The chief opponent of Dr. Taylor was Dr. Bennet Tyler. He replied

to Dr. Taylor that moral character has its seat, not in the

purpose, but in the affections back of the purpose. Otherwise

every Christian must be in a state of sinless perfection, for his

governing purpose is to serve God. But we know that there are

affections and desires not under control of this

purpose—dispositions not in conformity with the predominant

disposition. How, Dr. Tyler asked, can a sinner, completely

selfish, from a selfish motive, resolve not to be selfish, and so

suspend his selfishness? “Antecedently to regeneration, there can

be no suspension of the selfish principle. It is said that, in

suspending it, the sinner is actuated by self‐love. But is it

possible that the sinner, while destitute of love to God and every

particle of genuine benevolence, should love himself at all and

not love himself supremely? He loves nothing more than self. He

does not regard God or the universe, except as they tend to

promote his ultimate end, his own happiness. No sinner ever

suspended this selfishness until subdued by divine grace. We can

not become regenerate by preferring God to the world merely from

regard to our own interest. There is no necessity of the Holy

Spirit to renew the heart, if self‐love prompts men to turn from

the world to God. On the view thus combated, depravity consists

simply in ignorance. All men need is enlightenment as to the best

means of securing their own happiness. Regeneration by the Holy

Spirit is, therefore, not necessary.” See Bennet Tyler, Memoir and

Lectures, 316‐381, esp. 334, 370, 371; Letters on the New Haven

Theology, 21‐72, 143‐163; review of Taylor and Fitch, by E. D.

Griffin, Divine Efficiency, 13‐54; Martineau, Study, 2:9—“By

making it a man’s interest to be disinterested, do you cause him

to forget himself and put any love into his heart? or do you only

break him in and cause him to turn this way and that by the bit

and lash of a driving necessity?” The sinner, apart from the grace

of God, cannot see the truth. Wilberforce took Pitt to hear Cecil

preach, but Pitt declared that he did not understand a word that

Cecil said. Apart from the grace of God, the sinner, even when

made to see the truth, resists it the more, the more clearly he

sees it. Then the Holy Spirit overcomes his opposition and makes

him willing in the day of God’s power (_Psalm 110:3_).

B. The truth, as the efficient cause of regeneration.

According to this view, the truth as a system of motives is the direct and

immediate cause of the change from unholiness to holiness. This view is

objectionable for two reasons:

(_a_) It erroneously regards motives as wholly external to the mind that

is influenced by them. This is to conceive of them as mechanically

constraining the will, and is indistinguishable from necessitarianism. On

the contrary, motives are compounded of external presentations and

internal dispositions. It is the soul’s affections which render certain

suggestions attractive and others repugnant to us. In brief, the heart

makes the motive.

(_b_) Only as truth is loved, therefore, can it be a motive to holiness.

But we have seen that the aversion of the sinner to God is such that the

truth is hated instead of loved, and a thing that is hated, is hated more

intensely, the more distinctly it is seen. Hence no mere power of the

truth can be regarded as the efficient cause of regeneration. The contrary

view implies that it is not the truth which the sinner hates, but rather

some element of error which is mingled with it.

Lyman Beecher and Charles G. Finney held this view. The influence

of the Holy Spirit differs from that of the preacher only in

degree,—both use only moral suasion; both do nothing more than to

present the truth; both work upon the soul from without. “Were I

as eloquent as the Holy Ghost, I could convert sinners as well as

he,” said a popular preacher of this school (see Bennet Tyler,

Letters on New Haven Theology, 164‐171). On this view, it would be

absurd to pray to God to regenerate, for that is more than he can

do,—regeneration is simply the effect of truth.

Miley, in Meth. Quar., July, 1881:434‐462, holds that “the will

cannot rationally act without motive, but that it has always power

to suspend action, or defer it, for the purpose of rational

examination of the motive or end, and to consider the opposite

motive or end. Putting the old end or motive out of view will

temporarily break its power, and the new truth considered will

furnish motive for right action. Thus, by using our faculty of

suspending choice, and of fixing attention, we can realize the

permanent eligibility of the good and choose it against the evil.

This is, however, not the realization of a new spiritual life in

regeneration, but the election of its attainment. Power to do this

suspending is of grace [grace, however, given equally to all].

Without this power, life would be a spontaneous and irresponsible

development of evil.”

The view of Miley, thus substantially given, resembles that of Dr.

Taylor, upon which we have already commented; but, unlike that, it

makes truth itself, apart from the affections, a determining

agency in the change from sin to holiness. Our one reply is that,

without a change in the affections, the truth can neither be known

nor obeyed. Seeing cannot be the means of being born again, for

one must first be born again in order to see the kingdom of God

(_John 3:3_). The mind will not choose God, until God appears to

be the greatest good.

Edwards, quoted by Griffin, Divine Efficiency, 64—“Let the sinner

apply his rational powers to the contemplation of divine things,

and let his belief be speculatively correct; still he is in such a

state that those objects of contemplation will excite in him no

holy affections.” The Scriptures declare (_Rom. 8:7_) that “_the

mind of the flesh is enmity_”—not against some error or mistaken

notion of God—but “_is enmity against God_.” It is God’s holiness,

mandatory and punitive, that is hated. A clearer view of that

holiness will only increase the hatred. A woman’s hatred of

spiders will never be changed to love by bringing them close to

her. Magnifying them with a compound oxy‐hydrogen microscope will

not help the matter. Tyler: “All the light of the last day will

not subdue the sinner’s heart.” The mere presence of God, and

seeing God face to face, will be hell to him, if his hatred be not

first changed to love. See E. D. Griffin, Divine Efficiency,

105‐116, 203‐221; and review of Griffin, by S. R. Mason, Truth

Unfolded, 383‐407.

Bradford, Heredity and Christian Problems, 239—“Christianity puts

three motives before men: love, self‐love, and fear.” True, but

the last two are only preliminary motives, not essentially

Christian. The soul that is moved only by self‐love or by fear has

not yet entered into the Christian life at all. And any attention

to the truth of God which originates in these motives has no

absolute moral value, and cannot be regarded as even a beginning

of salvation. Nothing but holiness and love are entitled to be

called Christianity, and these the truth of itself cannot summon

up. The Spirit of God must go with the truth to impart right

desires and to make the truth effective. E. G. Robinson: “The

glory of our salvation can no more be attributed to the word of

God only, than the glory of a Praxiteles or a Canova can be

ascribed to the chisel or the mallet with which he wrought into

beauty his immortal creations.”

C. The immediate agency of the Holy Spirit, as the efficient cause of

regeneration.

In ascribing to the Holy Spirit the authorship of regeneration, we do not

affirm that the divine Spirit accomplishes his work without any

accompanying instrumentality. We simply assert that the power which

regenerates is the power of God, and that although conjoined with the use

of means, there is a direct operation of this power upon the sinner’s

heart which changes its moral character. We add two remarks by way of

further explanation:

(_a_) The Scriptural assertions of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit and

of his mighty power in the soul forbid us to regard the divine Spirit in

regeneration as coming in contact, not with the soul, but only with the

truth. The phrases, “to energize the truth,” “to intensify the truth,” “to

illuminate the truth,” have no proper meaning; since even God cannot make

the truth more true. If any change is wrought, it must be wrought, not in

the truth, but in the soul.

The maxim, “Truth is mighty and will prevail,” is very untrue, if

God be left out of the account. Truth without God is an

abstraction, and not a power. It is a mere instrument, useless

without an agent. “_The sword of the Spirit, which is the word of

God_” (_Eph. 6:17_), must be wielded by the Holy Spirit himself.

And the Holy Spirit comes in contact, not simply with the

instrument, but with the soul. To all moral, and especially to all

religious truth, there is an inward unsusceptibility, arising from

the perversity of the affections and the will. This blindness and

hardness of heart must be removed, before the soul can perceive or

be moved by the truth. Hence the Spirit must deal directly with

the soul. Denovan: “Our natural hearts are hearts of stone. The

word of God is good seed sown on the hard, trodden, macadamized

highway, which the horses of passion, the asses of self‐will, the

wagons of imaginary treasure, have made impenetrable. Only the

Holy Spirit can soften and pulverize this soil.”

The Psalmist prays: “_Incline my heart unto thy testimonies_”

(_Ps. 119:36_), while of Lydia it is said: “_whose heart the Lord

opened to give heed unto the things which were spoken by Paul_”

(_Acts 16:14_). We may say of the Holy Spirit: “He freezes and

then melts the soil, He breaks the hard, cold stone, Kills out the

rooted weeds so vile,—All this he does alone; And every virtue we

possess, And every victory won, And every thought of holiness, Are

his, and his alone.” Hence, in _Ps. 90:16, 17_, the Psalmist says,

first: “_Let thy work appear unto thy servants_”; then “_establish

thou the work of our hands upon us_”—God’s work is first to

appear,—then man’s work, which is God’s work carried out by human

instruments. At Jericho, the force was not applied to the rams’

horns, but to the walls. When Jesus healed the blind man, his

power was applied, not to the spittle, but to the eyes. The

impression is prepared, not by heating the seal, but by softening

the wax. So God’s power acts, not upon the truth, but upon the

sinner.

_Ps. 59:10_—“_My God with his lovingkindness will meet me_”; A.

V.—“_The God of my mercy shall prevent me_,” _i. e._, go before

me. Augustine urges this text as proof that the grace of God

precedes all merit of man: “What didst thou find in me but only

sins? Before I do anything good, his mercy will go before me. What

will unhappy Pelagius answer here?” Calvin however says this may

be a pious, but it is not a fair, use of the passage. The passage

does teach dependence upon God; but God’s anticipation of our

action, or in other words, the doctrine of prevenient grace, must

be derived from other portions of Scripture, such as _John 1:13_,

and _Eph. 2:10_. “The enthusiasm of humanity” to which J. R.

