God willing. Plans were made
and all arrangements completed for the most imposing celebrations that England
had ever witnessed. Kings and emperors from all parts of the earth had
received invitations to attend the royal ceremony. The Prince’s proclamations
were printed and displayed, but, so far as the writer is aware, the letters D.
V. were not found on a single one of them. A most imposing program had been
arranged, and the late Queen’s eldest son was to be crowned Edward the Seventh
at Westminster Abbey at a certain hour on a fixed day. And then God
intervened, and all man’s plans were frustrated. A still small voice was
heard to say, "You have reckoned without Me," and Prince Edward was stricken
down with appendicitis, and his coronation postponed for months!
As remarked, a true recognition of God’s
sovereignty causes us to hold our plans in abeyance to God’s will. It
makes us recognize that the Divine Potter has absolute power over the clay and
moulds it according to his own imperial pleasure. It causes us to heed that
admonition—now, alas! so generally disregarded—"Go to now, ye that say, Today
or tomorrow we will go into such a city, and continue there a year, and
buy and sell, and get gain: Whereas ye know not what shall be on the morrow.
For what is your life? It is even a vapor, that appeareth for a little time,
and then vanisheth away. For that ye ought to say, If the Lord will,
we shall live, and do this, or that" (James 4:13-15). Yes, it is to the
Lord’s will we must bow. It is for Him to say where I shall
live—whether in America or Africa. It is for Him to determine under
what circumstances I shall live—whether amid wealth or poverty, whether in
health or sickness. It is for Him to say how long I shall live—whether
I shall be cut down in youth like the flower of the field, or whether I shall
continue for three score and ten years. To really learn this lesson is,
by grace, to attain unto a high form in the school of God, and even when we
think we have learnt it, we discover, again and again, that we have to relearn
it.
4. One if deep thankfulness and joy.
The heart’s apprehension of this
most blessed truth of the sovereignty of God, produces something far different
than a sullen bowing to the inevitable. The philosophy of this perishing world
knows nothing better than to "make the best of a bad job". But with the
Christian it should be far other wise. Not only should the recognition of
God’s supremacy beget within us godly fear, implicit obedience, and entire
resignation, but it should cause us to say with the Psalmist, "Bless the Lord,
O my soul: and all that is within me, bless His holy name". Does not the
apostle say, "Giving thanks always for all things unto God and the
Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ" (Eph. 5:20)? Ah, it is at this
point the state of our souls is so often put to the test. Alas, there is
so much self-will in each of us. When things go as we wish them, we
appear to be very grateful to God; but what of those occasions when things go
contrary to our plans and desires?
We take it for granted when the real
Christian takes a train-journey that, upon reaching his destination, he
devoutly returns thanks unto God—which, of course, argues that He
controls everything; otherwise, we ought to thank the engine-driver, the
stoker, the signalmen etc. Or, if in business, at the close of a good week,
gratitude is expressed unto the Giver of every good (temporal) and of every
perfect (spiritual) gift—which again, argues that He directs all
customers to your shop. So far, so good. Such examples occasion no difficulty.
But imagine the opposites. Suppose my train was delayed for hours, did I fret
and fume; suppose another train ran into it, and I am injured! Or, suppose I
have had a poor week in business, or that lightning struck my shop and set it
on fire, or that burglars broke in and rifled it—then what: do I see the hand
of God in these things?
Take the case of Job once more. When
loss after loss came his way, what did he do? Bemoan his "bad luck"? Curse the
robbers? Murmur against God? No; he bowed before Him in worship. Ah, dear
reader, there is no real rest for your poor heart until you learn to see the
hand of God in everything. But for that, faith must be in constant
exercise. And what is faith? A blind credulity? A fatalistic acquiescence? No,
far from it. Faith is a resting on the sure Word of the living God, and
therefore says, "We know that all things work together for good to them
that love God, to them who are the called according to His purpose" (Rom.
8:28); and therefore faith will give thanks "always for all things". Operative
faith will "Rejoice in the Lord alway" (Phil. 4:4).
We turn now to mark how this recognition
of God’s sovereignty which is expressed in godly fear, implicit obedience,
entire resignation, and deep thankfulness and joy was supremely and perfectly
exemplified by the Lord Jesus Christ.
In all things the Lord Jesus has left us
an example that we should follow His steps. But is this true in connection
with the first point made above? Are the words "godly fear" ever linked with
His peerless name? Remembering that ‘godly fear’ signifies not a
servile terror, but rather a filial subjection and reverence, and remembering
too that "the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom," would it not
rather be strange if no mention at all were made of godly fear in connection
with the One who was wisdom incarnate! What a wonderful and precious word is
that of Hebrews 5:7—"Who in the days of His flesh, having offered up prayers
and supplications with strong crying and tears unto Him that was able to save
Him from death, and having been heard for His godly fear" (R.
V.). What was it but ‘godly fear’ which caused the Lord Jesus to be
"subject" unto Mary and Joseph in the days of His childhood? Was it not ‘godly
fear’—a filial subjection to and reverence for God—that we see displayed, when
we read, "And He came to Nazareth where He had been brought up: and, as His
custom was, He went into the synagogue on the Sabbath day" (Luke 4:16)?
Was it not ‘godly fear’ which caused the incarnate Son to say, when tempted by
Satan to fall down and worship him, "It is written, thou shalt worship the
Lord thy God and Him only shalt thou serve"? Was it not ‘godly fear’ which
moved Him to say to the cleansed leper, "Go thy way, shew thyself to the
priest, and offer the gift that Moses commanded" (Matt. 8:4)?
But why multiply illustrations? [1] How perfect
was the obedience that the Lord Jesus offered to God the Father! And in
reflecting upon this let us not lose sight of that wondrous grace which caused
Him, who was in the very form of God, to stoop so low as to take upon Him the
form of a Servant, and thus be brought into the place where obedience
was becoming. As the perfect Servant He yielded complete obedience to His
Father. How absolute and entire that obedience was we may learn from the
words, He "became obedient unto death, even the death of the Cross"
(Phil. 2:8). That this was a conscious and intelligent obedience is
clear from His own language—"Therefore doth My Father love Me, because I lay
down My life, that I might take it again. No man taketh it from Me, but I lay
it down of Myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it
again. This commandment have I received from My Father" (John 10:17,
18).
And what shall we say of the absolute
resignation of the Son to the Father’s will—what, but, between Them there
was entire oneness of accord. Said He, "For I came down from heaven, not to do
Mine own will, but the will of Him that sent Me" (John 6:38), and how fully He
substantiated that claim all know who have attentively followed His path as
marked out in the Scriptures. Behold Him in Gethsemane! The bitter ‘cup,’ held
in the Father’s hand, is presented to His view. Mark well His attitude.
Learn of Him who was meek and lowly in heart. Remember that there in the
Garden we see the Word become flesh—a perfect Man. His body is quivering at
every nerve, in contemplation of the physical sufferings which await Him; His
holy and sensitive nature is shrinking from the horrible indignities which
shall be heaped upon Him; His heart is breaking at the awful "reproach" which
is before Him; His spirit is greatly troubled as He foresees the terrible
conflict with the Power of Darkness; and above all, and supremely, His soul is
filled with horror at the thought of being separated from God Himself—thus and
there He pours out His soul to the Father, and with strong crying and tears He
sheds, as it were, great drops of blood. And now observe and listen. Still the
beating of thy heart, and hearken to the words which fall from His blessed
lips—"Father, if Thou be willing, remove this cup from Me:
nevertheless, not My will, but Thine be done" (Luke 22:42).
Here is submission personified. Here is resignation to the pleasure of a
sovereign God superlatively exemplified. And He has left us an example that we
should follow His steps. He who was God became man, and was tempted in all
points like as we are—sin apart—to show us how to wear our
creature nature!
Above we asked, What shall we say of
Christ’s absolute resignation to the Father’s will? We answer further,
This,—that here, as everywhere, He was unique, peerless. In all things He has
the pre-eminence. In the Lord Jesus there was no rebellious will to be broken.
In His heart there was nothing to be subdued. Was not this one reason why, in
the language of prophecy, He said, "I am a worm, and no man" (Ps. 22:6)—a
worm has no power of resistance! It was because in Him there was no
resistance that He could say, "My meat is to do the will of Him that
sent Me" (John 4:34). Yea, it was because He was in perfect accord with the
Father in all things that He said, "I delight to do Thy will, O God;
yea, Thy law is within My heart" (Ps. 40:8). Note the last clause here and
behold His matchless excellency. God has to put His laws into
our minds, and write them in our hearts (see Heb. 8:10), but
His law was already in Christ’s heart!
What a beautiful and striking
illustration of Christ’s thankfulness and joy is found in Matthew 11. There we
behold, first, the failure in the faith of His forerunner (vv. 22, 23).
Next, we learn of the discontent of the people: satisfied neither with
Christ’s joyous message, nor with John’s solemn one (vv. 16-20). Third, we
have the non-repentance of those favored cities in which our Lord’s mightiest
works were done (vv. 21-24). And then we read, "At that time Jesus
answered and said, I thank Thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth,
because Thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast
revealed them unto babes" (v. 25)! Note the parallel passage in Luke
10:21 opens by saying, "In that hour Jesus rejoiced in spirit, and
said, I thank Thee" etc. Ah, here was submission in its purest form. Here was
One by which the worlds were made, yet, in the days of His humiliation, and in
the face of His rejection, thankfully and joyously bowing to the will of the
"Lord of heaven and earth".
What ought to be our attitude towards
God’s sovereignty? Finally,
5. One of adoring worship.
It has been well said that "true worship
is based upon recognized GREATNESS, and greatness is superlatively seen
in Sovereignty, and at no other footstool will men really worship" (J.
B. Moody). In the presence of the Divine King upon His throne even the
seraphim ‘veil their faces.’
Divine sovereignty is not the
sovereignty of a tyrannical Despot, but the exercised pleasure of One who is
infinitely wise and good! Because God is infinitely wise He cannot err,
and because He is infinitely righteous He will not do wrong. Here then
is the preciousness of this truth. The mere fact itself that God’s will
is irresistible and irreversible fills me with fear, but once I realize that
God wills only that which is good, my heart is made to rejoice.
Here then is the final answer to the
question of this chapter—What ought to be our attitude toward the sovereignty
of God? The becoming attitude for us to take is that of godly fear, implicit
obedience, and unreserved resignation and submission. But not only so: the
recognition of the sovereignty of God, and the realization that the Sovereign
Himself is my Father, ought to overwhelm the heart and cause me to bow
before Him in adoring worship. At all times I must say, "Even so, Father, for
so it seemeth good in Thy sight." We conclude with an example
which well illustrates our meaning.
Some two hundred years ago the saintly
Madam Guyon, after ten years spent in a dungeon lying far below the surface of
the ground, lit only by a candle at meal-times, wrote these words,
"A little bird I am,
Shut from the fields of air;
Yet in my cage I sit and sing
To Him who placed me there;
Well pleased a prisoner to he,
Because, my God, it pleases Thee.
Nought have I else to do
I sing the whole day long;
And He whom most I love to please,
Doth listen to my song;
He caught and bound my wandering wing
But still He bends to hear me sing.
My cage confines me round;
Abroad I cannot fly;
But though my wing is closely bound,
My heart’s at liberty.
My prison walls cannot control
The flight, the freedom of the soul.
Ah! it is good to soar
These bolts and bars above,
To Him whose purpose I adore,
Whose Providence I love;
And in Thy mighty will to find
The joy, the freedom of the mind."
ENDNOTES:
[1]
Note how Old Testament prophecy
also declared that “the Spirit of the Lord” should “rest upon Him, the spirit
of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of
knowledge and of the fear of the Lord” (Isa.11:1,2).
Chapter 11
DIFFICULTIES AND OBJECTIONS
"Yet ye say, The way of the Lord is not equal. Hear
now, O house of Israel; Is not My way equal? are not your ways unequal?"
Ezekiel 18:25
A convenient point has been reached when
we may now examine, more definitely, some of the difficulties encountered and
the objections which might be advanced against what we have written in
previous pages. The author deemed it better to reserve these for a separate
consideration, rather than deal with them as he went along, requiring as that
would have done the breaking of the course of thought and destroying the
strict unity of each chapter, or else cumbering our pages with numerous and
lengthy footnotes.
That there are difficulties
involved in an attempt to set forth the truth of God’s sovereignty is readily
acknowledged. The hardest thing of all, perhaps, is to maintain the balance
of truth. It is largely a matter of perspective. That God is
sovereign is explicitly declared in Scripture: that man is a responsible
creature is also expressly affirmed in Holy Writ. To define the relationship
of these two truths, to fix the dividing line betwixt them, to show exactly
where they meet, to exhibit the perfect consistency of the one with the other,
is the weightiest task of all. Many have openly declared that it is
impossible for the finite mind to harmonize them. Others tell us it is not
necessary or even wise to attempt it. But, as we have remarked in an earlier
chapter, it seems to us more honoring to God to seek in His Word the solution
to every problem. What is impossible to man is possible with God, and while we
grant that the finite mind is limited in its reach, yet, we remember that the
Scriptures are given to us that the man of God may be "thoroughly
furnished," and if we approach their study in the spirit of humility and of
expectancy, then, according unto our faith will it be unto us.
As remarked above, the hardest task in
this connection is to preserve the balance of truth while insisting on both
the sovereignty of God and the responsibility of the creature. To some of
our readers it may appear that in pressing the sovereignty of God to the
lengths we have, man is reduced to a mere puppet. Hence, to guard against
this, they would modify their definitions and statements relating to
God’s sovereignty, and thus seek to blunt the keen edge of what is so
offensive to the carnal mind. Others, while refusing to weigh the evidence
that we have adduced in support of our assertions, may raise objections which
to their minds are sufficient to dispose of the whole subject. We would not
waste time in the effort to refute objections made in a carping and
contentious spirit, but we are desirous of meeting fairly the
difficulties experienced by those who are anxious to obtain a fuller
knowledge of the truth. Not that we deem ourselves able to give a satisfactory
and final answer to every question that might be asked. Like the reader, the
writer knows but "in part" and sees through a glass "darkly." All that we can
do is to examine these difficulties in the light we now have, in dependence
upon the Spirit of God that we may follow on to know the Lord better.
We propose now to retrace our steps and
pursue the same order of thought as that followed up to this point. As a part
of our "definition" of God’s sovereignty we affirmed: "To say
that God is sovereign is to declare that He is the Almighty, the Possessor of
all power in heaven and earth, so that none can defeat His counsels, thwart
His purpose, or resist His will. . . The sovereignty of the God of Scripture
is absolute, irresistible, infinite." To put it now in its strongest form, we
insist that God does as He pleases, only as He pleases,
always as He pleases: that whatever takes place in time is but the
outworking of that which He decreed in eternity. In proof of this assertion we
appeal to the following scriptures—"But our God is in the heavens:
He hath done whatsoever He hath
pleased" (Ps. 115:3). "For the Lord of hosts hath purposed, and who shall
disannul it? and His hand is stretched out, and who shall turn it back?" (Isa.
14:27). "And all the inhabitants of the earth are reputed as nothing: and He
doeth according to His will in the army of heaven, and among the inhabitants
of the earth: and none can stay His hand or say unto Him, What doest
thou?" (Dan. 4:35). "For of Him, and through Him, and to Him, are all
things: to whom be glory for ever. Amen" (Rom. 11:36).
The above declarations are so plain and
positive that any comments of ours upon them would simply be darkening counsel
by words without knowledge. Such express statements as those just quoted, are
so sweeping and so dogmatic that all controversy concerning the subject of
which they treat ought for ever to be at an end. Yet, rather than receive them
at their face value, every device of carnal ingenuity is resorted to so as to
neutralize their force. For example, it has been asked, If what we see in the
world today is but the outworking of God’s eternal purpose, if God’s counsel
is NOW being accomplished, then why did our Lord teach His disciples to
pray, "Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven"? Is it not a clear
implication from these words that God’s will is not now being done on
earth? The answer is very simple. The emphatic word in the above clause is
"as." God’s will is being done on earth today, if it is not, then our
earth is not subject to God’s rule, and if it is not subject to His rule then
He is not, as Scripture proclaims Him to be, "The Lord of all the earth"
(Josh. 3:13). But God’s will is not being done on earth as it is in
heaven. How is God’s will "done in heaven"?—consciously and joyfully.