Seeley, the author of Ecce Homo, exhorts us, is doubtless the

secret of happiness and usefulness,—unfortunately he does not tell

us whence it may come. John Stuart Mill felt the need of it, but

he did not get it. Arthur Hugh Clough, Clergyman’s First Tale:

“Would I could wish my wishes all to rest, And know to wish the

wish that were the best.” Bradford, Heredity, 228—“God is the

environment of the soul, yet man has free will. Light fills the

spaces, yet a man from ignorance may remain in a cave, or from

choice may dwell in darkness.” Man needs therefore a divine

influence which will beget in him a disposition to use his

opportunities aright.

We may illustrate the philosophy of revivals by the canal boat

which lies before the gate of a lock. No power on earth can open

the lock. But soon the lock begins to fill, and when the water has

reached the proper level, the gate can be opened almost at a

touch. Or, a steamer runs into a sandbar. Tugs fail to pull the

vessel off. Her own engines cannot accomplish it. But when the

tide comes in, she swings free without effort. So what we need in

religion is an influx of spiritual influence which will make easy

what before is difficult if not impossible. The Superintendent of

a New York State Prison tells us that the common schools furnish

83 per cent., and the colleges and academies over 4 per cent., of

the inmates of Auburn and Sing Sing. Truth without the Holy Spirit

to apply it is like sunshine without the actinic ray which alone

can give it vitalizing energy.

(_b_) Even if truth could be energized, intensified, illuminated, there

would still be needed a change in the moral disposition, before the soul

could recognize its beauty or be affected by it. No mere increase of light

can enable a blind man to see; the disease of the eye must first be cured

before external objects are visible. So God’s work in regeneration must be

performed within the soul itself. Over and above all influence of the

truth, there must be a direct influence of the Holy Spirit upon the heart.

Although wrought in conjunction with the presentation of truth to the

intellect, regeneration differs from moral suasion in being an immediate

act of God.

Before regeneration, man’s knowledge of God is the blind man’s

knowledge of color. The Scriptures call such knowledge

“_ignorance_” (_Eph. 4:18_). The heart does not appreciate God’s

mercy. Regeneration gives an experimental or heart knowledge; see

Shedd, Dogm. Theol., 2:495. _Is. 50:4_—God “_wakeneth mine ear to

hear_.” It is false to say that soul can come in contact with soul

only through the influence of truth. In the intercourse of dear

friends, or in the discourse of the orator, there is a personal

influence, distinct from the word spoken, which persuades the

heart and conquers the will. We sometimes call it “magnetism,”—but

we mean simply that soul reaches soul, in ways apart from the use

of physical intermediaries. Compare the facts, imperfectly known

as yet, of second sight, mind‐reading, clairvoyance. But whether

these be accepted or not, it still is true that God has not made

the human soul so that it is inaccessible to himself. The

omnipresent Spirit penetrates and pervades all spirits that have

been made by him. See Lotze, Outlines of Psychology (Ladd), 142,

143.

In the primary change of disposition, which is the most essential

feature of regeneration, the Spirit of God acts directly upon the

spirit of man. In the securing of the initial exercise of this new

disposition—which constitutes the secondary feature of God’s work

of regeneration—the truth is used as a means. Hence, perhaps, in

_James 1:18_, we read: “_Of his own will he brought us forth by

the word of truth_” instead of “he begat us by the word of

truth,”—the reference being to the secondary, not to the primary,

feature of regeneration. The advocates of the opposite view—the

view that God works _only_ through the truth as a means, and that

his _only_ influence upon the soul is a moral influence—very

naturally deny the mystical union of the soul with Christ. Squier,

for example, in his Autobiog., 343‐378, esp. 360, on the Spirit’s

influences, quotes _John 16:8_—he “_will convict the world in

respect of sin_”—to show that God regenerates by applying truth to

men’s minds, so far as to convince them, by fair and sufficient

arguments, that they are sinners.

Christ, opening blind eyes and unstopping deaf ears, illustrates

the nature of God’s operation in regeneration,—in the case of the

blind, there is plenty of _light_,—what is wanted is _sight_. The

negro convert said that his conversion was due to himself and God:

he fought against God with all his might, and God did the rest. So

our moral successes are due to ourselves and God,—we have done

only the fighting against God, and God has done the rest. The sand

of Sahara would not bring forth flowers and fruit, even if you

turned into it a hundred rivers like the Nile. Man may hear

sermons for a lifetime, and still be barren of all spiritual

growths. The soil of the heart needs to be changed, and the good

seed of the kingdom needs to be planted there.

For the view that truth is “energized” or “intensified” by the

Holy Spirit, see Phelps, New Birth, 61, 121; Walker, Philosophy of

Plan of Salvation, chap. 18. _Per contra_, see Wardlaw, Syst.

Theol., 3:24, 25; E. D. Griffin, Divine Efficiency, 73‐116;

Anderson, Regeneration, 123‐168; Edwards, Works, 2:547‐597;

Chalmers, Lectures on Romans, chap. 1; Payne, Divine Sovereignty,

lect. 23:363‐367; Hodge, Syst. Theol., 3:3‐37, 466‐485. On the

whole subject of the Efficient Cause of Regeneration, see Hopkins,

Works, 1:454; Dwight, Theology, 2:418‐429; John Owen, Works,

3:282‐297, 366‐538; Robert Hall, Sermon on the Cause, Agent, and

Purpose of Regeneration.

4. The Instrumentality used in Regeneration.

A. The Roman, English and Lutheran churches hold that regeneration is

accomplished through the instrumentality of baptism. The Disciples, or

followers of Alexander Campbell, make regeneration include baptism, as

well as repentance and faith. To the view that baptism is a means of

regeneration we urge the following objections:

(_a_) The Scriptures represent baptism to be not the means but only the

sign of regeneration, and therefore to presuppose and follow regeneration.

For this reason only believers—that is, persons giving credible evidence

of being regenerated—were baptized (Acts 8:12). Not external baptism, but

the conscientious turning of the soul to God which baptism symbolizes,

saves us (1 Pet. 3:21—συνειδήσεως ἀγαθῆς ἐπερώτημα). Texts like John 3:5,

Acts 2:38, Col. 2:12, Tit. 3:5, are to be explained upon the principle

that regeneration, the inward change, and baptism, the outward sign of

that change, were regarded as only different sides or aspects of the same

fact, and either side or aspect might therefore be described in terms

derived from the other.

(_b_) Upon this view, there is a striking incongruity between the nature

of the change to be wrought and the means employed to produce it. The

change is a spiritual one, but the means are physical. It is far more

rational to suppose that, in changing the character of intelligent beings,

God uses means which have relation to their intelligence. The view we are

considering is part and parcel of a general scheme of mechanical rather

than moral salvation, and is more consistent with a materialistic than

with a spiritual philosophy.

_Acts 8:12_—“_when they believed Philip preaching good tidings

concerning the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, they

were baptized_”; _1 Pet. 3:21_—“_which also after a true likeness

doth now save you, even baptism, not the putting away of the filth

of the flesh, but the interrogation_ [marg.—‘_inquiry_’,

‘_appeal_’] _of a good conscience toward God_” = the inquiry of

the soul after God, the conscientious turning of the soul to God.

Plumptre, however, makes ἐπερώτημα a forensic term equivalent to

“examination,” and including both question and answer. It means,

then, the open answer of allegiance to Christ, given by the new

convert to the constituted officers of the church. “That which is

of the essence of the saving power of baptism is the confession

and the profession which precede it. If this comes from a

conscience that really renounces sin and believes on Christ, then

baptism, as the channel through which the grace of the new birth

is conveyed and the convert admitted into the church of Christ,

‘saves us,’ but not otherwise.” We may adopt this statement from

Plumptre’s Commentary, with the alteration of the word “conveyed”

into “symbolized” or “manifested.” Plumptre’s interpretation is,

as he seems to admit, in its obvious meaning inconsistent with

infant baptism; to us it seems equally inconsistent with any

doctrine of baptismal regeneration.

Scriptural regeneration is God’s (1) changing man’s disposition,

and (2) securing its first exercise. Regeneration, according to

the Disciples, is man’s (1) repentance and faith, and (2)

submission to baptism. Alexander Campbell, Christianity Restored:

“We plead that all the converting power of the Holy Spirit is

exhibited in the divine Record.” Address of Disciples to Ohio

Baptist State Convention, 1871: “With us regeneration includes all

that is comprehended in faith, repentance, and baptism, and so far

as it is expressive of birth, it belongs more properly to the last

of these than to either of the former.” But if baptism be the

instrument of regeneration, it is difficult to see how the

patriarchs, or the penitent thief, could have been regenerated.

_Luke 23:43_—“_This day shalt thou be with me in Paradise._”

Bossuet: “_This day_”—what promptitude! “_With me_”—what

companionship! “_In Paradise_”—what rest! Bersier: “ ‘_This

day_’—what then? no flames of Purgatory? no long period of

mournful expiation? ‘_This day_’—pardon and heaven!”

Baptism is a condition of being outwardly in the kingdom; it is

not a condition of being inwardly in the kingdom. The confounding

of these two led many in the early church to dread dying

unbaptized, rather than dying unsaved. Even Pascal, in later

times, held that participation in outward ceremonies might lead to

real conversion. He probably meant that an initial act of holy

will would tend to draw others in its train. Similarly we urge

unconverted people to take some step that will manifest religious

interest. We hope that in taking this step a new decision of the

will, inwrought by the Spirit of God, may reveal itself. But a

religion which consists only in such outward performances is

justly denominated a cutaneous religion, for it is only skin‐deep.

On _John 3:5_—“_Except one be born of water and the Spirit, he

cannot enter into the kingdom of God_”; _Acts 2:38_—“_Repent ye,

and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ unto

the remission of your sins_”; _Col. 2:12_—“_buried with him in

baptism, wherein ye were also raised with him through faith_”;

_Tit. 3:5_—“_saved us, through the washing of regeneration and

renewing of the Holy Spirit_”—see further discussion and

exposition in our chapter on the Ordinances. Adkins, Disciples and

Baptists, a booklet published by the Am. Bap. Pub. Society, is the

best statement of the Baptist position, as distinguished from that

of the Disciples. It claims that Disciples overrate the externals

of Christianity and underrate the work of the Holy Spirit. _Per

contra_, see Gates, Disciples and Baptists.

B. The Scriptural view is that regeneration, so far as it secures an

activity of man, is accomplished through the instrumentality of the truth.

Although the Holy Spirit does not in any way illuminate the truth, he does

illuminate the mind, so that it can perceive the truth. In conjunction

with the change of man’s inner disposition, there is an appeal to man’s

rational nature through the truth. Two inferences may be drawn:

(_a_) Man is not wholly passive at the time of his regeneration. He is

passive only with respect to the change of his ruling disposition. With

respect to the exercise of this disposition, he is active. Although the

efficient power which secures this exercise of the new disposition is the

power of God, yet man is not therefore unconscious, nor is he a mere

machine worked by God’s fingers. On the other hand, his whole moral nature

under God’s working is alive and active. We reject the “exercise‐system,”

which regards God as the direct author of all man’s thoughts, feelings,

and volitions, not only in its general tenor, but in its special

application to regeneration.

Shedd, Dogm. Theol., 2:503—“A dead man cannot assist in his own

resurrection.” This is true so far as the giving of life is

concerned. But once made alive, man can, like Lazarus, obey

Christ’s command and “_come forth_” (_John 11:43_). In fact, if he

does not obey, there is no evidence that there is spiritual life.

“In us is God; we burn but as he moves”—“Est deus in nobis;

agitante calescimus illo.” Wireless telegraphy requires an attuned

receiver; regeneration attunes the soul so that it vibrates

responsively to God and receives the communications of his truth.

When a convert came to Rowland Hill and claimed that she had been

converted in a dream, he replied: “We will see how you walk, now

that you are awake.”

Lord Bacon said he would open every one of Argus’s hundred eyes,

before he opened one of Briareus’s hundred hands. If God did not

renew men’s hearts in connection with our preaching of the truth,

we might well give up our ministry. E. G. Robinson: “The

conversion of a soul is just as much according to law as the

raising of a crop of turnips.” Simon, Reconciliation, 377—“Though

the mere preaching of the gospel is not the _cause_ of the

conversion and revivification of men, it is a necessary

_condition_—as necessary as the action of light and heat, or other

physical agencies, are on a germ, if it is to develop, grow, and

bear its proper fruit.”

(_b_) The activity of man’s mind in regeneration is activity in view of

the truth. God secures the initial exercise of the new disposition which

he has wrought in man’s heart in connection with the use of truth as a

means. Here we perceive the link between the efficiency of God and the

activity of man. Only as the sinner’s mind is brought into contact with

the truth, does God complete his regenerating work. And as the change of

inward disposition and the initial exercise of it are never, so far as we

know, separated by any interval of time, we can say, in general, that

Christian work is successful only as it commends the truth to every man’s

conscience in the sight of God (2 Cor. 4:2).

In _Eph. 1:17, 18_, there is recognized the divine illumination of

the mind to behold the truth—“_may give unto you a spirit of

wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him; having the eyes of

your heart enlightened, that ye may know what is the hope of his

calling_” On truth as a means of regeneration, see Hovey,

Outlines, 192, who quotes Cunningham, Historical Theology,

1:617—“Regeneration may be taken in a limited sense as including

only the first impartation of spiritual life ... or it may be

taken in a wider sense as comprehending the whole of that process

by which he is renewed or made over again in the whole man after

the image of God,—_i. e._, as including the production of saving

faith and union to Christ. Only in the first sense did the

Reformers maintain that man in the process was wholly passive and

not active; for they did not dispute that, before the process in

the second and more enlarged sense was completed, man was

spiritually alive and active, and continued so ever after during

the whole process of his sanctification.”

Dr. Hovey suggests an apt illustration of these two parts of the

Holy Spirit’s work and their union in regeneration: At the same

time that God makes the photographic plate sensitive, he pours in

the light of truth whereby the image of Christ is formed in the

soul. Without the “sensitizing” of the plate, it would never fix

the rays of light so as to retain the image. In the process of

“sensitizing,” the plate is passive; under the influence of light,

it is active. In both the “sensitizing” and the taking of the

picture, the real agent is not the plate nor the light, but the

photographer. The photographer cannot perform both operations at

the same moment. God can. He gives the new affection, and at the

same instant he secures its exercise in view of the truth.

For denial of the instrumentality of truth in regeneration, see

Pierce, in Bap. Quar., Jan. 1872:52. _Per contra_, see Anderson,

Regeneration, 89‐122. H. B. Smith holds middle ground. He says:

“In adults it [regeneration] is wrought most frequently by the

word of God as the instrument. Believing that infants may be

regenerated, we cannot assert that it is tied to the word of God

absolutely.” We prefer to say that, if infants are regenerated,

they also are regenerated in conjunction with some influence of

truth upon the mind, dim as the recognition of it may be.

Otherwise we break the Scriptural connection between regeneration

and conversion, and open the way for faith in a physical, magical,

sacramental salvation. Squier, Autobiog., 368, says well, of the

theory of regeneration which makes man purely passive, that it has

a benumbing effect upon preaching: “The lack of expectation

unnerves the efforts of the preacher; an impression of the

fortuitous presence neutralizes his engagedness. This antinomian

dependence on the Spirit extracts all vitality from the pulpit and

sense of responsibility from the hearer, and makes preaching an

_opus operatum_, like the baptismal regeneration of the

formalist.” Only of the first element in regeneration are Shedd’s

words true: “A dead man cannot assist in his own resurrection”

(Dogm. Theol., 2:503).

Squier goes to the opposite extreme of regarding the truth alone

as the cause of regeneration. His words are none the less a

valuable protest against the view that regeneration is so entirely

due to God that in no part of it is man active. It was with a

better view that Luther cried: “O that we might multiply living

books, that is, preachers!” And the preacher is successful only as

he possesses and unfolds the truth. John took the little book from

the Covenant‐angel’s hand and ate it (_Rev. 10:8‐11_). So he who

is to preach God’s truth must feed upon it, until it has become

his own. For the Exercise‐system, see Emmons, Works, 4:339‐411;

Hagenbach, Hist. Doct., 2:439.

5. The Nature of the Change wrought in Regeneration.

A. It is a change in which the governing disposition is made holy. This

implies that:

(_a_) It is not a change in the substance of either body or soul.

Regeneration is not a physical change. There is no physical seed or germ

implanted in man’s nature. Regeneration does not add to, or subtract from,

the number of man’s intellectual, emotional or voluntary faculties. But

regeneration is the giving of a new direction or tendency to powers of

affection which man possessed before. Man had the faculty of love before,

but his love was supremely set on self. In regeneration the direction of

that faculty is changed, and his love is now set supremely upon God.

_Eph. 2:10_—“_created in Christ Jesus for good works_”—does not

imply that the old soul is annihilated, and a new soul created.

The “_old man_” which is “_crucified_”—(_Rom. 6:6_) and “_put

away_” (_Eph. 4:22_) is simply the sinful bent of the affections

and will. When this direction of the dispositions is changed, and

becomes holy, we can call the change a new birth of the old

nature, because the same _faculties_ that acted before are acting

now, the only difference being that now these faculties are set

toward God and purity. Or, regarding the change from another point

of view, we may speak of man as having a “new nature,” as

“recreated,” as being a “new creature,” because this _direction_

of the affection and will, which ensures a different life from

what was led before, is something totally new, and due wholly to

the regenerating act of God. In _1 Pet. 1:23_—“_begotten again,

not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible_”—all materialistic

inferences from the word “_seed_,” as if it implied the

implantation of a physical germ, are prevented by the following

explanatory words: “_through the word of God, which liveth and

abideth_.”

So, too, when we describe regeneration as the communication of a

new life to the soul, we should not conceive of this new life as a

_substance_ imparted or infused into us. The new life is rather a

new direction and activity of our own affections and will. There

is, indeed a union of the soul with Christ; Christ dwells in the

renewed heart; Christ’s entrance into the soul is the _cause_ and

_accompaniment_ of its regeneration. But this entrance of Christ

into the soul is not _itself_ regeneration. We must distinguish

the effect from the cause; otherwise we shall be in danger of a

pantheistic confounding of our own personality and life with the

personality and life of Christ. Christ is indeed our life, in the

sense of being the cause and supporter of our life, but he is not

our life in the sense that, after our union with him, our

individuality ceases. The effect of union with Christ is rather

that our individuality is enlarged and exalted (_John 10:10_—“_I

came that they may have life, and may have it abundantly._” See

page 799, (_c_)).