How is it "done on earth"?—for the most part, unconsciously and sullenly. In
heaven the angels perform the bidding of their Creator intelligently and
gladly, but on earth the unsaved among men accomplish His will blindly and in
ignorance. As we have said in earlier pages, when Judas betrayed the Lord
Jesus and when Pilate sentenced Him to be crucified, they had no conscious
intention of fulfilling God’s decrees yet, nevertheless, unknown to themselves
they did do so!
But again. It has been objected: If
everything that happens on earth is the fulfilling of the Almighty’s pleasure,
if God has fore-ordained—before the foundation of the world—everything which
comes to pass in human history, then why do we read in Genesis 6:6, "It
repented the Lord that He had made man on the earth, and it grieved
Him at His heart"? Does not this language intimate that the antediluvians had
followed a course which their Maker had not marked out for them, and that in
view of the fact they had "corrupted" their way upon the earth, the Lord
regretted that He had ever brought such a creature into existence? Ere
drawing such a conclusion let us note what is involved in such an
inference. If the words "It repented the Lord that He had made man" are
regarded in an absolute sense, then God’s omniscience would be
denied, for in such a case the course followed by man must have been
unforeseen by God in the day that He created him. Therefore it must be evident
to every reverent soul that this language bears some other meaning. We submit
that the words, "It repented the Lord" is an accommodation to
our finite intelligence, and in saying this we are not seeking to escape a
difficulty or cut a knot, but are advancing an interpretation which we
shall seek to show is in perfect accord with the general trend of Scripture.
The Word of God is addressed to men,
and therefore it speaks the language of men. Because we cannot rise to
God’s level He, in grace, comes down to ours and converses with us in our own
speech. The apostle Paul tells us of how he was "caught up into Paradise and
heard unspeakable words which it is not possible (margin) to utter" (2 Cor.
12:4) Those on earth could not understand the vernacular of heaven. The finite
cannot comprehend the Infinite, hence the Almighty deigns to couch His
revelation in terms we may understand. It is for this reason the Bible
contains many anthropomorphisms—i.e., representations of God in the form of
man. God is Spirit, yet the Scriptures speak of Him as having eyes, ears,
nostrils, breath, hands etc., which is surely an accommodation of terms
brought down to the level of human comprehension.
Again; we read in Genesis 18:20, 21,
"And the Lord said, Because the cry of Sodom and Gomorrah is great, and
because their sin is very grievous, I will go down now, and see whether
they have done altogether according to the cry of it, which is come up
unto Me; and if not, I will know." Now, manifestly, this is an anthropologism—God,
speaking in human language. God knew the conditions which prevailed in
Sodom, and His eyes had witnessed its fearful sins, yet He is pleased to use
terms here that are taken from our own vocabulary.
Again; in Genesis 22:12 we read, "And He
(God) said, Lay not thine hand upon the lad, neither do thou anything unto
him: for now I know that thou fearest God, seeing thou hast not
withheld thy son, thine only son, from Me." Here again, God is speaking in the
language of men, for He "knew" before He tested Abram exactly
how the patriarch would act. So too the expression used of God so often
in Jeremiah (7:13 etc.), of Him "rising up early", is manifestly an
accommodation of terms.
Once more: in the parable of the
vineyard Christ Himself represents its Owner as saying, "Then said the Lord of
the vineyard, What shall I do? I will send My beloved Son: it may be
they will reverence Him when they see Him" (Luke 20:13), and yet, it is
certain that God knew perfectly well that the "husbandmen" of the vineyard—the
Jews—would not "reverence His Son" but, instead, would "despise and
reject" Him, as His own Word had declared!
In the same way we understand the words
in Genesis 6:6— "It repented the Lord that He had made man on the
earth"—as an accommodation of terms to human comprehension. This verse does
not teach that God was confronted with an unforeseen contingency, and
therefore regretted that He had made man, but it expresses the
abhorrence of a holy God at the awful wickedness and corruption into which
man had fallen. Should there be any doubt remaining in the minds of our
readers as to the legitimacy and soundness of our interpretation, a direct
appeal to Scripture should instantly and entirely remove it—"The Strength of
Israel (a Divine title) will not lie nor repent: for He is not a man, that
He should repent" (1 Sam. 15:29)! "Every good and perfect gift is
from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights, with Whom is no
variableness, neither shadow of turning" (James 1 :17)!
Careful attention to what we have said
above will throw light on numerous other passages which, if we ignore their
figurative character and fail to note that God applies to Himself
human modes of expression, will be obscure and perplexing. Having commented at
such length upon Genesis 6:6 there will be no need to give such a detailed
exposition of other passages which belong to the same class, yet, for the
benefit of those of our readers who may be anxious for us to examine several
other scriptures, we turn to one or two more.
One scripture which we often find cited
in order to overthrow the teaching advanced in this book is our Lord’s lament
over Jerusalem: "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and
stonest them that are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered
thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings,
and ye would not!" (Matt. 23:37). The question is asked, Do not
these words show that the Saviour acknowledged the defeat of His
mission, that as a people the Jews resisted all His gracious overtures toward
them? In replying to this question, it should first be pointed out that our
Lord is here referring not so much to His own mission, as He is
upbraiding the Jews for having in all ages rejected His grace—this is
clear from His reference to the "prophets." The Old Testament bears full
witness of how graciously and patiently Jehovah dealt with His people, and
with what extreme obstinacy, from first to last, they refused to be "gathered"
unto Him, and how in the end He (temporarily) abandoned them to follow their
own devices, yet, as the same Scriptures declare, the counsel of God was
not frustrated by their wickedness, for it had been foretold (and
therefore, decreed) by Him—see, for example, 1 Kings 8:33.
Matthew 23:37 may well be compared with
Isaiah 65:2 where the Lord says, "I have spread out My hands all the
day unto a rebellious people, which walketh in a way that was not good, after
their own thoughts." But, it may be asked, Did God seek to do that which was
in opposition to His own eternal purpose? In words borrowed from Calvin we
reply, "Though to our apprehension the will of God is manifold and various,
yet He does not in Himself will things at variance with each other, but
astonishes our faculties with His various and ‘manifold’ wisdom,
according to the expression of Paul, till we shall be enabled to understand
that He mysteriously wills what now seems contrary to His will." As a further
illustration of the same principle we would refer the reader to Isaiah 5:1-4:
"Now will I sing to my well Beloved a song of my Beloved touching His
vineyard. My well Beloved hath a vineyard in a very fruitful hill: And He
fenced it, and gethered out the stones thereof, and planted it with the
choicest vine and built a tower in the midst of it, and also made a winepress
therein: and He looked that it should bring forth grapes, and it
brought forth wild grapes. And now, ) inhabitants of Jerusalem, and men of
Judah, judge, I pray you, betwixt Me and My vineyard. What could have been
done more to My vineyard, that I have not done in it? wherefore, when I
looked that it should bring forth grapes, brought it forth wild grapes?"
Is it not plain from this language that God reckoned Himself to have done
enough for Israel to warrant an expectation—speaking after the manner of
men—of better returns? Yet, is it not equally evident when Jehovah says here
"He looked that it should bring forth grapes" that He is accommodating Himself
to a form of finite expression? And, so also when He says "What could have
been done more to My vineyard, that I have not done in it ?" we
need to take note that in the previous enumeration of what He had
done—the "fencing" etc.—He refers only to external privileges,
means, and opportunities, which had been bestowed upon Israel, for, of course,
He could even then have taken away from them their stony heart and
given them a new heart, even a heart of flesh, as He will yet do, had He so
pleased.
Perhaps we should link up with Christ’s
lament over Jerusalem in Matthew 23:37, His tears over the City, recorded in
Luke 19:41: "He beheld the city, and wept over it." In the verses which
immediately follow, we learn what it was that occasioned His tears:
"Saying, If thou hadst known, even thou, at least in this thy day, the things
which belong unto thy peace! but now they are hid from thine eyes. For the
days shall come upon thee, that thine enemies shall cast a trench about thee,
and compass thee round, and keep thee in on every side." It was the prospect
of the fearful judgment which Christ knew was impending. But did those tears
make manifest a disappointed God? Nay, verily. Instead, they displayed a
perfect Man. The Man Christ Jesus was no emotionless stoic, but One "filled
with compassion." Those tears expressed the sinless sympathies of His real and
pure humanity. Had He not "wept", He had been less than human. Those
"tears" were one of many proofs that "in all things it behooved Him to
be made like unto His brethren" (Heb. 2:17).
In chapter one we have affirmed that God
is sovereign in the exercise of His love, and in saying this we are
fully aware that many will strongly resent the statement and that,
furthermore, what we have now to say will probably meet with more criticism
than anything else advanced in this book. Nevertheless, we must be true to our
convictions of what we believe to be the teaching of Holy Scripture, and we
can only ask our readers to examine diligently in the light of God’s Word what
we here submit to their attention.
One of the most popular beliefs of the
day is that God loves everybody, and the very fact that it is so popular
with all classes ought to be enough to arouse the suspicions of those who
are subject to the Word of Truth. God’s Love toward all His creatures
is the fundamental and favorite tenet of Universalists, Unitarians,
Theosophists, Christian Scientists, Spiritualists, Russellites, etc. No matter
how a man may live—in open defiance of Heaven, with no concern whatever for
his soul’s eternal interests, still less for God’s glory, dying, perhaps with
an oath on his lips,—notwithstanding, God loves him, we are told. So widely
has this dogma been proclaimed, and so comforting is it to the heart
which is at enmity with God, we have little hope of convincing many of their
error. That God loves everybody, is, we may say, quite a modern belief.
The writings of the church-fathers, the Reformers or the Puritans will (we
believe) be searched in vain for any such concept. Perhaps the late D. L.
Moody—captivated by Drummond’s "The Greatest Thing in the World"—did more than
anyone else last century to popularize this concept.
It has been customary to say God loves
the sinner, though He hates his sin. [1] But that
is a meaningless distinction. What is there in a sinner but sin? Is it not
true that his "whole head is sick", and his "whole heart faint",
and that "from the sole of the foot even unto the head there is no
soundness" in him? (Isa. 1:5,6). Is it true that God loves
the one who is despising and rejecting His blessed Son? God is Light as
well as Love, and therefore His love must be a holy love. To tell the
Christ-rejector that God loves him is to cauterize his conscience, as well as
to afford him a sense of security in his sins. The fact is, that the love of
God, is a truth for the saints only, and to present it to the enemies of God
is to take the children’s bread and cast it to the dogs. With the exception of
John 3:16, not once in the four Gospels do we read of the Lord Jesus—the
perfect Teacher— telling sinners that God loved them! In the book of Acts,
which records the evangelistic labors and messages of the apostles, God’s love
is never referred to at all! But, when we come to the Epistles, which are
addressed to the saints, we have a full presentation of this precious
truth—God’s love for His own. Let us seek to rightly divide the
Word of God and then we shall not be found taking truths which are addressed
to believers and misapplying them to unbelievers. That which sinners need to
have brought before them is, the ineffable holiness, the exacting
righteousness, the inflexible justice and the terrible wrath of God. Risking
the danger of being mis-understood, let us say—and we wish we could say it to
every evangelist and preacher in the country—there is far too much presenting
of Christ to sinners today (by those sound in the faith), and far too little
showing sinners their need of Christ, i.e., their absolutely ruined and
lost condition, their imminent and awful danger of suffering the wrath to
come, the fearful guilt resting upon them in the sight of God—to present
Christ to those who have never been shown their need of Him, seems to
us to be guilty of casting pearls before swine. [2]
If it be true that God loves every
member of the human family then why did our Lord tell His disciples, "He that
hath My commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth Me: and he that
loveth Me shall be loved of My Father. . . . . If a man love Me, he will keep
My words: and My Father will love him" (John 14:21,23)? Why say "he that
loveth Me shall be loved of My Father" if the Father loves everybody?
The same limitation is found in Proverbs 8:17: "I love them that love Me."
Again; we read, "Thou hatest all workers of iniquity"—not merely the
works of iniquity. Here, then, is a flat repudiation of present teaching that,
God hates sin but loves the sinner; Scripture says, "Thou hatest all
workers of iniquity" (Ps. 5:5)! "God is angry with the wicked every
day." "He that believeth not the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of
God"—not "shall abide," but even now—"abideth on him" (Ps. 5:5;
7:11 John 3:36). Can God "love" the one on whom His "wrath" abides? Again; is
it not evident that the words "The love of God which is in Christ Jesus"
(Rom. 8:39) mark a limitation, both in the sphere and objects of His love?
Again; is it not plain from the words "Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I
hated" (Rom. 9:13) that God does not love everybody? Again;
it is written, "For whom the Lord loveth He chasteneth, and scourgeth
every son whom He receiveth" (Heb. 12:6). Does not this verse teach
that God’s love is restricted to the members of His own family? If He
loves all men without exception, then the distinction and limitation here
mentioned is quite meaningless. Finally, we would ask, Is it conceivable that
God will love the damned in the Lake of Fire? Yet, if He loves them now He
will do so then, seeing that His love knows no change—He is "without
variableness or shadow of turning"!
Turning now to John 3:16, it should be
evident from the passages just quoted, that this verse will not bear the
construction usually put upon it. "God so loved the world". Many
suppose that this means, The entire human race. But "the entire human race,"
includes all mankind from Adam till the close of the earth’s history: it
reaches backward as well as forward! Consider, then, the history of mankind
before Christ was born. Unnumbered millions lived and died before the
Saviour came to the earth, lived here "having no hope and without God in the
world", and therefore passed out into an eternity of woe. If God "loved"
them, where is the slightest proof thereof? Scripture declares, "Who (God)
in times past (from the tower of Babel till after Pentecost) suffered all
nations to walk in their own ways" (Acts 14:16). Scripture declares that,
"And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave
them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not
convenient" (Rom. 1:28). To Israel God said, "You only have I known of
all the families of the earth" (Amos 3:2). In view of these plain passages,
who will be so foolish as to insist that God in the past loved all mankind!
The same applies with equal force to the future. Read through the book of
Revelation, noting especially chapters 8 to 19, where we have described the
judgments which will yet be poured out from heaven on this earth. Read of the
fearful woes, the frightful plagues, the vials of God’s wrath, which shall be
emptied on the wicked. Finally, read the 20th chapter of the Revelation, the
great white throne judgment, and see if you can discover there the slightest
trace of love.
But the objector comes back to John 3:16
and says, "World means world". True, but we have shown that "the
world" does not mean the whole human family. The fact is that "the world" is
used in a general way. When the brethren of Christ said, "Shew Thyself
to the world" (John 7:4), did they mean "shew Thyself to all
mankind"? When the Pharisees said, "Behold, the world is
gone after Him" (John 12:19), did they mean that "all the human
family" were flocking after Him? When the apostle wrote, "Your
faith is spoken of throughout the whole world" (Rom. 1:8), did
he mean that the faith of the saints at Rome was the subject of conversation
by every man, woman, and child on the earth? When Revelation 13:3
informs us that "all the world wondered after the beast", are we to
understand that there will be no exceptions? What of the godly Jewish Remnant,
who will be slain (Rev. 20:4) rather than submit? These, and other passages
which might be quoted, show that the term "the world" often has a relative
rather than an absolute force.
Now the first thing to note in
connection with John 3:16 is that our Lord was there speaking to Nicodemus—a
man who believed that God’s mercies were confined to his own nation.
Christ there announced that God’s love in giving His Son had a larger object
in view, that it flowed beyond the boundary of Palestine, reaching out to
"regions beyond". In other words, this was Christ’s announcement that God had
a purpose of grace toward Gentiles as well as Jews. "God so loved the world",
then, signifies, God’s love is international in its scope. But does
this mean that God loves every individual among the Gentiles? Not necessarily,
for as we have seen, the term "world" is general rather than specific,
relative rather than absolute. The term "world" in itself is not conclusive.
To ascertain who are the objects of God’s love other passages where
His love is mentioned must be consulted.
In 2 Peter 2:5 we read of "the world of
the ungodly". If then, there is a world of the ungodly
there must also be a world of the godly. It is the latter who are in
view in the passages we shall now briefly consider. "For the bread of God is
He which cometh down from heaven, and giveth life unto the world"
(John 6:33). Now mark it well, Christ did not say, "offereth life
unto the world", but "giveth". What is the difference between the two terms?
This: a thing which is "offered" may be refused, but a thing "given",
necessarily implies its acceptance. If it is not accepted, it is
not "given", it is simply proffered. Here, then, is a scripture that
positively states Christ giveth life (spiritual, eternal life) "unto the
world." Now He does not give eternal life to the "world of
the ungodly" for they will not have it, they do not want it. Hence, we are
obliged to understand the reference in John 6:33 as being to "the world of
the godly", i.e., God’s own people.