We must therefore take with a grain of allowance the generally

excellent words of A. J. Gordon, Twofold Life, 22—“Regeneration is

the communication of the divine nature to man by the operation of

the Holy Spirit through the word (_2 Pet. 1:4_).... As Christ was

made partaker of human nature by incarnation, that so he might

enter into truest fellowship with us, we are made partakers of the

divine nature, by regeneration, that we may enter into truest

fellowship with God. Regeneration is not a change of nature, _i.

e._, a natural heart bettered. Eternal life is not natural life

prolonged into endless duration. It is the divine life imparted to

us, the very life of God communicated to the human soul, and

bringing forth there its proper fruit.” Dr. Gordon’s view that

regeneration adds a new substance or faculty to the soul is the

result of literalizing the Scripture metaphors of creation and

life. This turning of symbol into fact accounts for his tendency

toward annihilation doctrine in the case of the unregenerate,

toward faith cure and the belief that all physical evils can be

removed by prayer. E. H. Johnson, The Holy Spirit: “Regeneration

is a change, not in the quantity, but in the quality, of the

soul.” E. G. Robinson, Christian Theology, 320—“Regeneration

consists in a divinely wrought change in the moral affections.”

So, too, we would criticize the doctrine of Drummond, Nat. Law in

the Spir. World: “People forget the persistence of force. Instead

of transforming energy, they try to create it. We must either

depend on environment, or be self‐sufficient. The ‘cannot _bear

fruit of itself_’ (_John 15:4_) is the ‘_cannot_’ of natural law.

Natural fruit flourishes with air and sunshine. The difference

between the Christian and the non‐Christian is the difference

between the organic and the inorganic. The Christian has all the

characteristics of life: assimilation, waste, reproduction,

spontaneous action.” See criticism of Drummond, by Murphy, in

Brit. Quar., 1884:118‐125—“As in resurrection there is a physical

connection with the old body, so in regeneration there is a

natural connection with the old soul.” Also, Brit. Quar., July,

1880, art.: Evolution Viewed in Relation to Theology—“The

regenerating agency of the Spirit of God is symbolized, not by the

vitalization of dead matter, but by the agency of the organizing

intelligence which guides the evolution of living beings.”

Murphy’s answer to Drummond is republished. Murphy’s Natural

Selection and Spiritual Freedom, 1‐33—“The will can no more create

force, either muscular or mental, than it can create matter. And

it is equally true that for our spiritual nourishment and

spiritual force we are altogether dependent on our spiritual

environment, which is God.” In “dead matter” there is no sin.

Drummond would imply that, as matter has no promise or potency of

life and is not responsible for being without life (or “dead,” to

use his misleading word), and if it ever is to live must wait for

the life‐giving influence to come unsought, so the human soul is

not responsible for being spiritually dead, cannot seek for life,

must passively wait for the Spirit. Plymouth Brethren generally

hold the same view with Drummond, that regeneration _adds_

something—as _vitality_—to the substance of the soul. Christ is

transsubstantiated into the soul’s substance; or, the πνεῦμα is

added. But we have given over talking of vitality, as if it were a

substance or faculty. We regard it as merely a mode of action.

Evolution, moreover, uses what already exists, so far as it will

go, instead of creating new; as in the miracle of the loaves, and

as in the original creation of man, so in his recreation or

regeneration. Dr. Charles Hodge also makes the same mistake in

calling regeneration an “origination of the principle of the

spirit of life, just as literal and real a creation as the

origination of the principle of natural life.” This, too,

literalizes Scripture metaphor, and ignores the fact that the

change accomplished in regeneration is an exclusively moral one.

There is indeed a new entrance of Christ into the soul, or a new

exercise of his spiritual power within the soul. But the effect of

Christ’s working is not to add any new faculty or substance, but

only to give new direction to already existing powers.

(_b_) Regeneration involves an enlightenment of the understanding and a

rectification of the volitions. But it seems most consonant with Scripture

and with a correct psychology to regard these changes as immediate and

necessary consequences of the change of disposition already mentioned,

rather than as the primary and central facts in regeneration. The taste

for truth logically precedes perception of the truth, and love for God

logically precedes obedience to God; indeed, without love no obedience is

possible. Reverse the lever of affection, and this moral locomotive,

without further change, will move away from sin, and toward truth and God.

Texts which seem to imply that a right taste, disposition,

affection, logically precedes both knowledge of God and obedience

to God, are the following: _Ps. 34:8_—“_Oh taste and see that

Jehovah is good_”; _119:36_—“_Incline my heart unto thy

testimonies_”; _Jer. 24:7_—“_I will give them a heart to know

me_”; _Mat. 5:8_—“_Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall

see God_”; _John 7:17_—“_If any man willeth to do his will, he

shall know of the teaching, whether it is of God_”; _Acts

16:14_—of Lydia it is said: “_whose heart the Lord opened to give

heed unto the things which were spoken by Paul_”; _Eph.

1:18_—“_having the eyes of your heart enlightened._” “Change the

centre of a circle and you change the place and direction of all

its radii.”

The text _John 1:12, 13_—“_But as many as received him, to them

gave him the right to become children of God, even to them that

believe on his name: who were born, not of blood, nor of the will

of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God_”—seems at first

sight to imply that faith is the condition of regeneration, and

therefore prior to it. “But if ἐξουσίαν here signifies the

‘_right_’ or ‘privilege’ of sonship, it is a right which may

presuppose faith as the work of the Spirit in regeneration—a work

apart from which no genuine faith exists in the soul. But it is

possible that John means to say that, in the case of all who

received Christ, their power to believe was _given_ to them by

him. In the original the emphasis is on ‘_gave,_’ and this is

shown by the order of the words”; see Hovey, Manual of Theology,

345, and Com. on _John 1:12, 13_—“The meaning would then be this:

‘Many did not receive him; but some did; and as to all who

received him, he _gave_ them grace by which they were enabled to

do this, and so to become God’s children.’ ”

Ruskin: “The first and last and closest trial question to any

living creature is, ‘What do you like?’ Go out into the street and

ask the first man you meet what his taste is, and, if he answers

candidly, you know him, body and soul. What we like determines

what we are, and is the sign of what we are; and to teach taste is

inevitably to form character.” If the taste here spoken of is

moral and spiritual taste, the words of Ruskin are sober truth.

Regeneration is essentially a changing of the fundamental taste of

the soul. But by taste we mean the direction of man’s love, the

bent of his affections, the trend of his will. And to alter that

taste is not to impart a new faculty, or to create a new

substance, but simply to set toward God the affections which

hitherto have been set upon self and sin. We may illustrate by the

engineer who climbs over the cab into a runaway locomotive and who

changes its course, not by adding any new rod or cog to the

machine, but simply by reversing the lever. The engine slows up

and soon moves in an opposite direction to that in which it has

been going. Man needs no new faculty of love; he needs only to

have his love set in a new and holy direction; this is virtually

to give him a new birth, to make him a new creature, to impart to

him a new life. But being born again, created anew, made alive

from the dead, are physical metaphors, to be interpreted not

literally but spiritually.

(_c_) It is objected, indeed, that we know only of mental substance and of

mental acts, and that the new disposition or state just mentioned, since

it is not an act, must be regarded as a new substance, and so lack all

moral quality. But we reply that, besides substance and acts, there are

habits, tendencies, proclivities, some of them native and some of them

acquired. They are voluntary, and have moral character. If we can by

repeated acts originate sinful tendencies, God can surely originate in us

holy tendencies. Such holy tendencies formed a part of the nature of Adam,

as he came from the hand of God. As the result of the Fall, we are born

with tendencies toward evil for which we are responsible. Regeneration is

a restoration of the original tendencies toward God which were lost by the

Fall. Such holy tendencies (tastes, dispositions, affections) are not only

not unmoral—they are the only possible springs of right moral action. Only

in the restoration of them does man become truly free.

_Mat. 12:33_—“_Make the tree good, and its fruit good_”; _Eph.

2:10_—“_created in Christ Jesus for good works._” The tree is

first made good—the character renewed in its fundamental

principle, love to God—in the certainty that when this is done the

fruit will be good also. Good works are the necessary result of

regeneration by union with Christ. Regeneration introduces a new

force into humanity, the force of a new love. The work of the

preacher is that of coöperation with God in the impartation of a

new life—a work far more radical and more noble than that of moral

reform, by as much as the origination of a new force is more

radical and more noble than the guidance of that force after it

has been originated. Does regeneration cure disease and remove

physical ills? Not primarily. _Mat. 1:21_—“_thou shalt call his

name Jesus; for it is he that shall save his people from their

sins._” Salvation from sin is Christ’s first and main work. He

performed physical healing only to illustrate and further the

healing of the soul. Hence in the case of the paralytic, when he

was expected to cure the body, he said first: “_thy sins are

forgiven_” (_Mat. 9:2_); but, that they who stood by might not

doubt his power to forgive, he added the raising up of the palsied

man. And ultimately in every redeemed man the holy heart will

bring in its train the perfected body: _Rom. 8:23_—“_we ourselves

groan within ourselves, waiting for our adoption, to wit, the

redemption of our body._”

On holy affection as the spring of holy action, see especially

Edwards, Religious Affections, in Works, 3:1‐21. This treatise is

Jonathan Edwards’s Confessions, as much as if it were directly

addressed to the Deity. Allen, his biographer, calls it “a work

which will not suffer by comparison with the work of great

teachers in theology, whether ancient or modern.” President

Timothy Dwight regarded it as most worthy of preservation next to

the Bible. See also Hodge, Essays and Reviews, 1:48; Owen on the

Holy Spirit, in Works, 3:297‐336; Charnock on Regeneration; Andrew

Fuller, Works, 2:461‐471, 512‐560, and 3:796; Bellamy, Works,

2:502; Dwight, Works, 2:418; Woods, Works, 3:1‐21; Anderson,

Regeneration, 21‐50.