One more: in 2 Corinthians 5:19
we read, "To wit that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto
Himself". What is meant by this is clearly defined in the words immediately
following, "not imputing their trespasses unto them". Here again, "the
world" cannot mean "the world of the ungodly", for their
"trespasses" are "imputed" to them, as the judgment of the Great White
Throne will yet show. But 2 Corinthians 5:19 plainly teaches there
is a "world" which are "reconciled", reconciled unto God, because
their trespasses are not reckoned to their account, having been borne
by their Substitute. Who then are they? Only one answer is fairly possible—the
world of God’s people!
In like manner, the "world" in John 3:16
must, in the final analysis, refer to the world of God’s people. Must
we say, for there is no other alternative solution. It cannot mean the
whole human race, for one half of the race was already in hell when Christ
came to earth. It is unfair to insist that it means every human being now
living, for every other passage in the New Testament where God’s love
is mentioned limits it to His own people—search and see! The objects of
God’s love in John 3:16 are precisely the same as the objects of Christ’s love
in John 13:1: "Now before the Feast of the Passover, when Jesus knew that His
time was come, that He should depart out of this world unto the Father, having
loved His own which were in the world, He loved them unto the
end". We may admit that our interpretation of John 3:16 is no novel one
invented by us, but one almost uniformly given by the Reformers and Puritans,
and many others since them. [3]
Coming now to chapter three—The
Sovereignty of God in Salvation—innumerable are the questions which might be
raised here. It is strange, yet it is true, that many who acknowledge the
sovereign rule of God over material things, will cavil and quibble when we
insist that God is also sovereign in the spiritual realm. But their quarrel is
with God and not with us. We have given scripture in support of everything
advanced in these pages, and if that will not satisfy our readers it is idle
for us to seek to convince them. What we write now is designed for those who
do bow to the authority of Holy Writ, and for their benefit we propose
to examine several other scriptures which have purposely been held over for
this chapter.
Perhaps the one passage which has
presented the greatest difficulty to those who have seen that passage after
passage in Holy Writ plainly teaches the election of a limited number unto
salvation is 2 Peter 3:9: "not willing that any should perish, but that
all should come to repentance".
The first thing to be said upon the
above passage is that, like all other scripture, it must be understood and
interpreted in the light of its context. What we have quoted in the preceding
paragraph is only part of the verse, and the last part of it at that! Surely
it must be allowed by all that the first half of the verse needs to be taken
into consideration. In order to establish what these words are supposed by
many to mean, viz., that the words "any" and "all" are to be received without
any qualification, it must be shown that the context is
referring to the whole human race! If this cannot be shown, if there is
no premise to justify this, then the conclusion also must be
unwarranted. Let us then ponder the first part of the verse.
"The Lord is not slack concerning His
promise". Note "promise" in the singular number, not "promises."
What promise is in view? The promise of salvation? Where, in all
Scripture, has God ever promised to save the whole human race!! Where
indeed? No, the "promise" here referred to is not about salvation.
What then is it? The context tells us.
"Knowing this, first, that there shall
come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, and saying,
Where is the promise of His coming?" (vv. 3,4). The context then refers to
God’s promise to send back His beloved Son. But many long centuries
have passed, and this promise has not yet been fulfilled. True, but long as
the delay may seem to us, the interval is short in the reckoning of
God. As the proof of this we are reminded, "But, beloved, be not ignorant
of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a
thousand years as one day" (v. 8). In God’s reckoning of time, less than two
days have yet passed since He promised to send back Christ.
But more, the delay in the Father
sending back His beloved Son is not only due to no "slackness" on His part,
but it is also occasioned by His "longsuffering". His long-suffering to whom?
The verse we are now considering tells us: "but is longsuffering to usward".
And whom are the "usward"?—the human race, or God’s own people? In the
light of the context this is not an open question upon which each of us
is free to form an opinion. The Holy Spirit has defined it. The opening verse
of the chapter says, "This second Epistle, beloved, I now write unto
you". And, again, the verse immediately preceding declares, "But, beloved,
be not ignorant of this one thing etc.," (v. 8). The "usward" then are the
"beloved" of God. They to whom this Epistle is addressed are "them that have
obtained (not "exercised", but "obtained" as God’s sovereign gift)
like precious faith with us through the righteousness of God and our
Saviour Jesus Christ" (2 Pet. 1:11). Therefore we say there is no room
for a doubt, a quibble or an argument—the "usward" are the elect of God.
Let us now quote the verse as a whole:
"The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some men count slackness;
but is longsuffering to usward, not willing that any should perish, but that
all should come to repentance." Could anything be clearer? The "any" that God
is not willing should perish, are the "usward" to whom God is "longsuffering",
the "beloved" of the previous verses. 2 Peter 3:9 means, then, that God
will not send back His Son until "the fulness of the Gentiles be come in"
(Rom. 11:25). God will not send back Christ till that "people" whom He is now
"taking out of the Gentiles" (Acts 15:14) are gathered in. God will not send
back His Son till the Body of Christ is complete, and that will not be till
the ones whom He has elected to be saved in this dispensation shall have been
brought to Him. Thank God for His "longsuffering to us-ward". Had Christ come
back twenty years ago the writer had been left behind to perish in His sins.
But that could not be, so God graciously delayed the Second Coming. For
the same reason He is still delaying His Advent. His decreed purpose is that
all His elect will come to repentance, and repent they shall.
The present interval of grace will not end until the last of the "other sheep"
of John 10:16 are safely folded,—then will Christ return,
In expounding the sovereignty of God
the Spirit in Salvation we have shown that His power is irresistible,
that, by His gracious operations upon and within them, He "compels" God’s
elect to come to Christ. The sovereignty of the Holy Spirit is set forth not
only in John 3:8 where we are told "The wind bloweth where it pleaseth. . . .
. .so is every one that is born of the Spirit," but is affirmed in other
passages as well. In 1 Corinthians 12:11 we read, "But all these worketh that
one and the self same Spirit, dividing to every man severally as He will."
And again; we read in Acts 16:6, 7— "Now when they had gone throughout
Phrygia and the region of Galatia, and were forbidden of the Holy Spirit to
preach the Word in Asia. After they were come to Mysia, they assayed to go
in to Bithynia: but the Spirit suffered them not." Thus we see
how the Holy Spirit interposed His imperial will in opposition to the
determination of the apostles.
But, it is objected against the
assertion that the will and power of the Holy Spirit are irresistible
that there are two passages, one in the Old Testament and the other in the
New, which appear to militate against such a conclusion. God said of old, "My
Spirit shall not always strive with man" (Gen. 6:3), and to the Jews
Stephen declared, "Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do
always resist the Holy Spirit: as your fathers did, so do ye.
Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted?" (Acts 7:51,
52). If then the Jews "resisted" the Holy Spirit, how can we say His power is
irresistible? The answer is found in Nehemiah 9:30—"Many years didst
Thou forbear them, and testifiedst against them by Thy Spirit in Thy
Prophets: yet would they not give ear." It was the external
operations of the Spirit which Israel "resisted." It was the Spirit speaking
by and through the prophets to which they "would not give ear." It was
not anything which the Holy Spirit wrought in them that they
"resisted," but the motives presented to them by the inspired messages
of the prophets. Perhaps it will help the reader to catch our thought better
if we compare Matthew 11:20-24—"Then began He to upbraid the
cities wherein most of His mighty works were done, because they
repented not. Woe unto thee Chorazin!" etc. Our Lord here pronounces
woe upon these cities for their failure to repent because of the
"mighty works" (miracles) which He had done in their sight, and not
because of any internal operations of His grace! The same is true of
Genesis 6:3. By comparing 1 Peter 3:18-20 it will be seen that it was by
and through Noah that God’s Spirit "strove" with the antediluvians. The
distinction noted above was ably summarized by Andrew Fuller (another writer
long deceased from whom our moderns might learn much) thus: "There are two
kinds of influences by which God works on the minds of men. First, That
which is common, and which is effected by the ordinary use of motives
presented to the mind for consideration; Secondly, That which is special and
supernatural. The one contains nothing mysterious, anymore than the influence
of our words and actions on each other; the other is such a mystery that we
know nothing of it but by its effects—The former ought to be effectual;
the latter is so." The work of the Holy Spirit upon or
towards men is always "resisted," by them; His work within is
always successful. What saith the scriptures? This: "He which hath begun a
good work IN you, will finish it" (Phil. 1:6)
The next question to be considered is:
Why preach the Gospel to every creature? If God the Father has
predestined only a limited number to be saved, if God the Son died to effect
the salvation of only those given to Him by the Father, and if God the Spirit
is seeking to quicken none save God’s elect, then what is the use of giving
the Gospel to the world at large, and where is the propriety of telling
sinners that "Whosoever believeth in Christ shall not perish but have
everlasting life"?
First; it is of great importance that we
should be clear upon the nature of the Gospel itself. The Gospel is
God’s good news concerning Christ and not concerning sinners,— "Paul a servant
of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, separated unto the Gospel of God . .
. . concerning His Son, Jesus Christ our Lord" (Rom. 1:1-3). God would
have proclaimed far and wide the amazing fact that His own blessed Son "became
obedient unto death, even the death of the cross." A universal testimony must
be borne to the matchless worth of the person and work of Christ. Note the
word "witness" in Matthew 22:14. The Gospel is God’s "witness" unto the
perfections of His Son. Mark the words of the apostle: "For we are unto God
a sweet savor of Christ, in them that are saved, and in them that
perish" (2 Cor. 2:15)!
Concerning the character and contents of
the Gospel the utmost confusion prevails today. The Gospel is not an "offer"
to be bandied around by evangelistic peddlers. The Gospel is no mere
invitation, but a proclamation, a proclamation concerning
Christ; true, whether men believe it or no. No man is asked to believe
that Christ died for him in particular. The Gospel, in brief, is this: Christ
died for sinners, you are a sinner, believe in Christ, and you shall be saved.
In the Gospel, God simply announces the terms upon which men may be saved
(namely, repentance and faith) and, indiscriminately, all are commanded to
fulfill them.
Second; repentance and remission of sins
are to be preached in the name of the Lord Jesus "unto all the nations" (Luke
24:47), because God’s elect are "scattered abroad" (John 11:52) among
all nations, and it is by the preaching and hearing of the Gospel that they
are called out of the world. The Gospel is the means which God uses in the
saving of His own chosen ones. By nature God’s elect are children of wrath
"even as others"; they are lost sinners needing a Saviour, and apart from
Christ there is no salvation for them. Hence, the Gospel must be believed by
them before they can rejoice in the knowledge of sins forgiven. The
Gospel is God’s winnowing fan: it separates the chaff from the wheat, and
gathers the latter into His garner.
Third; it is to be noted that God has
other purposes in the preaching of the Gospel than the salvation of His own
elect. The world exists for the elect’s sake, yet others have the benefit of
it. So the Word is preached for the elect’s sake, yet others have the benefit
of an external call. The sun shines, though blind men see it not. The rain
falls upon rocky mountains and waste deserts, as well as on the fruitful
valleys; so also, God suffers the Gospel to fall on the ears of the non-elect.
The power of the Gospel is one of God’s agencies for holding in check the
wickedness of the world. Many who are never saved by it are reformed,
their lusts are bridled, and they are restrained from becoming worse.
Moreover, the preaching of the Gospel to the non-elect is made an admirable
test of their characters. It exhibits the inveteracy of their sin: it
demonstrates that their hearts are at enmity against God: it justifies
the declaration of Christ that "men loved darkness rather than light, because
their deeds were evil" (John 3:19).
Finally; it is sufficient for us to know
that we are bidden to preach the Gospel to every creature. It is not
for us to reason about the consistency between this and the fact that
"few are chosen." It is for us to obey. It is a simple matter to ask questions
relating to the ways of God which no finite mind can fully fathom. We, too,
might turn and remind the objector that our Lord declared, "Verily I say unto
you, All sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of men, and blasphemies
wherewith soever they shall blaspheme. But he that shall blaspheme against the
Holy Spirit hath never forgiveness" (Mark 3:28, 29),
and there can be no doubt whatever but that certain of the Jews were
guilty of this very sin (see Matt. 12:24 etc.), and hence their
destruction was inevitable. Yet, notwithstanding, scarcely two months later,
He commanded His disciples to preach the Gospel to every creature. When
the objector can show us the consistency of these two things—the fact that
certain of the Jews had committed the sin for which there is never
forgiveness, and the fact that to them the Gospel was to be preached—we
will undertake to furnish a more satisfactory solution than the one given
above to the harmony between a universal proclamation of the Gospel and
a limitation of its saving power to those only that God has predestined
to be conformed to the image of His Son.
Once more, we say, it is not for us to
reason about the Gospel; it is our business to preach it. When
God ordered Abraham to offer up his son as a burnt-offering, he might have
objected that this command was inconsistent with His promise "In
Isaac shall thy seed be called." But instead of arguing he obeyed, and
left God to harmonize His promise and His precept. Jeremiah might have argued
that God had bade him do that which was altogether unreasonable when He said,
"Therefore thou shalt speak all these words unto them; but they will not
hearken to thee; thou shalt also call unto them; but they will not
answer thee" (Jer. 7:27), but instead, the prophet obeyed.
Ezekiel, too, might have complained that the Lord was asking of him a hard
thing when He said, "Son of man, go, get thee unto the House of Israel, and
speak with My words unto them. For thou art not sent to a people of a strange
speech and of an hard language, but to the House of Israel; Not to many people
of a strange speech and of a hard language, whose words thou cans’t not
understand. Surely, had I sent thee to them, they would have hearkened unto
thee. But the House of Israel will not hearken unto thee; for they will
not hearken unto Me; for all the House of Israel are impudent and hard
hearted" (Ezek. 3:4-7).
"But, O my soul, if truth so bright
Should dazzle and confound thy sight,
Yet still His written Word obey,
And wait the great decisive day."—Watts.
It has been well said, "The Gospel has
lost none of its ancient power. It is, as much today as when it was first
preached, ‘the power of God unto salvation’. It needs no pity, no help, and no
handmaid. It can overcome all obstacles, and break down all barriers. No human
device need be tried to prepare the sinner to receive it, for if God has sent
it no power can hinder it; and if He has not sent it, no power can make it
effectual." (Dr. Bullinger).
This chapter might be extended
indefinitely, but it is already too long, so a word or two more must suffice.
A number of other questions will be dealt with in the pages yet to follow, and
those that we fail to touch upon the reader must take to the Lord Himself who
has said, "If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth
to all liberally, and upbraideth not" (James 1:5).
ENDNOTES:
[1]
Romans 5 :8 is addressed to
saints, and the “we” are the same ones as those spoken of in
8:29, 30.
[2]
Concerning the rich young ruler of whom it is said Christ “loved
him” (Mark 10:21), we fully believe that he was one of God’s elect, and was
“saved” sometime after his interview with our Lord. Should it be said this is
an arbitrary assumption and assertion which lacks anything in the Gospel
record to substantiate it, we reply, It is written, “Him that cometh to Me I
will in no wise cast out,” and this man certainly did “come” to
Him. Compare the case of Nicodemus. He, too, came to Christ, yet there is
nothing in John 3 which intimates he was a saved man when the interview
closed; nevertheless, we know from his later life that he was not
“cast out.”
[3]
For a further discussion of John 3:16 see Appendix 3.
Chapter 12
THE VALUE OF THIS DOCTRINE
"All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, And is
profitable for doctrine, For reproof, for correction, for instruction in
righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, Throughly furnished unto
all good works"
2 Timothy 3:16, 17
"All Scripture is given by inspiration
of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction,
for instruction in righteousness: that the man of God may be perfect,
throughly furnished unto all good works" (2 Tim. 3:16, 17). "Doctrine" means
"teaching," and it is by doctrine or teaching that the great realities of God
and of our relation to Him—of Christ, the Spirit, salvation, grace, glory, are
made known to us. It is by doctrine (through the power of the Spirit) that
believers are nourished and edified, and where doctrine is neglected, growth
in grace and effective witnessing for Christ necessarily cease. How sad then
that doctrine is now decried as "unpractical" when, in fact, doctrine is the
very base of the practical life. There is an inseparable connection between
belief and practice—"As he thinketh in his heart, so is he" (Pro.
23:7). The relation between Divine truth and Christian character is that of
cause to effect—"And ye shall know the truth, and the truth
shall make you free" (John 8:32)—free from ignorance, free from prejudice,
free from error, free from the wiles of Satan, free from the power of evil;
and if the truth is not "known" then such freedom will not be enjoyed. Observe
the order of mention in the passage with which we have opened. All
Scripture is profitable first for "doctrine"! The same order is
observed throughout the Epistles, particularly in the great doctrinal
treatises of the apostle Paul. Read the Epistle of "Romans" and it will be
found that there is not a single admonition in the first five chapters. In the
Epistle of "Ephesians" there are no exhortations till the fourth chapter is
reached. The order is first doctrinal exposition and then admonition or
exhortation for the regulation of the daily walk.
The substitution of so-called
"practical" preaching for the doctrinal exposition which it has supplanted is
the root cause of many of the evil maladies which now afflict the church of
God. The reason why there is so little depth, so little intelligence, so
little grasp of the fundamental verities of Christianity, is because so few
believers have been established in the faith, through hearing expounded and
through their own personal study of the doctrines of grace. While the soul is
unestablished in the doctrine of the Divine Inspiration of the
Scriptures—their full and verbal inspiration— there can be no firm foundation
for faith to rest upon. While the soul is ignorant of the doctrine of
Justification there can be no real and intelligent assurance of its acceptance
in the Beloved. While the soul is unacquainted with the teaching of the Word
upon Sanctification it is open to receive all the crudities and errors of the
Perfectionists or "Holiness" people. While the soul knows not what Scripture
has to say upon the doctrine of the New Birth there can be no proper grasp of
the two natures in the believer, and ignorance here inevitably results in loss
of peace and joy. And so we might go on right through the list of Christian
doctrine. It is ignorance of doctrine that has rendered the professing
church helpless to cope with the rising tide of infidelity. It is ignorance
of doctrine which is mainly responsible for thousands of professing
Christians being captivated by the numerous fallacies of the day. It is
because the time has now arrived when the bulk of our churches "will not
endure sound doctrine" (2 Tim. 4:3) that they so readily receive false
doctrines. Of course it is true that doctrine, like anything else in
Scripture, may be studied from a merely cold intellectual viewpoint, and
thus approached, doctrinal teaching and doctrinal study will leave the
heart untouched, and will naturally be "dry" and profitless. But, doctrine
properly received, doctrine studied with an exercised heart, will ever
lead into a deeper knowledge of God and of the unsearchable riches of Christ.
The doctrine of God’s sovereignty then
is no mere metaphysical dogma which is devoid of practical value, but is one
that is calculated to produce a powerful effect upon Christian character and
the daily walk. The doctrine of God’s sovereignty lies at the foundation of
Christian theology, and in importance is perhaps second only to the Divine
Inspiration of the Scriptures. It is the center of gravity in the system of
Christian truth—the sun around which all the lesser orbs are grouped. It is
the golden milestone to which every highway of knowledge leads and from which
they all radiate. It is the cord upon which all other doctrines are strung
like so many pearls, holding them in place and giving them unity. It is the
plumb-line by which every creed needs to be measured, the balance in which
every human dogma must be weighed. It is designed as the sheet-anchor for our
souls amid the storms of life. The doctrine of God’s sovereignty is a Divine
cordial to refresh our spirits. It is designed and adapted to mould the
affections of the heart and to give a right direction to conduct. It produces
gratitude in prosperity and patience in adversity. It affords comfort for the
present and a sense of security respecting the unknown future. It is, and it
does all, and much more than we have just said, because it ascribes to
God—Father, Son, and Holy Spirit—the glory which is His due, and places the
creature in his proper place before Him—in the dust.
We shall now consider the Value of the
doctrine in detail.
1. It deepens our veneration of the
Divine Character.
The doctrine of God’s sovereignty as it
is unfolded in the Scriptures affords an exalted view of the Divine
perfections. It maintains His creatorial rights. It insists that "to us
there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in
Him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by Him"
(1 Cor. 8:6). It declares that His rights are those of the "potter" who forms
and fashions the clay into vessels of whatever type and for whatever use He
may please. Its testimony is, "Thou hast created all things, and for Thy
pleasure they are and were created" (Rev. 4:11). It argues that none has
any right to "reply" against God, and that the only becoming attitude for the
creature to take is one of reverent submission before Him. Thus the
apprehension of the absolute supremacy of God is of great practical
importance, for unless we have a proper regard to His high sovereignty He will
never be honored in our thoughts of Him, nor will He have His proper place in
our hearts and lives.
It exhibits the inscrutableness of
His wisdom. It shows that while God is immaculate in His holiness,
He has permitted evil to enter His fair creation; that while He is the
Possessor of all power, He has allowed the Devil to wage war against
Him for six thousand years at least; that while He is the perfect
embodiment of love, He spared not His own Son; that while He is the God
of all grace, multitudes will be tormented for ever and ever in the
Lake of Fire. High mysteries are these. Scripture does not deny them, but
acknowledge their existence—"O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and
knowledge of God! how unsearchable are His judgments, and His ways
past finding out!" (Rom. 11:33).
It makes known the irreversibleness
of His will. "Known unto God are all His works from the beginning of the
world" (Acts 15:18). From the beginning God purposed to glorify Himself "in
the Church by Christ Jesus, throughout all ages, world without end" (Eph. 3:21).
To this end, He created the world, and formed man. His all-wise plan was
not defeated when man fell, for in the Lamb "slain from the foundation of the
world" (Rev. 13:8) we behold the Fall anticipated. Nor will God’s purpose be
thwarted by the wickedness of men since the Fall, as is clear from the words
of the Psalmist, "Surely the wrath of man shall praise Thee: the
remainder of wrath shalt Thou restrain" (Ps. 76:10). Because God is the
Almighty His will cannot be withstood. "His purposes originated in eternity,
and are carried forward without change to eternity. They extend to all His
works, and control all events. He ‘worketh all things after the counsel of His
own will.’" (Dr. Rice). Neither man nor devil can successfully resist Him,
therefore is it written, "The Lord reigneth; let the people tremble."
(Ps. 99:1).
It magnifies His grace. Grace is
unmerited favor, and because grace is shown to the undeserving and
Hell-deserving, to those who have no claim upon God, therefore is grace
free and can be manifested toward the chief of sinners. But because
grace is exercised toward those who are destitute of worthiness or
merit, grace is sovereign; that is to say, God bestows grace upon whom
He pleases. Divine sovereignty has ordained that some shall be cast
into the Lake of Fire to show that all deserved such a doom. But grace
comes in like a drag-net and draws out from a lost humanity a people for God’s
name, to be throughout all eternity the monuments of His inscrutable favor.
Sovereign grace reveals God breaking down the opposition of the human heart,
subduing the enmity of the carnal mind, and bringing us to love Him because He
first loved us.
2. It is the solid foundation of all
true religion.
This naturally follows from. what we
have said above under the first head. If the doctrine of Divine sovereignty
alone gives God His rightful place, then it is also true that it alone can
supply a firm base for practical religion to build upon. There can be no
progress in Divine things until there is the personal recognition that God is
Supreme, that He is to be feared and revered, that He is to be owned and
served as Lord. We read the Scriptures in vain unless we come to them
earnestly desiring a better knowledge of God’s will for us—any other motive is
selfish and utterly inadequate and unworthy. Every prayer we send up to God is
but carnal presumption unless it be offered "according to His will"—
anything short of this is to ask ‘amiss,’ that we might consume upon our
own lusts the thing requested. Every service we engage in is but a "dead
work" unless it be done for the glory of God. Experimental religion consists
mainly in the perception and performance of the Divine will—performance both
active and passive. We are predestinated to be "conformed to the image of
God’s Son", whose meat it ever was to do the will of the One that sent Him,
and the measure in which each saint is becoming "conformed" practically, in
his daily life, is largely determined by his response to our Lord’s word—"Take
My yoke upon you, and learn of Me; for I am meek and lowly in heart."
3. It repudiates the heresy of salvation
by works.
"There is a way which seemeth right unto
a man; but the end thereof are the ways of death" (Prov. 14:12). The way which
"seemeth right" and which ends in "death," death
eternal, is salvation by human effort and merit. The belief in salvation by
works is one that is common to human nature. It may not always assume the
grosser form of Popish penances, or even of Protestant "repentance"—i.e.,
sorrowing for sin, which is never the meaning of repentance in
Scripture—anything which gives man a place at all is but a variety of the same
evil genus. To say, as alas! many preachers are saying, God is willing to do
His part if you will do yours, is a wretched and excuseless denial of
the Gospel of His grace. To declare that God helps those who help themselves,
is to repudiate one of the most precious truths taught in the Bible,
and in the Bible alone; namely, that God helps those who are unable to
help themselves, who have tried again and again only to fail. To say that the
sinner’s salvation turns upon the action of his own. will, is another
form of the God-dishonoring dogma of salvation by human efforts. In the final
analysis, any movement of the will is a work: it is something from me,
something which I do. But the doctrine of God’s sovereignty lays the
axe at the root of this evil tree by declaring, "it is not of him that
willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy" (Rom.
9:16). Does some one say, Such a doctrine will drive sinners to despair.
The reply is, Be it so; it is just such despair the writer longs to see
prevail. It is not until the sinner despairs of any help from himself, that he
will ever fall into the arms of sovereign mercy; but if once the Holy Spirit
convicts him that there is no help in himself, then he will recognize
that he is lost, and will cry, "God be merciful to me a sinner," and
such a cry will be heard. If the author may be allowed to bear personal
witness, he has found during the course of his ministry that, the sermons he
has preached on human depravity, the sinner’s helplessness to do anything
himself, and the salvation of the soul turning upon the sovereign mercy of
God, have been those most owned and blessed in the salvation of the lost. We
repeat, then, a sense of utter helplessness is the first prerequisite
to any sound conversion. There is no salvation for any soul until it looks
away from itself, looks to something, yea, to Someone, outside of
itself.
4. It is deeply humbling to the
creature.
This doctrine of the absolute
sovereignty of God is a great battering-ram against human pride, and in this
it is in sharp contrast from "the doctrines of men." The spirit of our age is
essentially that of boasting and glorying in the flesh. The achievements of
man, his development and progress, his greatness and self-sufficiency, are the
shrine at which the world worships today. But the truth of God’s sovereignty,
with all its corollaries, removes every ground for human boasting and instills
the spirit of humility in its stead. It declares that salvation is of the
Lord—of the Lord in its origination, in its operation, and in its
consummation. It insists that the Lord has to apply as well as supply, that He
has to complete as well as begin His saving work in our souls, that He has not
only to reclaim but to maintain and sustain us to the end. It teaches that
salvation is by grace through faith, and that all our works (before
conversion), good as well as evil, count for nothing toward salvation. It
tells us we are "born, not of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man,
but of God" (John 1:13). And all this is most humbling to the heart of man,
who wants to contribute something to the price of his redemption and do that
which will afford ground for boasting and self-satisfaction.
But if this doctrine humbles us,
it results in praise to God. If, in the light of God’s sovereignty, we
have seen our own worthlessness and helplessness, we shall indeed cry with the
Psalmist, "All my springs are in Thee" (Ps. 87:7). If by
nature we were "children of wrath," and by practice rebels against the Divine
government and justly exposed to the "curse" of the Law, and if God was under
no obligation to rescue us from the fiery indignation and yet,
notwithstanding, He delivered up His well-beloved Son for us all; then
how such grace and love will melt our hearts, how the apprehension of it will
cause us to say in adoring gratitude, "Not unto us, O Lord, not unto
us, but unto Thy name give glory, for Thy mercy, and for Thy truth’s
sake" (Ps. 115:1)! How readily shall each of us acknowledge, "By the grace
of God I am what I am"! With what wondering praise shall we exclaim—
"Why was I made to hear His voice,
And enter while there’s room,
When thousands make a wretched choice,
And rather starve than come?
‘Twas the same love that spread the feast,
That sweetly forced us in;
Else we had still refused to taste
And perished in our sin."
5. It affords a sense of absolute
security.
God is infinite in power, and therefore
it is impossible to withstand His will or resist the outworking of His
decrees. Such a statement as that is well calculated to fill the sinner with
alarm, but from the saint it evokes naught but praise. Let us add a word and
see what a difference it makes:—My God is infinite in power! then
"I will not fear what man can do unto me." My God is infinite in power,
then "what time I am afraid I will trust in Him." My God is infinite in
power, then "I will both lay me down in peace, and sleep: for Thou,
Lord, only makest me dwell in safety" (Ps. 4:8). Right down the ages
this has been the source of the saints’ confidence. Was not this the
assurance of Moses when, in his parting words to Israel, he said—"There is
none like unto the God of Jeshurun (Israel), who rideth upon the heaven in Thy
help, and in His excellency on the sky. The eternal God is thy refuge, and
underneath are the everlasting arms" (Deut. 33:26, 27)? Was
it not this sense of security that caused the Psalmist, moved by the Holy
Spirit, to write—"He that dwelleth in the secret place of the Most High shall
abide under the shadow of the Almighty. I will say of the Lord, He is my
refuge and my fortress: my God: in Him will I trust. Surely He shall
deliver thee from the snare of the fowler, and from the noisome pestilence. He
shall cover thee with His feathers, and under His wings shalt thou trust: His
truth shall be thy shield and buckler: Thou shalt not be afraid for the
terror by night; nor for the arrow that flieth by day; Nor for the pestilence
that walketh in darkness; nor for the destruction that wasteth at noonday. A
thousand shall fall at thy side, and ten thousand at thy right hand, but it
shall not come nigh thee. Because thou hast made the Lord, which is my
refuge, even the Most High thy Habitation; There shall no evil befall
thee (instead, all things will work together for good), neither
shall any plague come nigh thy dwelling" (Ps. 91)?
"Death and plagues around me fly,
Till He hid, I cannot die;
Not a single shaft can hit,
Till the God of love sees fit."
O the preciousness of this truth! Here
am I, a poor, helpless, senseless "sheep," yet am I secure in the hand
of Christ. And why am I secure there? None can pluck me thence
because the hand that holds me is that of the Son of God, and all power
in heaven and earth is His! Again; I have no strength of my own: the
world, the flesh, and the Devil, are arrayed against me, so I commit myself
into the care and keeping of the Lord and say with the apostle, "I know Whom I
have believed, and am persuaded that He is able to keep that which I
have committed unto Him against that day" (2 Tim. 1:12). And what is
the ground of my confidence? How do I know that He is able to
keep that which I have committed unto Him? I know it because God is
almighty, the King of kings and Lord of lords.
6. It supplies comfort in sorrow.
The doctrine of God’s sovereignty is one
that is full of consolation and imparts great peace to the Christian. The
sovereignty of God is a foundation that nothing can shake and is more firm
than the heavens and earth. How blessed to know there is no corner of the
universe that is out of His reach! as said the Psalmist, "Whither shall I go
from Thy Spirit? or whither shall I flee from Thy presence? If I ascend
up into heaven, Thou art there: if I make my bed in hell, behold,
Thou art there. If I take the wings of the morning, and dwell in the
uttermost parts of the sea; even there shall Thy hand lead me, and Thy
right hand shall hold me. If I say surely the darkness shall cover me; even
the night shall be light about me. Yea, the darkness hideth not from Thee:
but the night shineth as the day: the darkness and the light are both alike to
Thee" (Ps. 139:7-12). How blessed it is to know that God’s strong hand
is upon every one and every thing! How blessed to know that not a sparrow
falleth to the ground without His notice! How blessed to know that our very
afflictions come not by chance, nor from the Devil, but are ordained and
ordered by God:— "That no man should be moved by these afflictions: for
yourselves know that we are appointed thereunto" (1 Thess. 3:3)!
But our God is not only infinite in
power, He is infinite in wisdom and goodness too. And herein is the
preciousness of this truth. God wills only that which is good and His will is
irreversible and irresistible! God is too wise to err and too loving to cause
His child a needless tear. Therefore if God be perfect wisdom and perfect
goodness how blessed is the assurance that everything is in His
hand, and moulded by His will according to His eternal purpose! "Behold, He
taketh away, who can hinder Him? who will say unto Him what doest Thou?"
(Job 9:12). Yet, how comforting to learn that it is "He", and not the
Devil, who "taketh away" our loved ones! Ah! what peace for our poor frail
hearts to be told that the number of our days is with Him (Job 7:1; 14:5);
that disease and death are His messengers, and always march under His
orders; that it is the Lord who gives and the Lord who takes away!