B. It is an instantaneous change, in a region of the soul below

consciousness, and is therefore known only in its results.

(_a_) It is an instantaneous change.—Regeneration is not a gradual work.

Although there may be a gradual work of God’s providence and Spirit,

preparing the change, and a gradual recognition of it after it has taken

place, there must be an instant of time when, under the influence of God’s

Spirit, the disposition of the soul, just before hostile to God, is

changed to love. Any other view assumes an intermediate state of

indecision which has no moral character at all, and confounds regeneration

either with conviction or with sanctification.

Conviction of sin is an ordinary, if not an invariable, antecedent

of regeneration. It results from the contemplation of truth. It is

often accompanied by fear, remorse, and cries for mercy. But these

desires and fears are not signs of regeneration. They are selfish.

They are quite consistent with manifest and dreadful enmity to

God. They have a hopeful aspect, simply because they are evidence

that the Holy Spirit is striving with the soul. But this work of

the Spirit is not yet regeneration; at most, it is preparation for

regeneration. So far as the sinner is concerned, he is more of a

sinner than ever before; because, under more light than has ever

before been given him, he is still rejecting Christ and resisting

the Spirit. The word of God and the Holy Spirit appeal to lower as

well as to higher motives; most men’s concern about religion is

determined, at the outset, by hope or fear. See Shedd, Dogm.

Theol., 2:512.

All these motives, though they are not the highest, are yet proper

motives to influence the soul; it is right to seek God from

motives of self‐interest, and because we desire heaven. But the

seeking which not only begins, but ends, upon this lower plane, is

never successful. Until the soul gives itself to God from motives

of love, it is never saved. And so long as these preliminary

motives rule, regeneration has not yet taken place. Bible‐reading,

and prayers, and church‐attendance, and partial reformations, are

certainly better than apathy or outbreaking sin. They may be signs

that God is working in the soul. But without complete surrender to

God, they may be accompanied with the greatest guilt and the

greatest danger; simply because, under such influences, the

withholding of submission implies the most active hatred to God,

and opposition to his will. Instance cases of outward reformation

that preceded regeneration,—like that of John Bunyan, who left off

swearing before his conversion. Park: “The soul is a monad, and

must turn all at once. If we are standing on the line, we are yet

unregenerate. We are regenerate only when we cross it.” There is a

prevenient grace as well as a regenerating grace. Wendelius indeed

distinguished five kinds of grace, namely, prevenient,

preparatory, operant, coöperant, and perfecting.

While in some cases God’s preparatory work occupies a long time,

there are many cases in which he cuts short his work in

righteousness (_Rom. 9:28_). Some persons are regenerated in

infancy or childhood, cannot remember a time when they did not

love Christ, and yet take long to learn that they are regenerate.

Others are convicted and converted suddenly in mature years. The

best proof of regeneration is not the memory of a past experience,

however vivid and startling, but rather a present inward love for

Christ, his holiness, his servants, his work, and his word. Much

sympathy should be given to those who have been early converted,

but who, from timidity, self‐distrust, or the faults of

inconsistent church members, have been deterred from joining

themselves with Christian people, and so have lost all hope and

joy in their religious lives. Instance the man who, though

converted in a revival of religion, was injured by a professed

Christian, and became a recluse, but cherished the memory of his

dead wife and child, kept the playthings of the one and the

clothing of the other, and left directions to have them buried

with him.

As there is danger of confounding regeneration with preparatory

influences of God’s Spirit, so there is danger of confounding

regeneration with sanctification. Sanctification, as the

development of the new affection, is gradual and progressive. But

no _beginning_ is progressive or gradual; and regeneration is a

beginning of the new affection. We may gradually come to the

_knowledge_ that a new affection exists, but the knowledge of a

beginning is one thing; the beginning itself is another thing.

Luther had experienced a change of heart, long before he knew its

meaning or could express his new feelings in scientific form. It

is not in the sense of a gradual regeneration, but in the sense of

a gradual recognition of the fact of regeneration, and a

progressive enjoyment of its results, that “_the path of the

righteous_” is said to be “_as the dawning light_”—the morning‐

dawn that begins in faintness, but—“_that shineth more and more

unto the perfect day_” (_Prov. 4:18_). _Cf._ _2 Cor. 4:4_—“_the

god of this world hath blinded the minds of the unbelieving, that

the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image

of God, should not dawn upon them._” Here the recognition of God’s

work is described as gradual; that the work itself is

instantaneous, appears from the following _verse 6_—“_Seeing it is

God, that said, Light shall shine out of darkness, who shined in

our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God

in the face of Jesus Christ._”

Illustrate by the unconscious crossing of the line which separates

one State of the Federal Union from another. From this doctrine of

instantaneous regeneration, we may infer the duty of reaping as

well as of sowing: _John 4:38_—“_I sent you to reap._” “It is a

mistaken notion that it takes God a long time to give increase to

the seed planted in a sinner’s heart. This grows out of the idea

that regeneration is a matter of _training_; that a soul must be

_educated_ from a lost state into a state of salvation. Let us

remember that three thousand, whom in the morning Peter called

murderers of Christ, were before night regenerated and baptized

members of his church.” Drummond, in his Nat. Law in the Spir.

World, remarks upon the humaneness of sudden conversion. As self‐

limitation, self‐mortification, suicide of the old nature, it is

well to have it at once done and over with, and not to die by

degrees.

(_b_) This change takes place in the region of the soul below

consciousness.—It is by no means true that God’s work in regeneration is

always recognized by the subject of it. On the other hand, it is never

directly perceived at all. The working of God in the human soul, since it

contravenes no law of man’s being, but rather puts him in the full and

normal possession of his own powers, is secret and inscrutable. Although

man is conscious, he is not conscious of God’s regenerating agency.

We know our own natural existence only through the phenomena of

thought and sense. So we know our own spiritual existence, as new

creatures in Christ, only through the new feelings and experiences

of the soul. “The will does not need to act solitarily, in order

to act freely.” God acts on the will, and the resulting holiness

is true freedom. _John 8:36_—“_If therefore the Son shall make you

free, ye shall be free indeed._” We have the consciousness of

freedom; but the act of God in giving us this freedom is beyond or

beneath our consciousness.

Both Luther and Calvin used the word regeneration in a loose way,

confounding it with sanctification. After the Federalists made a

distinct doctrine of it, Calvinists in general came to treat it

separately. And John Wesley rescued it from identification with

sacraments, by showing its connection with the truth. E. G.

Robinson: “Regeneration is in one sense instantaneous, in another

sense not. There is necessity of some sort of knowledge in

regeneration. The doctrine of Christ crucified is the fit

instrument. The object of religion is to produce a _sound_ rather

than an _emotional_ experience. Revivals of religion are valuable

in just the proportion in which they produce rational conviction

and permanently righteous action.” But none are left unaffected by

them. “An arm of the magnetic needle must be attracted to the

magnetic pole of the earth, or it must be repelled,—there is no

such thing as indifference. Modern materialism, refusing to say

that the fear of God is the beginning of wisdom, is led to declare

that the hate of God is the beginning of wisdom” (Diesselhoff, Die

klassische Poesie, 8).

(_c_) This change, however, is recognized indirectly in its results.—At

the moment of regeneration, the soul is conscious only of the truth and of

its own exercises with reference to it. That God is the author of its new

affection is an inference from the new character of the exercises which it

prompts. The human side or aspect of regeneration is Conversion. This, and

the Sanctification which follows it (including the special gifts of the

Holy Spirit), are the sole evidences in any particular case that

regeneration is an accomplished fact.

Regeneration, though it is the birth of a perfect child, is still

the birth of a child. The child is to grow, and the growth is

sanctification; in other words, sanctification, as we shall see,

is simply the strengthening and development of the holy affection

which begins its existence in regeneration. Hence the subject of

the epistle to the _Romans_—salvation by faith—includes not only

justification by faith (_chapters 1‐7_), but sanctification by

faith (_chapters 8‐16_). On evidences of regeneration, see

Anderson, Regeneration, 169‐214, 227‐295; Woods, Works, 44‐55. The

transition from justification by faith to sanctification by faith

is in _chapter 8_ of the epistle to the _Romans_. That begins by

declaring that there is _no condemnation_ in Christ, and ends by

declaring that there is _no separation_ from Christ. The work of

the Holy Spirit follows upon the work of Christ. See Godet on the

epistle.

The doctrine of Alexander Campbell was a protest against laying an

unscriptural emphasis on emotional states as evidences of

regeneration—a protest which certain mystical and antinomian

exaggerations of evangelical teaching very justly provoked. But

Campbell went to the opposite extreme of practically excluding

emotion from religion, and of confining the work of the Holy

Spirit to the conscious influence of the truth. Disciples need to

recognize a power of the Holy Spirit exerted below consciousness,

in order to explain the conscious acceptance of Christ and of his

salvation.

William James, Varieties of Religious Experience, 271—“If we

should conceive that the human mind, with its different

possibilities of equilibrium, might be like a many sided solid

with different surfaces on which it could lie flat, we might liken

mental revolutions to the spatial revolutions of such a body. As

it is pried up, say by a lever, from a position in which it lies

on surface A, for instance, it will linger for a time unstably

half way up, and if the lever cease to urge it, it will tumble

back or relapse, under the continued pull of gravity. But if at

last it rotate far enough for its centre of gravity to pass beyond

the surface A altogether, the body will fall over, on surface B,

say, and will abide there permanently. The pulls of gravity

towards A have vanished, and may now be disregarded. The

polyhedron has become immune against further attraction from this

direction.”

III. Conversion.

Conversion is that voluntary change in the mind of the sinner, in which he

turns, on the one hand, from sin, and on the other hand, to Christ. The

former or negative element in conversion, namely, the turning from sin, we

denominate repentance. The latter or positive element in conversion,

namely, the turning to Christ, we denominate faith.

For account of repentance and faith as elements of conversion, see

Andrew Fuller, Works, 1:666; Luthardt, Compendium der Dogmatik, 3d

ed., 201‐206. The two elements of conversion seem to be in the

mind of Paul, when he writes in _Rom. 6:11_—“_reckon ye also

yourselves to be dead unto sin, but alive unto God in Christ

Jesus_”; _Col. 3:3_—“_ye died, and your life is hid with Christ in

God._” _Cf._ ἀποστρέφω, in _Acts 3:26_—“_in turning away every one

of you from your iniquities_,” with ἐπιστρέφω in _Acts

11:21_—“_believed_” and “_turned unto the Lord_.” A candidate for

ordination was once asked which came first: regeneration or

conversion. He replied very correctly: “Regeneration and

conversion are like the cannon‐ball and the hole—they both go

through together.” This is true however only as to their

chronological relation. Logically the ball is first and causes the

hole, not the hole first and causes the ball.

(_a_) Conversion is the human side or aspect of that fundamental spiritual

change which, as viewed from the divine side, we call regeneration. It is

simply man’s turning. The Scriptures recognize the voluntary activity of

the human soul in this change as distinctly as they recognize the

causative agency of God. While God turns men to himself (Ps. 85:4; Song

1:4; Jer. 31:18; Lam. 5:21), men are exhorted to turn themselves to God

(Prov. 1:23; Is. 31:6; 59:20; Ez. 14:6; 18:32; 33:9, 11; Joel 2:12‐14).

While God is represented as the author of the new heart and the new spirit

(Ps. 51:10; Ez. 11:19; 36:26), men are commanded to make for themselves a

new heart and a new spirit (Ez. 18:31; 2 Cor. 7:1; cf. Phil. 2:12, 13;

Eph. 5:14).

_Ps. 85:4_—“_Turn us, O God of our salvation_”; _Song 1:4_—“_Draw

me, we will run after thee_”; _Jer. 31:18_—“_turn thou me, and I

shall be turned_”; _Lam. 5:21_—“_Turn thou us unto thee, O

Jehovah, and we shall be turned._”

_Prov. 1:23_—“_Turn you at my reproof: Behold, I will pour out my

spirit unto you_”; _Is. 31:6_—“_Turn ye unto him from whom ye have

deeply revolted, O children of Israel_”; _59:20_—“_And a Redeemer

will come to Zion, and unto them that turn from transgression in

Jacob_”; _Ez. 14:6_—“_Return ye, and turn yourselves from your

idols_”; _18:32_—“_turn yourselves and live_”; _33:9_—“_if thou

warn the wicked of his way to turn from it, and he turn not from

his way, he shall die in his iniquity_”; _11_—“_turn ye, turn ye

from your evil ways; for why will ye die, O house of Israel?_”

_Joel 2:12‐14_—“_turn ye unto me with all your heart._”

_Ps. 51:10_—“_Create in me a clean heart, O God; And renew a right

spirit within me_”; _Ez. 11:19_—“_And I will give them one heart,

and I will put a new spirit within you; and I will take the stony

heart out of their flesh, and will give them a heart of flesh_”;

_36:26_—“_A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will

I put within you._”

_Ez. 18:31_—“_Cast away from you all your transgressions, wherein

ye have transgressed; and make you a new heart and a new spirit:

for why will ye die, O house of Israel?_” _2 Cor. 7:1_—“_Having

therefore these promises, beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from

all defilement of flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the

fear of God_”; _cf._ _Phil. 2:12, 13_—“_work out your own

salvation with fear and trembling; for it is God who worketh in

you both to will and to work, for his good pleasure_”; _Eph.

5:14_—“_Awake, thou that sleepest, and arise from the dead, and

Christ shall shine upon thee._”

When asked the way to heaven, Bishop Wilberforce replied: “Take

the first turn to the right, and go straight forward.” Phillips

Brooks’s conversion is described by Professor Allen, Life, 1:266,

as consisting in the resolve “to be true to himself, to renounce

nothing which he knew to be good, and yet bring all things captive

to the obedience of God, ... the absolute surrender of his will to

God, in accordance with the example of Christ: ‘_Lo, I am come ...

to do thy will, O God_’ (_Heb. 10:7_).”

(_b_) This twofold method of representation can be explained only when we

remember that man’s powers may be interpenetrated and quickened by the

divine, not only without destroying man’s freedom, but with the result of

making man for the first time truly free. Since the relation between the

divine and the human activity is not one of chronological succession, man

is never to wait for God’s working. If he is ever regenerated, it must be

in and through a movement of his own will, in which he turns to God as

unconstrainedly and with as little consciousness of God’s operation upon

him, as if no such operation of God were involved in the change. And in

preaching, we are to press upon men the claims of God and their duty of

immediate submission to Christ, with the certainty that they who do so

submit will subsequently recognize this new and holy activity of their own

wills as due to a working within them of divine power.

_Ps. 110:3_—“_Thy people offer themselves willingly in the day of

thy power._” The act of God is accompanied by an activity of man.

Dorner: “God’s act initiates action.” There is indeed an original

changing of man’s tastes and affections, and in this man is

passive. But this is only the first aspect of regeneration. In the

second aspect of it—the rousing of man’s powers—God’s action is

accompanied by man’s activity, and regeneration is but the obverse

side of conversion. Luther’s word: “Man, in conversion, is purely

passive,” is true only of the first part of the change; and here,

by “conversion,” Luther means “regeneration.” Melanchthon said

better: “Non est enim coäctio, ut voluntas non possit repugnare:

trahit Deus, sed volentem trahit.” See Meyer on _Rom. 8:14_—“_led

by the Spirit of God_”: “The expression,” Meyer says, “is passive,

though without prejudice to the human will, as _verse 13_ proves:

‘_by the Spirit ye put to death the deeds of the body_.’ ”

As, by a well known principle of hydrostatics, the water contained

in a little tube can balance the water of a whole ocean, so God’s

grace can be balanced by man’s will. As sunshine on the sand

produces nothing unless man sow the seed, and as a fair breeze

does not propel the vessel unless man spread the sails, so the

influences of God’s Spirit require human agencies, and work

through them. The Holy Spirit is sovereign,—he bloweth where he

listeth. Even though there be uniform human conditions, there will

not be uniform spiritual results. Results are often independent of

human conditions as such. This is the truth emphasized by Andrew

Fuller. But this does not prevent us from saying that, whenever

God’s Spirit works in regeneration, there is always accompanying

it a voluntary change in man, which we call conversion, and that

this change is as free, and as really man’s own work, as if there

were no divine influence upon him.

Jesus told the man with the withered hand to stretch forth his

hand; it was the man’s duty to stretch it forth, not to wait for

strength from God to do it. Jesus told the man sick of the palsy

to take up his bed and walk. It was that man’s duty to obey the

command, not to pray for power to obey. Depend wholly upon God?

Yes, as you depend wholly upon wind when you sail, yet need to

keep your sails properly set. “_Work out your own salvation_”

comes first in the apostle’s exhortation; “_for it is God who

worketh in you_” follows (_Phil. 2:12, 13_); which means that our

first business is to use our wills in obedience; then we shall

find that God has gone before us to prepare us to obey.

_Mat. 11:12_—“_the kingdom of heaven suffereth violence, and men

of violence take it by force._” Conversion is like the invasion of

a kingdom. Men are not to wait for God’s time, but to act at once.

Not bodily exercises are required, but impassioned earnestness of

soul. Wendt, Teaching of Jesus, 2:49‐56—“Not injustice and

violence, but energetic laying hold of a good to which they can

make no claim. It is of no avail to wait idly, or to seek

laboriously to earn it; but it is of avail to lay hold of it and

to retain it. It is ready as a gift of God for men, but men must

direct their desire and will toward it.... The man who put on the

wedding garment did not earn his share of the feast thereby, yet

he did show the disposition without which he was not permitted to

partake of it.”

James, Varieties of Religious Experience, 12—“The two main

phenomena of religion, they will say, are essentially phenomena of

adolescence, and therefore synchronous with the development of

sexual life. To which the retort is easy: Even were the asserted

synchrony unrestrictedly true as a fact (which it is not), it is

not only the sexual life, but the entire higher mental life, which

awakens during adolescence. One might then as well set up the

thesis that the interest in mechanics, physics, chemistry, logic,

physiology and sociology, which springs up during adolescent years

along with that in poetry and religion, is also a perversion of

the sexual instinct, but this would be too absurd. Moreover, if

the argument from synchrony is to decide, what is to be done with

the fact that the religious age _par excellence_ would seem to be

old age, when the uproar of the sexual life is past?”

(_c_) From the fact that the word “conversion” means simply “a turning,”

every turning of the Christian from sin, subsequent to the first, may, in

a subordinate sense, be denominated a conversion (Luke 22:32). Since

regeneration is not complete sanctification, and the change of governing

disposition is not identical with complete purification of the nature,

such subsequent turnings from sin are necessary consequences and evidences

of the first (_cf._ John 13:10). But they do not, like the first, imply a

change in the governing disposition,—they are rather new manifestations of

a disposition already changed. For this reason, conversion proper, like

the regeneration of which it is the obverse side, can occur but once. The

phrase “second conversion,” even if it does not imply radical

misconception of the nature of conversion, is misleading. We prefer,

therefore, to describe these subsequent experiences, not by the term

“conversion,” but by such phrases as “breaking off, forsaking, returning

from, neglects or transgressions,” and “coming back to Christ, trusting

anew in him.” It is with repentance and faith, as elements in that first

and radical change by which the soul enters upon a state of salvation,

that we have now to do.