7. It begets a spirit of sweet
resignation.
To bow before the sovereign will of God
is one of the great secrets of peace and happiness. There can be no real
submission with contentment until we are broken in spirit, that is, until we
are willing and glad for the Lord to have His way with us. Not
that we are insisting upon a spirit of fatalistic acquiescence; far
from it. The saints are exhorted to "prove what is that good,
and acceptable, and perfect will of God" (Rom. 12:2).
We touched upon this subject of
resignation to God’s will in the chapter upon our Attitude towards God’s
Sovereignty, and there, in addition to the supreme Pattern, we cited the
examples of Eli and Job: we would now supplement their cases with further
examples. What a word is that in Leviticus 10:3—"And Aaron held his peace."
Look at the circumstances: "And Nadab and Abihu, the sons of Aaron, took
either of them his censer, and put fire therein, and put incense thereon, and
offered strange fire before the Lord, which He commanded them not. And there
went out fire from the Lord, and devoured them, and they died before the Lord.
. . . . And Aaron held his peace." Two of the high priests’ sons
were slain, slain by a visitation of Divine judgment, and they were
probably intoxicated at the time; moreover, this trial came upon Aaron
suddenly, without anything to prepare him for it; yet, he "held
his peace." Precious exemplification of the power of God’s all-sufficient
grace!
Consider now an utterance which fell
from the lips of David: "And the king said unto Zadok, Carry back the ark of
God into the city: if I shall find favor in the eyes of the Lord, He will
bring me again, and shew me both it, and His habitation. But if He thus say, I
have no delight in thee; behold, here am I, let Him do to me as seemeth
good unto Him" (2 Sam. 15:25, 26). Here, too, the circumstances
which confronted the speaker were exceedingly trying to the human heart. David
was sore pressed with sorrow. His own son was driving him from the throne, and
seeking his very life. Whether he would ever see Jerusalem and the Tabernacle
again he knew not. But he was so yielded up to God, he was so fully assured
that His will was best, that even though it meant the loss of the
throne and the loss of his life he was content for Him to have His way—"let
Him do to me as seemeth Him good."
There is no need to multiply examples,
but a reflection upon the last case will be in place. If amid the shadows of
the Old Testament dispensation, David was content for the Lord to have His
way, now that the heart of God has been fully revealed at the
Cross, how much more ought we to delight in the execution of His will!
Surely we shall have no hesitation in saying—
"Ill that He blesses is our good,
And unblest good is ill,
And all is right that seems most wrong,
If it he His sweet will."
8. It evokes a song of praise.
It could not be otherwise. Why should I,
who am by nature no different from the careless and godless throngs all
around, have been chosen in Christ before the foundation of the world and now
blest with all spiritual blessings in the heavenlies in Him! Why was I, that
once was an alien and a rebel, singled out for such wondrous favors! Ah, that
is something I cannot fathom. Such grace, such love, "passeth knowledge." But
if my mind is unable to discern a reason, my heart can express its gratitude
in praise and adoration. But not only should I be grateful to God for His
grace toward me in the past, His present dealings will fill me with
thanksgivings. What is the force of that word "Rejoice in the Lord alway"
(Phil. 4:4)? Mark it is not "Rejoice in the Saviour," but we
are to "Rejoice in the Lord," as "Lord," as the Master of every
circumstance. Need we remind the reader that when the apostle penned these
words he was himself a prisoner in the hands of the Roman government. A long
course of affliction and suffering lay behind him. Perils on land and perils
on sea, hunger and thirst, scourging and stoning, had all been experienced. He
had been persecuted by those within the church as well as by those without:
the very ones who ought to have stood by him had forsaken him. And still he
writes, "Rejoice in the Lord alway"! What was the secret
of his peace and happiness? Ah! had not this same apostle written, "And we
know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to
them who are the called according to His purpose" (Rom. 8:28). But how did he,
and how do we, "know," that all things work together for good?
The answer is, Because all things are under the control of and are
being regulated by the Supreme Sovereign, and because He has naught but
thoughts of love toward His own, then "all things" are so ordered by Him that
they are made to minister to our ultimate good. It is for this cause we
are to give "thanks always for all things unto God and the
Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ" (Eph. 5:20). Yes, give thanks for
"all things" for, as it has been well said "Our disappointments are but His
appointments." To the one who delights in the sovereignty of God the
clouds not only have a ‘silver lining’ but they are silvern all through,
the darkness only serving to offset the light—
"Ye fearful saints fresh courage take
The clouds ye so much dread,
Are big with mercy and shall break
In blessings o’er your head."
9. It guarantees the final triumph of
good over evil.
Ever since the day that Cain slew Abel,
the conflict on earth between good and evil, has been a sore problem to the
saints. In every age the righteous have been hated and persecuted, whilst the
unrighteous have appeared to defy God with impugnity. The Lord’s people, for
the most part, have been poor in this world’s goods, whereas the wicked in
their temporal prosperity have flourished like the green bay tree. As one
looks around and beholds the oppression of believers and the earthly success
of unbelievers, and notes how few are the former and how numerous the latter;
as he sees the apparent defeat of the right, and the triumphing of might and
the wrong; as he hears the roar of battle, the cries of the wounded, and the
lamentations of the bereaved; as he discovers that almost everything down here
is in confusion, chaos, and ruins, it seems as though Satan were getting the
better of the conflict. But as one looks above, instead of around,
there is plainly visible to the eye of faith a Throne, a Throne unaffected by
the storms of earth, a Throne that is "set," stable and secure; and upon it is
seated One whose name is the Almighty, and who "worketh all things after the
counsel of His own will" (Eph. 1:11). This then is our confidence—God is on
the Throne. The helm is in His hand, and being Almighty His purpose
cannot fail, for "He is in one mind, and who can turn Him? and what His
soul desireth, even that He doeth" (Job 23:13). Though God’s
governing hand is invisible to the eye of sense, it is real to faith, that
faith which rests with sure confidence upon His Word, and therefore is assured
He cannot fail. What follows below is from the pen of our brother Mr.
Gaebelein.
"There can be no failure with God. ‘God
is not a man, that He should lie, neither the Son of man, that He should
repent; bath He said and shall He not do it? or bath He spoken, and shall He
not make it good?’ (Num. 23:19). All will be accomplished. The promise
made to His own beloved people to come for them and take them from hence to
glory will not fail. He will surely come and gather them in His own presence.
The solemn words spoken to the nations of the earth by the different prophets
will also not fail. ‘Come near, ye nations, to hear; and hearken ye people;
let the earth hear, and all that is therein; the world, and all things that
come forth of it. For the indignation of the Lord is upon all nations, and His
fury upon all armies; He bath utterly destroyed them, He hath delivered them
to the slaughter’ (Isa. 34:1, 2). Nor will that day fail in which ‘the
lofty looks of man shall be humbled and the haughtiness of men shall be bowed
down and the Lord alone shall be exalted’ (Isa. 2:11). The day in which He is
manifested, when His glory shall cover the heavens and His feet will stand
again upon this earth, will surely come. His kingdom will not fail, nor all
the promised events connected with the end of the age and the consummation.
"In these dark and trying times bow well
it is to remember that He is on the throne, the throne which cannot be shaken,
and that He will not fail in doing all He has spoken and promised. ‘Seek ye
out of the book of the Lord and read: Not one of these shall fail’ (Isa.
34:16). In believing, blessed anticipation, we can look on to the glory-time
when His Word and His Will is accomplished, when through the coming of the
Prince of Peace, righteousness and peace comes at last. And while we wait for
the supreme and blessed moment when His promise to us is accomplished, we
trust Him, walking in His fellowship and daily find afresh, that He does not
fail to sustain and keep us in all our ways.
10. It provides a resting place for the
heart.
Much that might have been said here has
already been anticipated under previous heads. The One seated upon the Throne
of Heaven, the One who is Governor over the nations and who has ordained and
now regulates all events, is infinite not only in power but in wisdom and
goodness as well. He who is Lord over all creation is the One that was
"manifest in the flesh" (1 Tim. 3:16). Ah! here is a theme no human pen can do
justice to. The glory of God consists not merely in that He is Highest, but in
that being high He stooped in lowly love to bear the burden of His own sinful
creatures, for it is written "God was in Christ, reconciling the world
unto Himself" (2 Cor. 5:19). The Church of God was purchased "with
His own Blood" (Acts 20:28). It is upon the gracious
self-humiliation of the King Himself that His kingdom is established. O
wondrous Cross! By it He who suffered upon it has become not the Lord of our
destinies (He was that before), but the Lord of our hearts. Therefore, it is
not in abject terror that we bow before the Supreme Sovereign, but in adoring
worship we cry, "Worthy is the Lamb that was slain to receive power, and
riches, and wisdom, and strength, and honor, and glory, and blessing" (Rev.
5:12).
Here then is the refutation of the
wicked charge that this doctrine is a horrible calumny upon God and
dangerous to expound to His people. Can a doctrine be "horrible" and
"dangerous" that gives God His true place, that maintains His rights, that
magnifies His grace, that ascribes all glory to Him and removes every
ground of boasting from the creature? Can a doctrine be "horrible" and
"dangerous" which affords the saints a sense of security in danger, that
supplies them comfort in sorrow, that begets patience within them in
adversity, that evokes from them praise at all times? Can a doctrine be
"horrible" and "dangerous" which assures us of the certain triumph of good
over evil, and which provides a sure resting-place for our hearts, and that
place, the perfections of the Sovereign Himself? No; a thousand times, no.
Instead of being "horrible and dangerous" this doctrine of the
Sovereignty of God is glorious and edifying, and a due apprehension of it will
but serve to make us exclaim with Moses, "Who is like unto thee, O Lord,
among the gods? who is like Thee, glorious in holiness, fearful in
praises, doing wonders?" (Ex. 15:11).
CONCLUSION
"Halleluia: for the Lord God omnipotent reigneth" -
Revelation 19:6
In our Foreword to the second edition we
acknowledge the need for preserving the balance of Truth. Two things are
beyond dispute: God is sovereign, man is responsible. In this book we have
sought to expound the former; in our other works we have frequently pressed
the latter. That there is real danger of over-emphasizing the one and ignoring
the other, we readily admit; yea, history furnishes numerous examples of cases
of each. To emphasize the sovereignty of God, without also maintaining the
accountability of the creature tends to fatalism; to be so concerned in
maintaining the responsibility of man, as to lose tight of the sovereignty of
God, is to exalt the creature and dishonor the Creator.
Almost all doctrinal error, is, really,
Truth perverted, Truth wrongly divided, Truth disproportionately held and
taught. The fairest face on earth, with the most comely features, would soon
become ugly and unsightly, if one member continued growing while the others
remained undeveloped. Beauty is, primarily, a matter of proportion. Thus it is
with the Word of God: its beauty and blessedness are best perceived when its
manifold wisdom is exhibited in its true proportions. Here is where so many
have failed in the past. A single phase of God’s Truth has so impressed this
man or that, that he has concentrated his attention upon it, almost to the
exclusion of everything else. Some portion of God’s Word has been made a "pet
doctrine", and often this has become the distinctive badge of some party. But
it is the duty of each servant of God to "declare all the counsel of God"
(Acts 20:27).
It is true that the degenerate days in
which our lot is cast, when on every side man is exalted, and "superman" has
become a common expression, there is real need for a special emphasis upon the
glorious fact of God’s supremacy. The more so where this is expressly denied.
Yet even here much wisdom is required, lest our zeal should not be according
to knowledge." The words "meat in due season" should ever be before the
servant of God. What is needed, primarily, by one congregation, may not be
specifically needed by another. If called to labor where Arminian preachers
have preceded, then the neglected truth of God’s sovereignty should be
expounded—though with caution and care, lest too much "strong meat" be given
to "babes". The example of Christ in John 16:12, "I have yet many things to
say unto you, but ye cannot hear them now", must be borne in mind. On the
other hand, if I am called to take charge of a distinctly Calvinistic pulpit,
then the truth of human responsibility (in its many aspects) may be profitably
set forth. What the preacher needs to give-out is not what his people most
like to hear, but what they most need, i.e. those aspects of truth they are
least familiar with, or least exhibiting in their walk.
To carry into actual practice what we
have inculcated above will, most probably, lay the preacher open to the charge
of being a Turncoat. But what matters that if he has his Master’s approval? He
is not called upon to be "consistent" with himself, nor with any rules drawn
up by man; his business is to be consistent with Holy Writ. And in Scripture
each part or aspect of truth is balanced by another aspect of truth. There are
two sides to everything, even to the character of God, for He is "light" (1
John 1:5) as well as "love" (1 John 4:8), and therefore are we called upon to
"Behold, therefore the goodness and severity of God" (Rom. 11:22). To be all
the time preaching on the one to the exclusion of the other, caricatures the
Divine character.
When the Son of God became incarnate He
came here in "the form of a servant" (Phil. 2:6); nevertheless, in the manger
He was "Christ the Lord" (Luke 2:11)! All things are possible with God (Matt.
19:26), yet God "cannot lie" (Titus 1:2). Scripture says, "Bear ye one
another’s burdens (Gal. 6:2), yet the same chapter insists "every man shall
bear his own burden" (Gal. 6:5). We are enjoined to take "no thought for the
morrow" (Matt. 6:34), yet "if any provide not for his own, and specially for
those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an
infidel" (1 Tim. 5:8). No sheep of Christ’s can perish (John 10:28, 29), yet
the Christian is bidden to make his "calling and election sure" (2 Pet. 1:10).
And so we might go on multiplying illustrations. These things are not
contradictions, but complementaries: the one "balances the other". Thus, the
Scriptures set forth both the sovereignty of God and the responsibility of
man. So too should every servant of God, and that, in their proper
proportions.
But we return now to a few closing
reflections upon our present theme. "And Jehoshaphat stood in the congregation
of Judah and Jerusalem, in the house of the Lord, before the new court, And
said, O Lord God of our fathers, art not Thou God in heaven? and rulest not
Thou over all the kingdoms of the heathen? and in Thine hand is there not
power and might, so that none is able to withstand Thee?" (2 Chron. 20:5, 6).
Yes, the Lord is God, ruling over all the kingdoms of men, ruling in supreme
majesty and might. Yet in our day, a day of boasted enlightenment and
progress, this is denied on every hand. A materialistic science and an
atheistic philosophy have bowed God out of His own world, and everything is
regulated, forsooth, by (impersonal) laws of nature. So in human affairs: at
best God is a far-distant spectator, and a helpless one at that. God could not
help the launching of the dreadful war, and though He longed to put a stop to
it He was unable to do so—and this in the face of 1 Chronicles 5:22; 2
Chronicles 24:24! Having endowed man with "free agency God is obliged to let
man make his own choice and go his own way, and He cannot interfere with him,
or otherwise his moral responsibility would be destroyed. Such are the popular
beliefs of the day. One is not surprised to find these sentiments emanating
from German neologians (coiners of new words), but how sad that they should be
taught in many of our Seminaries, echoed from many of our pulpits, and
accepted by many of the rank and file of professing Christians.
One of the most flagrant sins of our age
is that of irreverence—the failure to ascribe the glory which is due the
august majesty of God. Men limit the power and activities of the Lord in their
degrading concepts of His being and character. Originally, man was made in the
image and likeness of God, but today we are asked to believe in a god made in
the image and likeness of man. The Creator is reduced to the level of the
creature: His omniscience is called into question, His omnipotency is no
longer believed in, and His absolute sovereignty is flatly denied. Men claim
to be the architects of their own fortunes and the determiners of their own
destiny. They know not that their lives are at the disposal of the Divine
Despot. They know not they have no more power to thwart Hs secret decrees than
a worm has to resist the tread of an elephant. They know not that "The Lord
hath prepared His throne in the heavens; and His kingdom ruleth over all" (Ps.
103:19).
In the foregoing pages we have sought to
repudiate such paganistic views as the above-mentioned, and have endeavored to
show from Scripture that God is God, on the Throne, and that so far from the
recent war being an evidence that the helm had slipped out of His hand, it was
a sure proof that He still lives and reigns, and is now bringing to pass that
which He had fore-determined and fore-announced (Matt. 24:6-8 etc.). That the
carnal mind is enmity against God, that the unregenerate man is a rebel
against the Divine government, that the sinner has no concern for the glory of
his Maker, and little or no respect for His revealed will, is freely granted.
But, nevertheless, behind the scenes, God is ruling and over-ruling,
fulfilling His eternal purpose, not only in spite of but, also by means of,
those who are His enemies.
How earnestly are the claims of man
contended for against the claims of God! Has not man power and knowledge, but
what of it? Has God no will, or power, or knowledge? Suppose man’s will
conflicts with God’s—then what? Turn to the Scripture of Truth for answer. Men
had a will on the plains of Shinar and determined to build a tower whose top
should reach unto heaven, but what came of their purpose? Pharaoh had a will
when he hardened his heart and refused to allow Jehovah’s people to go and
worship Him in the wilderness, but what came of his rebellion? Balak had a
will when he hired Balaam to come and curse the Hebrews, but of what avail was
it? The Canaanites had a will when they determined to prevent Israel occupying
the land of Canaan, but how far did they succeed? Saul had a will when he
hurled his javelin at David, but it entered the wall instead! Jonah had a will
when he refused to go and preach to the Ninevites, but what came of it?
Nebuchadnezzar had a will when he thought to destroy the three Hebrew
children, but God had a will too, and the fire did not harm them. Herod had a
will when he sought to slay the Child Jesus, and had there been no living,
reigning God, his evil desire would have been effected; but in daring to pit
his puny will against the irresistible will of the Almighty, his efforts came
to nought. Yes, my reader, and you, too, had a will when you formed your plans
without first seeking counsel of the Lord, therefore did He overturn them!
"There are many devices in a man s heart: nevertheless the counsel of the
Lord, that shall stand" (Prov. 19:21).
What a demonstration of the irresistible
sovereignty of God is furnished by that wonderful statement found in
Revelation 17:17—"For God hath put in their hearts to fulfill His will, and to
agree, and give their kingdom unto the Beast, until the words of God shall be
fulfilled." The fulfillment of any single prophecy is but the sovereignty of
God in operation. It is the demonstration that what He has decreed He is able
also to perform. It is proof that none can withstand the execution of His
counsel or prevent the accomplishment of His pleasure. It is the evidence that
God inclines men to fulfill that which He has ordained and perform that which
He has fore-determined. If God were not absolute Sovereign, then Divine
prophecy would be valueless, for in such case no guarantee would be left that
what He had predicted would surely come to pass.
"For God hath put in their hearts to
fulfill His will and, to agree, and give their kingdom unto the Beast, until
the words of God shall he fulfilled" (Rev. 17:17). Even in that terrible time,
when Satan has been cast down to the earth itself (Rev. 12:9), when the
Antichrist is reigning in full power (Rev. 13), when the basest passions of
men are let loose (Rev. 6:4), even then God is supreme above all, working
"through all" (Eph. 4:6), controlling men’s hearts and directing their
counsels to the fulfilling of His own purpose. We cannot do better than quote
here the excellent comments of our esteemed friend Mr. Walter Scott upon this
verse—"God works unseen, but not the less truly, in all the political changes
of the day. The astute statesman. the clever diplomatist, is simply an agent
in the Lord’s hands. He knows it not. Self-will and motives of policy may
influence to action, but God is steadily working toward an end— to exhibit the
heavenly and earthly glories of His Son. Thus, instead of kings and statesmen
thwarting God’s purpose, they unconsciously forward it. God is not
indifferent, but is behind the scenes of human action. The doings of the
future ten kings in relation to Babylon and the Beast— the ecclesiastical and
secular powers—are not only under the direct control of God, but all is done
in fulfillment of His words."
Closely connected with Revelation 17:17
is that which is brought before us in Micah 4:11, 12—"Now also many nations
are gathered against thee, that say, Let her be defiled, and let our eye look
upon Zion. But they know not the thoughts of the Lord, neither understand they
His counsel: for He shall gather them as the sheaves into the floor." Here is
another instance which demonstrates God’s absolute control of the nations, of
His power to fulfill His secret counsel or decrees through and by them, and of
His inclining men to perform His pleasure though it be performed blindly and
unwittingly by them.
Once more. What a word was that of the
Lord Jesus as He stood before Pilate! Who can depict the scene! There was the
Roman official, and there also was the Servant of Jehovah standing before him.
Said Pilate, "Whence art Thou?" And we read, "Jesus gave him no answer. Then
said Pilate unto Him, "Speakest Thou not unto me? Knowest Thou not that I have
power to crucify Thee, and have power to release Thee?" (John 19:10). Ah! that
is what Pilate thought. That is what many another has thought. He was merely
voicing the common conviction of the human heart—the heart which leaves God
out of its reckoning. But hear the Lord Jesus as He corrects Pilate, and at
the same time repudiates the proud boasting of men in general—"thou couldest
have no power against Me, except it were given thee from above" (John 19:11).
How sweeping is this assertion! Man—even though he be a prominent official in
the most influential empire of his day—has no power except that which is given
him from above, no power, even, to do that which is evil, i.e., carry out his
own evil designs, unless God empowers him so that His purpose may be
forwarded. It was God who gave Pilate the power to sentence to death His
well-beloved Son! And how this rebukes the sophistries and reasonings of men,
who argue that God does nothing more than permit evil! Why, go right back to
the very first words spoken by the Lord God to man after the Fall, and hear
Him saying, "I will put ENMITY between thee and the woman, and between thy
seed and her seed" (Gen. 3:15)! Bare permission of sin does not cover all the
facts which are revealed in Scripture touching this mystery. As Calvin
succinctly remarked, "But what reason shall we assign for His permitting it
but because it is His will?"
At the close of chapter eleven we
promised to give attention to one or two other Difficulties which were not
examined at that time. To them we now turn. If God has not only pre-determined
the salvation of His own, but has also fore-ordained the good works which they
are to walk ‘in (Eph. 2:10), then what incentive remains for us to strive
after practical godliness? If God has fixed the number of those who are to be
saved, and the others are vessels of wrath fitted to destruction, then what
encouragement have we to preach the Gospel to the lost? Let us take up these
questions in the order of mention.
1. God’s Sovereignty and the believer’s
growth in grace.
If God has fore-ordained everything that
comes to pass, of what avail is it for us to "exercise" ourselves "unto
godliness" (1Tim. 4:7)? If God has before ordained the good works in which we
are to walk (Eph. 2:10), then why should we be "careful to maintain good
works" (Titus 3:8)? This only raises once more the problem of human
responsibility. Really, it should be enough for us to reply, God has bidden us
do so. Nowhere does Scripture inculcate or encourage a spirit of fatalistic
indifference. Contentment with our present attainments is expressly
disallowed. The word to every believer is, "Press toward the mark for the
prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus" (Phil. 3:14). This was the
apostle’s aim, and it should be ours. Instead of hindering the development of
Christian character, a proper apprehension and appreciation of God’s
sovereignty will forward it. Just as the sinner’s despair of any help from
himself is the first prerequisite of a sound conversion, so the loss of all
confidence in himself is the first essential in the believer’s growth in
grace; and just as the sinner despairing of help from himself will cast him
into the arms of sovereign mercy, so the Christian, conscious of his own
frailty, will turn unto the Lord for power. It is when we are weak, we are
strong (2 Cor. 12:10): that is to say, there must be consciousness of our
weakness before we shall turn to the Lord for help. While the Christian allows
the thought that he is sufficient in himself, while he imagines that by mere
force of will he shall resist temptation, while he has any confidence in the
flesh then, like Peter who boasted that though all forsook the Lord yet should
not he, so we shall certainly fail and fall. Apart from Christ we can do
nothing (John 15:5). The promise of God is, "He giveth power to the faint; and
to them that have no might (of their own) He increaseth strength" (Isa.
40:29).
The question now before us is of great
practical importance, and we are deeply anxious to express ourselves clearly
and simply. The secret of development of Christian character is the
realization of our own powerlessness, acknowledged powerlessness, and the
consequent turning unto the Lord for help. The plain fact is that of ourselves
we are utterly unable to practice a single precept or obey a single command
that is set before us in the Scriptures. For example: "Love your enemies"—but
of ourselves we cannot do this, or make ourselves do it. "In nothing be
anxious"—but who can avoid and prevent anxiety when things go wrong? "Awake to
righteousness and sin not"—but who can help sinning? These are merely examples
selected at random from scores of others. Does then God mock us by bidding us
do what He knows we are unable to do? The answer of Augustine to this question
is the best we have met with—"God gives commands we cannot perform, that we
may know what we ought to request from Him." A consciousness of our
powerlessness should cast us upon Him who has all power. Here then is where a
vision and view of God’s sovereignty helps, for it reveals His sufficiency and
shows us our insufficiency.
2. God’s Sovereignty and Christian
service.
If God has determined before the
foundation of the world the precise number of those who shall be saved, then
why should we concern ourselves about the eternal destiny of those with whom
we come into contact? What place is left for zeal in Christian service? Will
not the doctrine of God’s sovereignty, and its corollary of predestination,
discourage the Lord’s servants from faithfulness in evangelism? No; instead of
discouraging His servants, a recognition of God’s sovereignty is most
encouraging to them. Here is one, for example, who is called upon to do the
work of an evangelist, and he goes forth believing in the freedom of the will
and in the sinner’s own ability to come to Christ. He preaches the Gospel as
faithfully and zealously as he knows how; but, he finds the vast majority of
his hearers are utterly indifferent and have no heart at all for Christ. He
discovers that men are, for the most part, thoroughly wrapt up in the things
of the world, and that few have any concern about the world to come. He
beseeches men to be reconciled to God, and pleads with them over their soul’s
salvation. But it is of no avail. He becomes thoroughly disheartened, and asks
himself, What is the use of it all? Shall he quit, or had he better change his
mission and message? If men will not respond to the Gospel, had he not better
engage in that which is more popular and acceptable to the world? Why not
occupy himself with humanitarian efforts, with social uplift work, with the
purity campaign? Alas! that so many men who once preached the Gospel are now
engaged in these activities instead.
What then is God’s corrective for His
discouraged servant? First, he needs to learn from Scripture that God is not
now seeking to convert the world, but that in this Age He is "taking out of
the Gentiles" a people for His name (Acts 15:14). What then is God’s
corrective for His discouraged servant? This—a proper apprehension of God’s
plan for this Dispensation. Again: what is God’s remedy for dejection at
apparent failure in our labors? This—the assurance that God’s purpose cannot
fail, that God’s plans cannot miscarry, that God’s will must be done. Our
labors are not intended to bring about that which God has not decreed. Once
more: what is God’s word of cheer for the one who is thoroughly disheartened
at the lack of response to his appeals and the absence of fruit for his
labors? This— that we are not responsible for results: that is God’s side, and
God’s business. Paul may "plant," and Apollos may "water," but it is God who
"gave the increase" (1 Cor. 3:6). Our business is to obey Christ and preach
the Gospel to every creature, to emphasize the "Whosoever believeth", and then
to leave the sovereign operations of the Holy Spirit to apply the Word in
quickening power to whom He wills, resting on the sure promise of Jehovah—"For
as the rain cometh down, and the snow from heaven, and returneth not thither,
but watereth the earth, and maketh it bring forth and bud, that it may give
seed to the sower, and bread to the eater: So shall My Word be that goeth
forth out of My mouth: it shall not return unto Me void, but it shall
accomplish that which I please (it may not that which we please), and it shall
prosper in the thing whereto I sent it" (Isa. 55:10, 11). Was it not this
assurance that sustained the beloved apostle when he declared "Therefore (see
context) I endure all things for the elect’s sake" (2 Tim.2:10)! Yea, is not
this same lesson to be learned from the blessed example of the Lord Jesus!
When we read that He said to the people, "Ye also have seen Me, and believe
not", He fell back upon the sovereign pleasure of the One who sent Him,
saying, "All that the Father giveth Me shall come to Me, and him that cometh
to Me I will in no wise cast out" (John 6:36, 37). He knew that His labor
would not be in vain. He knew God’s Word would not return unto Him "void." He
knew that "God’s elect" would come to Him and believe on Him. And this same
assurance fills the soul of every servant who intelligently rests upon the
blessed truth of God’s sovereignty.
Ah fellow-Christian-worker, God has not
sent us forth to "draw a bow at a venture". The success of the ministry which
He has committed into our hands is not left contingent on the fickleness of
the wills in those to whom we preach. How gloriously encouraging, how
soul-sustaining the assurance are those words of our Lord’s, if we rest on
them in simple faith: "And other sheep I have ("have" mark you, not "will
have"; "have," because given to Him by the Father before the foundation of the
world), which are not of this fold (i.e. the Jewish fold then existing) : them
also I must bring, and they shall hear My voice" (John 10:16). Not simply,
"they ought to hear My voice," not simply "they may hear My voice", not "they
will do so if they are willing." There is no "if", no "perhaps", no
uncertainty about it. "They shall hear My voice" is His own positive,
unqualified, absolute promise. Here then, is where faith is to rest! Continue
your quest, dear friend, after the "other sheep" of Christ’s. Be not
discouraged because the "goats" heed not His voice as you preach the Gospel.
Be faithful, be scriptural, be persevering, and Christ may use even you to be
His mouthpiece in calling some of His lost sheep unto Himself. "Therefore, my
beloved brethren, be ye stedfast, unmoveable, always abounding in the work of
the Lord, forasmuch as ye know that your labor is not in vain in the Lord" (1
Cor. 15:58).
It now remains for us to offer a few
closing reflections and our happy task is finished.
God’s sovereign election of certain ones
to salvation is a MERCIFUL provision. The sufficient answer to all the wicked
accusations that the doctrine of Predestination is cruel, horrible, and
unjust, is that, unless God had chosen certain ones to salvation, none would
have been saved, for "there is none that seeketh after God" (Rom. 3:11). This
is no mere inference of ours but the definite teaching of Holy Scripture.
Attend closely to the words of the apostle in Romans 9, where this theme is
fully discussed—"Though the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of
the sea, a remnant shall be saved. . . . And as Isaiah said before, Except the
Lord of hosts had left us a seed, we had been as Sodom, and been made like
unto Gomorrah" (Rom. 9:27, 29). The teaching of this passage is unmistakable:
but for Divine interference, Israel would have become as Sodom and Gomorrah.
Had God left Israel alone, human depravity would have run its course to its
own tragic end. But God left Israel a "remnant" or "seed." Of old the cities
of the plain had been obliterated for their sin, and none was left to survive
them; and so it would have been in Israel’s case had not God "left" or spared
a remnant. Thus it is with the human race: but for God’s sovereign grace in
sparing a remnant, all of Adam’s descendants had perished in their sins.
Therefore, we say that God’s sovereign election of certain ones to salvation
is a merciful provision. And, be it noted, in choosing the ones He did, God
did no injustice to the others who were passed by, for none had any right to
salvation. Salvation is by grace, and the exercise of grace is a matter of
pure sovereignty—God might save all or none, many or few, one or ten thousand,
just as He saw best. Should it be replied, But surely it were "best" to save
all. The answer would be: We are not capable of judging. We might have thought
it "best" never to have created Satan, never to have allowed sin to enter the
world, or having entered, to have brought the conflict between good and evil
to an end long before now. Ah! God’s ways are not ours, and His ways are "past
finding out."
God fore-ordains everything which comes
to pass. His sovereign rule extends throughout the entire Universe and is over
every creature. "For of Him, and through Him, and to Him, are all things"
(Rom. 11:36). God initiates all things, regulates all things, and all things
are working unto His eternal glory. "There is but one God, the Father, of whom
are all things, and we in Him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all
things, and we by Him" (1 Cor. 8:6). And again, "According to the purpose of
Him who worketh all things after the counsel of His own will" (Eph. 1:11).
Surely if anything could be ascribed to chance it is the drawing of lots, and
yet the Word of God expressly declares, "The lot is cast into the lap; but the
whole disposing thereof is of the Lord" (Prov. 16:33)!!
God’s wisdom in the government of our
world shall yet be completely vindicated before all created intelligences. God
is no idle Spectator, looking on from a distant world at the happenings on our
earth, but is Himself shaping everything to the ultimate promotion of His own
glory. Even now He is working out His eternal purpose, not only in spite of
human and Satanic opposition, but by means of them. How wicked and futile have
been all efforts to resist His will shall one day be as fully evident as when
of old He overthrew the rebellious Pharaoh and his hosts at the Red Sea.
It has been well said, "The end and
object of all is the glory of God. It is perfectly, divinely true, that ‘God
hath ordained for His own glory whatsoever comes to pass.’ In order to guard
this from all possibility of mistake, we have only to remember who is this
God, and what the glory that He seeks. It is He who is the God and Father of
our Lord Jesus Christ,—of Him in whom divine love came seeking not her own,
among us as ‘One that serveth.’ It is He who, sufficient in Himself, can
receive no real accession of glory from His creatures, but from whom—‘Love’,
as He is ‘Light,’—cometh down every good and every perfect gift, in whom is no
variableness nor shadow of turning. Of His own alone can His creatures give to
Him."