_Luke 22:31, 32_—“_Simon, Simon, behold, Satan asked to have you,

that he might sift you as wheat: but I made supplication for thee,

that thy faith fail not; and do thou, when once thou hast turned

again_ [A. V.: ‘_art converted_’], _establish thy brethren_”;

_John 13:10_—“_He that is bathed_ [has taken a full bath] _needeth

not save to wash his feet, but is clean every whit_ [as a whole].”

Notice that Jesus here announces that only one regeneration is

needed,—what follows is not conversion but sanctification.

Spurgeon said he believed in regeneration, but not in re‐

regeneration. Second blessing? Yes, and a forty‐second. The stages

in the Christian life are like ice, water, invisible vapor, steam,

all successive and natural results of increasing temperature,

seemingly different from one another, yet all forms of the same

element.

On the relation between the divine and the human agencies, we

quote a different view from another writer: “God decrees to employ

means which in every case are sufficient, and which in certain

cases it is foreseen will be effectual. Human action converts a

sufficient means into an effectual means. The result is not always

according to the varying use of means. The power is all of God.

Man has power to resist only. There is a universal influence of

the Spirit, but the influences of the Spirit vary in different

cases, just as external opportunities do. The love of holiness is

blunted, but it still lingers. The Holy Spirit quickens it. When

this love is wholly lost, sin against the Holy Ghost results.

Before regeneration there is a desire for holiness, an

apprehension of its beauty, but this is overborne by a greater

love for sin. If the man does not quickly grow worse, it is not

because of positive action on his part, but only because

negatively he does not resist as he might. ‘_Behold, I stand at

the door and knock_.’ God leads at first by a resistible

influence. When man yields, God leads by an irresistible

influence. The second influence of the Holy Spirit confirms the

Christian’s choice. This second influence is called ‘sealing.’

There is no necessary interval of time between the two. Prevenient

grace comes first; conversion comes after.”

To this view, we would reply that a partial love for holiness, and

an ability to choose it before God works effectually upon the

heart, seem to contradict those Scriptures which assert that “_the

mind of the flesh is enmity against God_” (_Rom. 8:7_), and that

all good works are the result of God’s new creation (_Eph. 2:10_).

Conversion does not precede regeneration,—it chronologically

accompanies regeneration, though it logically follows it.

1. Repentance.

Repentance is that voluntary change in the mind of the sinner in which he

turns from sin. Being essentially a change of mind, it involves a change

of view, a change of feeling, and a change of purpose. We may therefore

analyze repentance into three constituents, each succeeding term of which

includes and implies the one preceding:

A. An intellectual element,—change of view—recognition of sin as involving

personal guilt, defilement, and helplessness (Ps. 51:3, 7, 11). If

unaccompanied by the following elements, this recognition may manifest

itself in fear of punishment, although as yet there is no hatred of sin.

This element is indicated in the Scripture phrase ἐπίγνωσις ἁμαρτίας (Rom.

3:20; _cf._ 1:32).

_Ps. 51:3, 11_—“_For I know my transgressions; And my sin is ever

before me.... Cast me not away from thy presence, And take not thy

Holy Spirit from me_”; _Rom. 3:20_—“_through the law cometh the

knowledge of sin_”; _cf._ _1:32_—“_who, knowing the ordinance of

God, that they that practise such things are worthy of death, not

only do the same, but also consent with them that practise them._”

It is well to remember that God requires us to cherish no views or

emotions that contradict the truth. He wants of us no false

humility. Humility (_humus_) = groundness—a coming down to the

hard‐pan of facts—a facing of the truth. Repentance, therefore, is

not a calling ourselves by hard names. It is not cringing, or

exaggerated self‐contempt. It is simple recognition of what we

are. The “’umble” Uriah Heep is the arrant hypocrite. If we see

ourselves as God sees us, we shall say with _Job 42:5, 6_—“_I had

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._”

Apart from God’s working in the heart there is no proper

recognition of sin, either in people of high or low degree. Lady

Huntington invited the Duchess of Buckingham to come and hear

Whitefield, when the Duchess answered: “It is monstrous to be told

that you have a heart as sinful as the common wretches that crawl

on the earth,—it is highly offensive and insulting.” Mr. Moody,

after preaching to the prisoners in the jail at Chicago, visited

them in their cells. In the first cell he found two, playing

cards. They said false witnesses had testified against them. In

the second cell, the convict said that the guilty man had escaped,

but that he, a mere accomplice, had been caught. In the last cell

only Mr. Moody found a man crying over his sins. Henry Drummond,

after hearing the confessions of inquirers, said: “I am sick of

the sins of these men,—how can God bear it?”

Experience of sin does not teach us to recognize sin. We do not

learn to know chloroform by frequently inhaling it. The drunkard

does not understand the degrading effects of drink so well as his

miserable wife and children do. Even the natural conscience does

not give the recognition of sin that is needed in true repentance.

The confession “_I have sinned_” is made by hardened Pharaoh (_Ex.

9:27_), double minded Balaam (_Num. 22:34_), remorseful Achan

(_Josh. 7:20_), insincere King Saul (_1 Sam. 15:24_), despairing

Judas (_Mat. 27:4_); but in no one of these cases was there true

repentance. True repentance takes God’s part against ourselves,

has sympathy with God, feels how unworthily the Ruler, Father,

Friend of men has been treated. It does not ask, “What will my sin

bring to me?” but, “What does my sin mean to God?” It involves, in

addition to the mere recognition of sin:

B. An emotional element,—change of feeling—sorrow for sin as committed

against goodness and justice, and therefore hateful to God, and hateful in

itself (Ps. 51:1, 2, 10, 14). This element of repentance is indicated in

the Scripture word μεταμέλομαι. If accompanied by the following element,

it is a λύπη κατὰ Θεόν. If not so accompanied, it is a λύπη τοῦ κόσμου =

remorse and despair (Mat. 27:3; Luke 18:23; 2 Cor. 7:9, 10).

_Ps. 51:1, 2, 10, 14_—“_Have mercy upon me ... blot out my

transgressions. Wash me thoroughly from mine iniquity, And cleanse

me from my sin.... Create in me a clean heart, O God; ... Deliver

me from bloodguiltiness, O God_”; _Mat. 27:3_—“_Then Judas, who

betrayed him, when he saw that he was condemned, repented himself,

and brought back the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests

and elders, saying, I have sinned in that I betrayed innocent __

blood_”; _Luke 18:23_—“_when he heard these things, he became

exceeding sorrowful; for he was very rich_”; _2 Cor. 7:9, 10_—“_I

now rejoice, not that ye were made sorry, but that ye were made

sorry unto repentance; for ye were made sorry after a godly

sort.... For godly sorrow worketh repentance unto salvation, a

repentance which bringeth no regret: but the sorrow of the world

worketh death._” We must distinguish sorrow for sin from shame on

account of it and fear of its consequences. These last are

selfish, while godly sorrow is disinterested. “A man may be angry

with himself and may despise himself without any humble

prostration before God or confession of his guilt” (Shedd, Dogm.

Theol., 2:535, note).

True repentance, as illustrated in _Ps. 51_, does not think of 1.

consequences, 2. other men, 3. heredity, as an excuse; but it sees

sin as 1. transgression against God, 2. personal guilt, 3.

defiling the inmost being. Perowne on _Ps. 51:1_—“In all godly

sorrow there is hope. Sorrow without hope may be remorse or

despair, but it is not repentance.” Much so‐called repentance is

illustrated by the little girl’s prayer: “O God, make me good,—not

real good, but just good enough so that I won’t have to be

whipped!” Shakespeare, Measure for Measure, 2:3—“’Tis meet so,

daughter; but lest you do repent As that the sin hath brought you

to this shame, Which sorrow is always towards ourselves, not

heaven, Showing we would not spare heaven as we love it, But as we

stand in fear.... I do repent me as it is an evil, And take the

shame with joy.” Tempest, 3:3—“For which foul deed, the Powers

delaying, not forgetting, Have incensed the seas, and shores, yea,

all the creatures, Against your peace.... Whose wrath to guard you

from ... is nothing but heart’s sorrow And a clear life ensuing.”

Simon, Reconciliation, 195, 379—“At the very bottom it is God

whose claims are advocated, whose part is taken, by that in us

which, whilst most truly our own, yea, our very selves, is also

most truly his, and of him. The divine energy and idea which

constitutes us will not let its own root and source suffer wrong

unatoned. God intends us to be givers as well as receivers, givers

even to him. We share in his image that we may be creators and

givers, not from compulsion, but in love.” Such repentance as this

is wrought only by the Holy Spirit. Conscience indeed is present

in every human heart, but only the Holy Spirit convinces of sin.

Why is the Holy Spirit needed? A. J. Gordon, Ministry of the

Spirit, 189‐201—“Conscience is the witness to the law; the Spirit

is the witness to grace. Conscience brings legal conviction; the

Spirit brings evangelical conviction. The one begets a conviction

unto despair; the other a conviction unto hope. Conscience

convinces of sin committed, of righteousness impossible, of

judgment impending; the Comforter convinces of sin committed, of

righteousness imputed, of judgment accomplished—in Christ. God

alone can reveal the divine view of sin, and enable man to

understand it.” But, however agonizing the sorrow, it will not

constitute true repentance, unless it leads to, or is accompanied

by:

C. A voluntary element,—change of purpose—inward turning from sin and

disposition to seek pardon and cleansing (Ps. 51:5, 7, 10; Jer. 25:5).