"The glory of such an one is found in
the display of His own goodness, righteousness, holiness, truth; in
manifesting Himself as in Christ He has manifested Himself and will forever.
The glory of this God is what of necessity all things must serve—adversaries
and evil as well as all else. He has ordained it; His power will insure it;
and when all apparent clouds and obstructions are removed, then shall He
rest—‘rest in His love’ forever, although eternity only will suffice for the
apprehension of the revelation. ‘God shall be all in all’ (italics ours
throughout this paragraph) gives in six words the ineffable result" (F. W.
Grant on "Atonement").
That what we have written gives but an
incomplete and imperfect presentation of this most important subject we must
sorrowfully confess. Nevertheless, if it results in a clearer apprehension of
the majesty of God and His sovereign mercy we shall be amply repaid for our
labors. If the reader has received blessing from the perusal of these pages,
let him not fail to return thanks to the Giver of every good and every perfect
gift, ascribing all praise to His inimitable and sovereign grace.
"The Lord, our God, is clothed with might,
The winds and waves obey His will;
He speaks, and in the shining height
The sun and rolling worlds stand still.
Rebel ye waves, and o’er the land
With threatening aspect foam and roar,
The Lord hath spoken His command
That breaks your rage upon the shore.
Ye winds of night, your force combine—
Without His holy high behest
You shall not in a mountain pine
Disturb the little swallow’s nest.
His voice sublime is heard afar;
In distant peals it fades and dies;
He binds the cyclone to His car
And sweeps the howling murky skies.
Great God! how infinite art Thou,
What weak and worthless worms are we,
Let all the race of creatures bow
And seek salvation now from Thee.
Eternity, with all its years
Stands ever-present to Thy view,
To Thee there’s nothing old appears
Great God! There can be nothing new.
Our lives through varied scenes are drawn,
And vexed with mean and trifling cares;
While Thine eternal thought moves on
Thy fixed and undisturbed affairs."
"Halleluia: for the Lord God omnipotent reigneth" (Rev. 19:6).
Appendix 1
THE WILL OF GOD
In treating of the Will of God some
theologians have differentiated between His decretive will and His
permissive will, insisting that there are certain things which God has
positively fore-ordained, but other things which He merely suffers to exist or
happen. But such a distinction is really no distinction at all, inasmuch as
God only permits that which is according to His will. No such distinction
would have been invented had these theologians discerned that God could have
decreed the existence and activities of sin without Himself
being the Author of sin. Personally, we much prefer to adopt the
distinction made by the older Calvinists between God’s secret and revealed
will, or, to state it in another way, His disposing and His preceptive will.
God’s revealed will is made known in His
Word, but His secret will is His own hidden counsels. God’s revealed will is
the definer of our duty and the standard of our responsibility. The primary
and basic reason why I should follow a certain course or do a certain thing is
because it is God’s will that I should, His will being clearly defined
for me in His Word. That I should not follow a certain course, that I must
refrain from doing certain things, is because they are contrary to
God’s revealed will. But suppose I disobey God’s Word, then do I not
cross His will? And if so, how can it still be true that God’s will is
always done and His counsel accomplished at all times? Such questions
should make evident the necessity for the distinction here advocated. God’s
revealed will is frequently crost, but His secret will is
never thwarted. That it is legitimate for us to make such a distinction
concerning God’s will is clear from Scripture. Take these two passages: "For
this is the will of God, even your sanctification" (1 Thess. 4:3); "For who
hath resisted His will?" (Rom. 9:19). Would any thoughtful reader declare that
God’s "will" has precisely the same meaning in both of these passages? We
surely hope not. The first passage refers to God’s revealed will, the latter
to His secret will. The first passage concerns our duty, the latter declares
that God’s secret purpose is immutable and must come to pass notwithstanding
the creature’s insubordination. God’s revealed will is never done perfectly or
fully by any of us, but His secret will never fails of accomplishment even in
the minutest particular. His secret will mainly concerns future events;
His revealed will, our present duty: the one has to do with His
irresistible purpose, the other with His manifested pleasure: the one is
wrought upon us and accomplished through us, the other is to be done by us.
The secret will of God is His eternal,
unchanging purpose concerning all things which He bath made, to be brought
about by certain means to their appointed ends: of this God expressly declares
"My counsel shall stand, and I will do all My pleasure" (Isa. 46:10).
This is the absolute, efficacious will of God, always effected, always
fulfilled. The revealed will of God contains not His purpose and decree but
our duty,—not what He will do according to His eternal counsel, but
what we should do if we would please Him, and this is expressed in the
precepts and promises of His Word. Whatever God has determined within Himself,
whether to do Himself, or to do by others, or to suffer to be done, whilst it
is in His own breast, and is not made known by any event in providence, or by
precept, or by prophecy, is His secret will. Such are the deep things of God,
the thoughts of His heart, the counsels of His mind, which are impenetrable to
all creatures. But when these are made known they become His revealed will:
such is almost the whole of the book of Revelation, wherein God has made known
to us "things which must shortly come to pass (Rev. 1:1—"must" because He has
eternally purposed that they should).
It has been objected by Arminian
theologians that the division of God’s will into secret and revealed is
untenable, because it makes God to have two different wills, the one opposed
to the other. But this is a mistake, due to their failure to see that the
secret and revealed will of God respect entirely different objects. If God
should require and forbid the same thing, or if He should decree the same
thing should and should not exist, then would His secret and revealed will be
contradictory and purposeless. If those who object to the secret and revealed
will of God being inconsistent would only make the same distinction in this
case that they do in many other cases, the seeming inconsistency would at once
disappear. How often do men draw a sharp distinction between what is desirable
in its own nature. and what is not desirable all things considered.
For example, the fond parent does not desire simply considered to
punish his offending child, but, all things considered, he knows it is
his bounden duty, and so corrects his child. And though he tells his child he
does not desire to punish him, but that he is satisfied it is for the
best all things considered to do so, then an intelligent child would
see no inconsistency in what his father says and does. Just so the All-wise
Creator may consistently decree to bring to pass things which He hates,
forbids and condemns. God chooses that some things shall exist which He
thoroughly hates (in their intrinsic nature), and He also chooses that some
things shall not yet exist which He perfectly loves (in their intrinsic
nature). For example: He commanded that Pharaoh should let His people go,
because that was right in the nature of things, yet, He had secretly
declared that Pharaoh should not let His people go, not because it was
right in Pharaoh to refuse, but because it was best all things considered
that he should not let them go—i.e. best because it subserved God’s
larger purpose.
Again; God commands us to be perfectly
holy in this life (Matt. 5:48), because this is right in the nature of
things, but He has decreed that no man shall be perfectly holy in this
life, because this is best all things considered that none shall be
perfectly holy (experimentally) before they leave this world. Holiness is one
thing, the taking place of holiness is another; so, sin is one thing, the
taking place of sin is another. When God requires holiness His preceptive or
revealed will respects the nature or moral excellence of holiness; but when He
decrees that holiness shall not take place (fully and perfectly) His secret or
decretive will respects only the event of it not taking place. So, again, when
He forbids sin, His preceptive or revealed will respects only the nature or
moral evil of sin; but when He decrees that sin shall take place, His
secret will respects only its actual occurrence to serve His good purpose.
Thus the secret and revealed will of God respect entirely different objects.
God’s will of decree is not His will in
the same sense as His will of command is. Therefore, there is no difficulty in
supposing that one may be contrary to the other. His will, in both senses, is
His inclination. Everything that concerns His revealed will is perfectly
agreeable to His nature, as when He commands love, obedience, and service from
His creatures. But that which concerns His secret will has in view His
ultimate end, that to which all things are now working. Thus, He decreed the
entrance of sin into His universe, though His own holy nature hates all sin
with infinite abhorrence, yet, because it is one of the means by which His
appointed end is to be reached He suffered it to enter. God’s revealed
will is the measure of our responsibility and the determiner of our duty. With
God’s secret will we have nothing to do: that is His concern. But, God knowing
that we should fail to perfectly do His revealed will ordered His eternal
counsels accordingly, and these eternal counsels, which make up His secret
will, though unknown to us are, though unconsciously, fulfilled in and through
us.
Whether the reader is prepared to accept
the above distinction in the will of God or not he must acknowledge that the
commands of Scripture declare God’s revealed will, and he must also allow that
sometimes God wills not to hinder a breach of those commands, because
He does not as a fact so hinder it. God wills to permit sin as is
evident, for He does permit it. Surely none will say that God Himself
does what He does not will to do.
Finally, let it be said again that, my
responsibility with regard to the will of God is measured by what He has
made known in His Word. There I learn that it is my duty to use the
means of His providing, and to humbly pray that He may be pleased to
bless them to me. To refuse so to do on the ground that I am ignorant of what
may or may not be His secret counsels concerning me, is not only absurd, but
the height of presumption. We repeat: the secret will of God is none of our
business; it is His revealed will which measures our accountability.
That there is no conflict whatever between the secret and the revealed will of
God is made clear from the fact that, the former is accomplished by my use of
the means laid down in the latter.
Appendix 2
THE CASE OF ADAM
In our chapter on God’s Sovereignty and
Human Responsibility we dealt only with the responsibility of man considered
as a fallen creature, and at the close of the discussion it was pointed out
how that the measure and extent of our responsibility varies in different
individuals, according to the advantages they have received and the privileges
they have enjoyed, which is a truth clearly established by the declaration of
the Saviour recorded in Luke 12 :47, 48, "And that servant, which knew his
lord’s will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will,
shall be beaten with many stripes. But he that knew not, and did not commit
things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For unto
whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have
committed much, of him they will ask the more".
Now, strictly speaking, there are only
two men who have ever walked this earth which were endowed with full and
unimpaired responsibility, and they were the first and last Adam’s. The
responsibility of each of the rational descendants of Adam, while real, and
sufficient to establish them accountable to their Creator is, nevertheless,
limited in degree, limited because impaired through the effects of the Fall.
Not only is the responsibility of each
descendant of Adam sufficient to constitute him, personally an
accountable creature (that is, as one so constituted that he ought to
do right and ought not to do wrong), but originally every one of us was
also endowed, judicially, with full and unimpaired
responsibility, not in ourselves, but, in Adam. It should ever be borne
in mind that not only was Adam the father of the human race seminally,
but he was also the head of the race legally. When Adam was placed in
Eden he stood there as our representative, so that what he did is
reckoned to the account of each for whom he acted.
It is beside our present purpose to
enter here into a lengthy discussion of the Federal Headship of Adam
(Though there is deep and widespread need for this, and we hope ere
long to write upon this subject in another book.), suffice it now to refer the
reader to Romans 5:12-19 where this truth is dealt with by the Holy Spirit. In
the heart of this most important passage we are told that Adam was "the
figure of Him that was to come" (v. 14), that is, of Christ. In what
sense, then, was Adam "the figure" of Christ? The answer must be, In that
he was a Federal Head; in that he acted on the behalf of a race of men; in
that he was one who has legally, as well as vitally, affected all connected
with him. It is for this reason that the Lord Jesus is in 1 Corinthians 15:45
denominated "the last Adam", that is, the Head of the new creation, as
the first Adam was the Head of the old creation.
In Adam, then, each of us stood. As the
representative of the human race the first man acted. As then Adam was created
with full and unimpaired responsibility, unimpaired because there was no evil
nature within him; and as we were all "in Adam", it necessarily follows that
all of us, originally, were also endowed with full and unimpaired
responsibility. Therefore, in Eden, it was not merely the responsibility of
Adam as a single person that was tested, but it was Human Responsibility, the
Responsibility of the Race, as a whole and in part, which was on trial.
Webster defines responsibility first, as
"liable to account"; second, as "able to discharge an obligation". Perhaps the
meaning and scope of the term responsibility might be expressed and summed up
in the one word oughtness. Godwards, responsibility respects that which
is due the Creator from the creature, and which the creature is under
moral obligations to render.
In the light of the above definition it
is at once apparent that responsibility is something that must be placed on
trial. And as a fact, this is, as we learn from the Inspired Record,
exactly what transpired in Eden. Adam was placed on probation. His obligations
to God were put to the test. His loyalty to the Creator was tried out. The
test consisted of obedience to his Maker’s command. Of a certain tree he was
forbidden to eat.
But right here a very formidable
difficulty confronts us. From God’s standpoint the result of
Adam’s probation was not left in uncertainty. Before He formed him out of the
dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, God knew
exactly how the appointed test would terminate. With this statement every
Christian reader must be in accord, for, to deny God’s foreknowledge is to
deny His omniscience, and this is to repudiate one of the fundamental
attributes of Deity. But we must go further: not only had God a perfect
foreknowledge of the outcome of Adam’s trial, not only did His omniscient eye
see Adam eating of the forbidden fruit, but He decreed beforehand that
he should do so. This is evident not only from the general fact that
nothing happens save that which the Creator and Governor of the universe
has eternally purposed, but also from the express declaration of Scripture
that Christ as a Lamb "verily was foreordained before the foundation of
the world" (1 Pet. 1:20). If, then, God had foreordained before the foundation
of the world that Christ should, in due time, be offered as a Sacrifice for
sin, then it is unmistakably evident that God had also foreordained sin should
enter the world, and if so, that Adam should transgress and fall. In full
harmony with this, God Himself placed in Eden the tree of the knowledge
of good and evil, and also allowed the Serpent to enter and deceive Eve.
Here then is the difficulty: If God has
eternally decreed that Adam should eat of the tree, how could he be
held responsible not to eat of it? Formidable as the problem appears,
nevertheless, it is capable of a solution, a solution, moreover, which can be
grasped even by the finite mind. The solution is to be found in the
distinction between God’s secret will and His revealed will. As stated in
Appendix I, human responsibility is measured by our knowledge of God’s
revealed will; what God has told us, not what He has not told us,
is the definer of our duty. So it was with Adam.
That God had decreed sin should enter
this world through the disobedience of our first parents was a secret
hid in His own breast. Of this Adam knew nothing, and that made all the
difference so far as his responsibility was concerned. Adam was quite
unacquainted with the Creator’s hidden counsels. What concerned him was God’s
revealed will. And that was plain! God had forbidden him
to eat of the tree, and that was enough. But God went further: He even warned
Adam of the dire consequences which would follow should he disobey—death would
be the penalty. Transgression, then, on the part of Adam was entirely
excuseless. Created with no evil nature in him, with a will in perfect
equipoise, placed in the fairest environment, given dominion over all the
lower creation, allowed full liberty with only a single restriction upon him,
plainly warned of what would follow an act of insubordination to God, there
was every possible inducement for Adam to preserve his innocence; and, should
he fail and fall, then by every principle of righteousness his blood must lie
upon his own head, and his guilt be imputed to all in whose behalf he acted.
Had God disclosed to Adam His purpose
that sin would enter this world, and that He had decreed Adam should
eat of the forbidden fruit, it is obvious that Adam could not have been held
responsible for the eating of it. But in that God withheld the
knowledge of His counsels from Adam, his accountability was not
interfered with.
Again; had God created Adam with a bias
toward evil, then human responsibility had been impaired and man’s probation
merely one in name. But inasmuch as Adam was included among that which God, at
the end of the sixth day, pronounced "Very good", and, inasmuch as man was
made "upright" (Eccl. 7:29), then every mouth must be "stopped" and
"the whole world" must acknowledge itself "guilty before God" (Rom.
3:19).
Once more, it needs to be carefully
borne in mind that God did not decree that Adam should sin and then inject
into Adam an inclination to evil, in order that His decree might be
carried out. No; "God cannot be tempted, neither tempteth He any man"
(James 1:13). Instead, when the Serpent came to tempt Eve, God caused her
to remember His command forbidding to eat of the tree of the knowledge of
good and evil and of the penalty attached to disobedience! Thus, though God
had decreed the Fall, in no sense was He the Author of Adam’s sin,
and at no point was Adam’s responsibility impaired. Thus may we admire and
adore the "manifold wisdom of God", in devising a way whereby His
eternal decree should be accomplished, and yet the responsibility of His
creatures be preserved intact.
Perhaps a further word should be added
concerning the decretive will of God, particularly in its relation to evil.
First of all we take the high ground that, whatever things God does or
permits, are right, just, and good, simply because God does or permits
them. When Luther gave answer to the question, "Whence it was that Adam was
permitted to fall, and corrupt his whole posterity; when God could have
prevented him from falling, etc", he said, "God is a Being whose will
acknowledges no cause: neither is it for us to prescribe rules to His
sovereign pleasure, or call Him to account for what He does. He has neither
superior nor equal; and His will is the rule of all things. He did not thus
will such and such things because they were right, and He was bound to will
them; but they are therefore equitable and right because He wills them. The
will of man, indeed, may be influenced and moved; but God’s will never can. To
assert the contrary is to undeify Him" (De Servo, Arb. c/ 153).
To affirm that God decreed the entrance
of sin into His universe, and that He foreordained all its fruits and
activities, is to say that which, at first may shock the reader; but
reflection should show that it is far more shocking to insist that sin has
invaded His dominions against His will, and that its exercise is
outside His jurisdiction: for in such a case where would be His
omnipotency? No; to recognize that God has foreordained all the activities of
evil, is to see that He is the Governor of sin: His will determines its
exercise, His power regulates its bounds (Ps. 76:10). He is neither the
Inspirer nor the Infuser of sin in any of His creatures, but He is its
Master, by which we mean God’s management of the wicked is so entire that,
they can do nothing save that which His hand and counsel, from everlasting,
determined should be done.
Though nothing contrary to holiness and
righteousness can ever emanate from God, yet He has, for His own wise ends,
ordained His creatures to fall into sin. Had sin never been permitted, how
could the justice of God have been displayed in punishing it? How could the
wisdom of God have been manifested in so wondrously over-ruling it? How could
the grace of God have been exhibited in pardoning it? How could the power of
God have been exercised in subduing it? A very solemn and striking proof of
Christ’s acknowledgment of God’s decretal of sin is seen in His treatment
of Judas. The Saviour knew full well that Judas would betray Him, yet we never
read that He expostulated with him! Instead, He said to him, "That thou doest,
do quickly" (John 13 :27)! Yet, mark this was said after he had
received the sop and Satan had taken possession of his heart. Judas was
already prepared for and determined on his traitorous work, therefore did
Christ permissively (bowing to His Father’s ordination) bid him go forth to
his awful work.
Thus, though God is not the
Author of sin, and though sin is contrary to His holy nature, yet the
existence and operations of it are not contrary to His will, but
subservient to it. God never tempts man to sin, but He has, by His eternal
counsels (which He is now executing), determined its course. Moreover,
as we have shown in chapter 8, though God has decreed man’s sins, yet is man
responsible not to commit them, and blamable because he does. Strikingly were
these two sides of this awful subject brought together by Christ in that
statement of His: "Woe unto the world because of offences! for it must
needs be that offences come (because God has foreordained them); but
woe to that man by whom the offence cometh" (Matt. 18:7). So, too, though
all which took place at Calvary was by the "determinate counsel and
foreknowledge of God" (Acts 2:23), nevertheless, "wicked hands"
crucified the Lord of glory, and, in consequence, His blood has righteously
rested upon them and on their children. High mysteries are these, yet it is
both our happy privilege and bounden duty to humbly receive whatsoever God has
been pleased to reveal concerning them in His Word of Truth.
Appendix 3
The Meaning Of "KOSMOS" In John 3:16
It may appear to some of our readers
that the exposition we have given of John 3:16 in the chapter on "Difficulties
and Objections" is a forced and unnatural one, inasmuch as our definition of
the term "world" seems to be out of harmony with the meaning and scope of this
word in other passages, where, to supply the world of believers (God’s elect)
as a definition of "world" would make no sense. Many have said to us, "Surely,
‘world’ means world, that is, you, me, and everybody." In reply we would say:
We know from experience how difficult it is to set aside the "traditions of
men" and come to a passage which we have heard explained in a certain way
scores of times, and study it carefully for ourselves without bias
Nevertheless, this is essential if we would learn the mind of God.
Many people suppose they already know
the simple meaning of John 3:16, and therefore they conclude that no diligent
study is required of them to discover the precise teaching of this verse.
Needless to say, such an attitude shuts out any further light which they
otherwise might obtain on the passage. Yet, if anyone will take a Concordance
and read carefully the various passages in which the term "world" (as a
translation of "kosmos") occurs, he will quickly perceive that to ascertain
the precise meaning of, the word "world" in any given passage is not nearly so
easy as is popularly supposed. The word "kosmos," and its English equivalent
"world," is not used with a uniform significance in the New Testament. Very
far from it. It is used in quite a number of different ways. Below we will
refer to a few passages where this term occurs, suggesting a tentative
definition in each case:
"Kosmos" is used of the Universe as a whole: Acts
17:24 - "God that made the world and all things therein seeing that
He is Lord of heaven and earth."
"Kosmos" is used of the earth: John 13:1;
Ephesians 1:4, etc., etc.- "When Jesus knew that his hour was come that He
should depart out of this world unto the Father, having loved His own
which were in the world He loved them unto the end." "Depart out of this
world" signifies, leave this earth. "According as He hath chosen us in
Him before the foundation of the world." This expression signifies,
before the earth was founded—compare Job 38:4 etc.
"Kosmos" is used of the world-system: John 12:31
etc. "Now is the judgment of this world: now shall the Prince of this
world be cast out"— compare Matthew 4:8 and 1 John 5:19, R. V.
"Kosmos" is used of the whole human race: Romans
3:19, etc.—"Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to
them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the
world may become guilty before God."
"Kosmos" is used of humanity minus believers: John
15:18; Romans 3:6 "If the world hate you, ye know that it hated Me
before it hated you." Believers do not "hate" Christ, so that "the world"
here must signify the world of unbelievers in contrast from believers
who love Christ. "God forbid: for then how shall God judge the world."
Here is another passage where "the world" cannot mean "you, me, and
everybody," for believers will not be "judged" by God, see John 5:24. So
that here, too, it must be the world of unbelievers which is in view.
"Kosmos" is used of Gentiles in contrast from
Jews: Romans 11:12 etc. "Now if the fall of them (Israel) be the riches of
the world, and the diminishing of them (Israel) the riches of the
Gentiles; how much more their (Israel’s) fulness." Note how the first clause
in italics is defined by the latter clause placed in italics. Here, again,
"the world" cannot signify all humanity for it excludes Israel!
"Kosmos" is used of believers only: John 1:29;
3:16, 17; 6:33; 12:47; 1 Corinthians 4:9; 2 Corinthians 5:19. We leave our
readers to turn to these passages, asking them to note, carefully, exactly
what is said and predicated of "the world" in each place.
Thus it will be seen that "kosmos"
has at least seven clearly defined different meanings in the New Testament. It
may be asked, Has then God used a word thus to confuse and confound those who
read the Scriptures? We answer, No! nor has He written His Word for lazy
people who are too dilatory, or too busy with the things of this world, or,
like Martha, so much occupied with "serving," they have no time and no heart
to "search" and "study" Holy Writ! Should it be asked further, But how is a
searcher of the Scriptures to know which of the above meanings the term
"world" has in any given passage? The answer is: This may be ascertained by a
careful study of the context, by diligently noting what is predicated of "the
world" in each passage, and by prayer fully consulting other parallel passages
to the one being studied. The principal subject of John 3:16 is Christ as the
Gift of God. The first clause tells us what moved God to "give" His only
begotten Son, and that was His great "love;" the second clause informs us for
whom God "gave" His Son, and that is for, "whosoever (or, better, ‘every one’)
believeth;" while the last clause makes known why God "gave" His Son (His
purpose), and that is, that everyone that believeth "should not perish but
have everlasting life." That "the world" in John 3:16 refers to the world of
believers (God’s elect), in contradistinction from "the world of the ungodly"
(2 Pet. 2:5), is established, unequivocally established, by a comparison of
the other passages which speak of God’s "love." "God commendeth His love
toward US"—the saints, Romans 5:8. "Whom the Lord loveth He chasteneth"—every
son, Hebrews 12:6. "We love Him, because He first loved US"—believers, 1 John
4:19. The wicked God "pities" (see Matt. 18:33). Unto the unthankful and evil
God is "kind" (see Luke 6:35). The vessels of wrath He endures "with much
long-suffering" (see Rom. 9:22). But "His own" God "loves"!!
Appendix 4
1 JOHN 2:2
There is one passage more than any other
which is appealed to by those who believe in universal redemption, and which
at first sight appears to teach that Christ died for the whole human race. We
have therefore decided to give it a detailed examination and exposition.
"And He is the propitiation for our
sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world" (1 John
2:2). This is the passage which, apparently, most favors the Arminian
view of the Atonement, yet if it be considered attentively it will be seen
that it does so only in appearance, and not in reality. Below we offer
a number of conclusive proofs to show that this verse does not teach
that Christ has propitiated God on behalf of all the sins of all men.
In the first place, the fact that this
verse opens with "and" necessarily links it with what has gone before. We,
therefore, give a literal word for word translation of 1 John 2 :1 from
Bagster’s Interlinear: "Little children my, these things I write to you, that
ye may not sin; and if any one should sin, a Paraclete we have with the
Father, Jesus Christ (the) righteous". It will thus be seen that the apostle
John is here writing to and about the saints of God. His
immediate purpose was two-fold: first, to communicate a message that would
keep God’s children from sinning; second, to supply comfort and assurance to
those who might sin, and, in consequence, be cast down and fearful that the
issue would prove fatal. He, therefore, makes known to them the provision
which God has made for just such an emergency. This we find at the end of
verse 1 and throughout verse 2. The ground of comfort is twofold: let the
downcast and repentant believer (1 John 1:9) be assured that, first, he
has an "Advocate with the Father"; second, that this Advocate is "the
propitiation for our sins". Now believers only may take comfort from
this, for they alone have an "Advocate", for them alone is Christ the
propitiation, as is proven by linking the Propitiation ("and") with
"the Advocate"!
In the second place, if other passages
in the New Testament which speak of "propitiation," be compared with 1 John
2:2, it will be found that it is strictly limited in its scope. For
example, in Romans 3 :25 we read that God set forth Christ "a propitiation
through faith in His blood". If Christ is a propitiation "through faith",
then He is not a "propitiation" to those who have no faith! Again, in
Hebrews 2:17 we read, "To make propitiation for the sins of the people"
(Heb. 2:17, R. V.).
In the third place, who are meant
when John says, "He is the propitiation for our sins"? We answer,
Jewish believers. And a part of the proof on which we base this assertion
we now submit to the careful attention of the reader.
In Galatians 2 :9 we are told
that John, together with James and Cephas, were apostles "unto the
circumcision" (i.e. Israel). In keeping with this, the Epistle of James
is addressed to "the twelve tribes, which are scattered abroad" (1:1).
So, the first Epistle of Peter is addressed to "the elect who are sojourners
of the Dispersion" (1 Pet.1:1, R. V.). And John also is writing to
saved Israelites, but for saved Jews and saved Gentiles.
Some of the evidences that John is
writing to saved Jews are as follows.
(a) In the opening verse he says of
Christ, "Which we have seen with our eyes . . . . and our
hands have handled". How impossible it would have been for the Apostle Paul to
have commenced any of his epistles to Gentile saints with such
language!
(b) "Brethren, I write no new
commandment unto you, but an old commandment which ye had from the
beginning" (1 John 2 :7). The "beginning" here referred to is the
beginning of the public manifestation of Christ—in proof compare 1:1; 2:13,
etc. Now these believers the apostle tells us, had the "old
commandment" from the beginning. This was true of Jewish
believers, but it was not true of Gentile believers.
(c) "I write unto you, fathers, because
ye have known Him from the beginning" (2:13). Here, again, it is
evident that it is Jewish believers that are in view.
(d) "Little children, it is the last
time: and as ye have heard that Antichrist shall come, even now are
there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time. They
went out from us, but they were not of us" (2:18, 19).
These brethren to whom John wrote had
"heard" from Christ Himself that Antichrist should come (see Matt. 24).
The "many antichrists" whom John declares "went out from us"
were all Jews, for during the first century none but a Jew posed
as the Messiah. Therefore, when John says "He is the propitiation for our
sins" he can only mean for the sins of Jewish believers.
[1]
In the fourth place, when John added,
"And not for ours only, but also for the whole world", he
signified that Christ was the propitiation for the sins of Gentile
believers too, for, as previously shown, "the world" is a term
contrasted from Israel. This interpretation is unequivocally established
by a careful comparison of 1 John 2:2 with John 11:51,52, which is a
strictly parallel passage: "And this spake he not of himself: but being high
priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus should die for that nation; And not
for that nation only, but that also He should gather together in one the
children of God that were scattered abroad". Here Caiaphas, under inspiration,
made known for whom Jesus should "die". Notice now the correspondency
of his prophecy with this declaration of John’s:
|
1 John
2:2 |
John
11:51, 52 |
|
"He is the
propitiation for our (believing Israelites) sins". |
"He
prophesied that Jesus should die for that) nation". |
|
"And not
for ours only". |
"And not
for that nation only". |
|
"But also
for the whole world"— That is, Gentile believers scattered throughout the)
earth. |
"He should
gather together in one the children of God that were scattered abroad".
|
In the fifth place, the above
interpretation is confirmed by the fact that no other is consistent or
intelligible. If the "whole world" signifies the whole human race, then the
first clause and the "also" in the second clause are absolutely meaningless.
If Christ is the propitiation for everybody, it would be idle tautology
to say, first, "He is the propitiation for our sins and also for
everybody". There could be no "also" if He is the propitiation for the entire
human family. Had the apostle meant to affirm that Christ is a
universal propitiation he had omitted the first clause of verse 2, and simply
said, "He is the propitiation for the sins of the whole world." Confirmatory
of "not for ours (Jewish believers) only, but also for the whole
world"—Gentile believers, too; compare John 10:16; 17:20.
In the sixth place, our definition of
"the whole world" is in perfect accord with other passages in the New
Testament. For example: "Whereof ye heard before in the word of the truth of
the Gospel; which is come unto you, as it is in all the world"
(Col. 1:5, 6). Does "all the world" here mean, absolutely and unqualifiedly,
all mankind? Had all the human family heard the Gospel? No; the apostle’s
obvious meaning is that, the Gospel, instead of being confined to the land of
Judea, had gone abroad, without restraint, into Gentile lands. So in
Romans 1:8: "First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for you all, that your
faith is spoken of throughout the whole world". The apostle is
here referring to the faith of these Roman saints being spoken of in a way of
commendation. But certainly all mankind did not so speak of their
faith! It was the whole world of believers that he was referring to! In
Revelation 12:9 we read of Satan "which deceiveth the whole world".
But again this expression cannot be understood as a universal one, for
Matthew 24:24 tells us that Satan does not and cannot "deceive" God’s
elect. Here it is "the whole world" of unbelievers.
In the seventh place, to insist that
"the whole world" in 1 John 2:2 signifies the entire human race
is to undermine the very foundations of our faith. If Christ is the
propitiation for those that are lost equally as much as for those that are
saved, then what assurance have we that believers too may not be lost? If
Christ is the propitiation for those now in hell, what guarantee have I that I
may not end in hell? The blood-shedding of the incarnate Son of God is the
only thing which can keep any one out of hell, and if many for whom
that precious blood made propitiation are now in the awful place of the
damned, then may not that blood prove inefficacious for me! Away with such a
God-dishonoring thought.
However men may quibble and wrest the
Scriptures, one thing is certain: The Atonement is no failure. God will not
allow that precious and costly sacrifice to fail in accomplishing, completely,
that which it was designed to effect. Not a drop of that holy blood was shed
in vain. In the last great Day there shall stand forth no disappointed and
defeated Saviour, but One who "shall see of the travail of His soul and
be satisfied" (Isa. 53:11). These are not our words, but the
infallible assertion of Him who declares, "My counsel shall stand, and I will
do all My pleasure" (Isa. 64:10). Upon this impregnable rock we take
our stand. Let others rest on the sands of human speculation and
twentieth-century theorizing if they wish. That is their business. But to God
they will yet have to render an account. For our part we had rather be railed
at as a narrow-minded, out-of-date, hyper-Calvinist, than be found repudiating
God’s truth by reducing the Divinely-efficacious atonement to a mere fiction.
ENDNOTES:
[1]
It is true that many things in
John’s Epistle apply equally to believing Jews and believing
Gentiles. Christ is the Advocate of the one, as much as of the other. The same
may be said of many things in the Epistle of James which is also a
catholic, or general epistle, though expressly addressed to
the twelve tribes scattered abroad.
|