This includes and implies the two preceding elements, and is therefore the

most important aspect of repentance. It is indicated in the Scripture term

μετάνοια (Acts 2:38; Rom. 2:4).

_Ps. 51:5, 7, 10_—“_Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity; And

in sin did my mother conceive me.... Purge me with hyssop, and I

shall be clean: Wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow....

Create in me a clean heart, O God; And renew a right spirit within

me_”; _Jer. 25:5_—“_Return ye now every one from his evil way, and

from the evil of your doings_”; _Acts 2:38_—“_And Peter said unto

them, Repent ye, and be baptized every one of you in the name of

Jesus Christ_”; _Rom. 2:4_—“_despisest thou the riches of his

goodness and forbearance and longsuffering, not knowing that the

goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance?_”

Walden, The Great Meaning of _Metanoia_, brings out well the fact

that “repentance” is not the true translation of the word, but

rather “change of mind”; indeed, he would give up the word

“repentance” altogether in the N. T., except as the translation of

μεταμέλεια. The idea of μετάνοια is abandonment of sin rather than

sorrow for sin,—an act of the will rather than a state of the

sensibility. Repentance is participation in Christ’s revulsion

from sin and suffering on account of it. It is repentance _from_

sin, not _of_ sin, nor _for_ sin—always ἀπό and ἔκ, never περί or

ἐπί. The true illustrations of repentance are found in Job

(_42:6_—“_I abhor myself, And repent in dust and ashes_”); in

David (_Ps. 51:10_—“_Create in me a clean heart; And renew a right

spirit within me_”); in Peter (_John 21:17_—“_thou knowest that I

love thee_”); in the penitent thief (_Luke 23:42_—“_Jesus,

remember me when thou comest in thy kingdom_”); in the prodigal

son (_Luke 15:18_—“_I will arise and go to my Father_”).

Repentance implies free will. Hence Spinoza, who knows nothing of

free will, knows nothing of repentance. In book 4 of his Ethics,

he says: “Repentance is not a virtue, that is, it does not spring

from reason; on the contrary, the man who repents of what he has

done is doubly wretched or impotent.” Still he urges that for the

good of society it is not desirable that vulgar minds should be

enlightened as to this matter; see Upton, Hibbert Lectures, 315.

Determinism also renders it irrational to feel righteous

indignation either at the misconduct of other people or of

ourselves. Moral admiration is similarly irrational in the

determinist; see Balfour, Foundations of Belief, 24.

In broad distinction from the Scriptural doctrine, we find the Romanist

view, which regards the three elements of repentance as the following: (1)

contrition; (2) confession; (3) satisfaction. Of these, contrition is the

only element properly belonging to repentance; yet from this contrition

the Romanist excludes all sorrow for sin of nature. Confession is

confession to the priest; and satisfaction is the sinner’s own doing of

outward penance, as a temporal and symbolic submission and reparation to

violated law. This view is false and pernicious, in that it confounds

repentance with its outward fruits, conceives of it as exercised rather

toward the church than toward God, and regards it as a meritorious ground,

instead of a mere condition, of pardon.

On the Romanist doctrine of Penance, Thornwell (Collected

Writings, 1:423) remarks: “The _culpa_ may be remitted, they say,

while the _pœna_ is to some extent retained.” The priest absolves,

not declaratively, but judicially. Denying the greatness of the

sin, it makes man able to become his own Savior. Christ’s

satisfaction, for sins after baptism, is not sufficient; our

satisfaction is sufficient. But performance of one duty, we

object, cannot make satisfaction for the violation of another.

We are required to confess one to another, and specially to those

whom we have wronged: _James 5:16_—“_Confess therefore your sins

one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed._”

This puts the hardest stress upon our natural pride. There are a

hundred who will confess to a priest or to God, where there is one

who will make frank and full confession to the aggrieved party.

Confession to an official religious superior is not penitence nor

a test of penitence. In the Confessional women expose their inmost

desires to priests who are forbidden to marry. These priests are

sometimes, though gradually, corrupted to the core, and at the

same time they are taught in the Confessional precisely to what

women to apply. In France many noble families will not permit

their children to confess, and their women are not permitted to

incur the danger.

Lord Salisbury in the House of Lords said of auricular confession:

“It has been injurious to the moral independence and virility of

the nation to an extent to which probably it has been given to no

other institution to affect the character of mankind.” See Walsh,

Secret History of the Oxford Movement; A. J. Gordon, Ministry of

the Spirit, 111—“Asceticism is an absolute inversion of the divine

order, since it seeks life through death, instead of finding death

through life. No degree of mortification can ever bring us to

sanctification.” Penance can never effect true repentance, nor be

other than a hindrance to the soul’s abandonment of sin. Penance

is something external to be done, and it diverts attention from

the real inward need of the soul. The monk does penance by

sleeping on an iron bed and by wearing a hair shirt. When Anselm

of Canterbury died, his under garments were found alive with

vermin which the saint had cultivated in order to mortify the

flesh. Dr. Pusey always sat on a hard chair, traveled as

uncomfortably as possible, looked down when he walked, and

whenever he saw a coal‐fire thought of hell. Thieves do penance by

giving a part of their ill‐gotten wealth to charity. In all these

things there is no transformation of the inner life.

In further explanation of the Scripture representations, we remark:

(_a_) That repentance, in each and all of its aspects, is wholly an inward

act, not to be confounded with the change of life which proceeds from it.

True repentance is indeed manifested and evidenced by confession of sin

before God (Luke 18:13), and by reparation for wrongs done to men (Luke

19:8). But these do not constitute repentance; they are rather fruits of

repentance. Between “repentance” and “fruit worthy of repentance,”

Scripture plainly distinguishes (Mat. 3:8).

_Luke 18:13_—“_But the publican, standing afar off, would not lift

up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote his breast, saying,

God, be thou merciful to me a sinner_ [‘be propitiated to me the

sinner’]”; _19:8_—“_And Zacchæus stood, and said unto the Lord,

Behold, Lord, the half of my goods I give to the poor; and if I

have wrongfully exacted aught of any man, I restore fourfold_”;

_Mat. 3:8_—“_Bring forth therefore fruit worthy of repentance._”

Fruit worthy of repentance, or fruits meet for repentance, are: 1.

Confession of sin; 2. Surrender to Christ; 3. Turning from sin; 4.

Reparation for wrong doing; 5. Right moral conduct; 6. Profession

of Christian faith.

On _Luke 17:3_—“_if thy brother sin, rebuke him; and if he repent,

forgive him_”—Dr. B. H. Carroll remarks that the law is uniform

which makes repentance indispensable to forgiveness. It applies to

man’s forgiveness of man, as well as to God’s forgiveness of man,

or the church’s forgiveness of man. But I must be sure that I

cherish toward the offender the spirit of love, whether he repents

or not. Freedom from all malice toward him, however, and even

loving prayerful labor to lead him to repentance, is not

forgiveness. This I can grant only when he actually repents. If I

do forgive him without repentance, then I impose my rule on God

when I pray: “_Forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our

debtors_” (_Mat. 6:12_).

On the question whether the requirement that we forgive without

atonement implies that God does, see Brit. and For. Evang. Rev.,

Oct 1881:678‐691—“Answer: 1. The present constitution of things is

based upon atonement. Forgiveness on our part is required upon the

ground of the Cross, without which the world would be hell. 2. God

is Judge. We forgive, as brethren. When he forgives, it is as

Judge of all the earth, of whom all earthly judges are

representatives. If earthly judges may exact justice, much more

God. The argument that would abolish atonement would abolish all

civil government. 3. I should forgive my brother on the ground of

God’s love, and Christ’s bearing of his sins. 4. God, who requires

atonement, is the same being that provides it. This is ‘handsome

and generous.’ But I can never provide atonement for my brother. I

must, therefore, forgive freely, only upon the ground of what

Christ has done for him.”

(_b_) That repentance is only a negative condition, and not a positive

means of salvation.

This is evident from the fact that repentance is no more than the sinner’s

present duty, and can furnish no offset to the claims of the law on

account of past transgression. The truly penitent man feels that his

repentance has no merit. Apart from the positive element of conversion,

namely, faith in Christ, it would be only sorrow for guilt unremoved. This

very sorrow, moreover, is not the mere product of human will, but is the

gift of God.

_Acts 5:31_—“_Him did God exalt with his right hand to be a Prince

and a Savior, to give repentance to Israel, and remission of

sins_”; _11:18_—“_Then to the Gentiles also hath God granted

repentance unto life_”; _2 Tim. 2:25_—“_if peradventure God may

give them repentance unto the knowledge of the truth._” The truly

penitent man recognizes the fact that his sin deserves punishment.

He never regards his penitence as offsetting the demands of law,

and as making his punishment unjust. Whitefield: “Our repentance

needeth to be repented of, and our very tears to be washed in the

blood of Christ.” Shakespeare, Henry V, 4:1—“More will I do:

Though all that I can do is nothing worth, Since that my penitence

comes after all, Imploring pardon”—imploring pardon both for the

crime and for the imperfect repentance.

(_c_) That true repentance, however, never exists except in conjunction

with faith.

Sorrow for sin, not simply on account of its evil consequences to the

transgressor, but on account of its intrinsic hatefulness as opposed to

divine holiness and love, is practically impossible without some

confidence in God’s mercy. It is the Cross which first makes us truly

penitent (_cf._ John 12:32, 33). Hence all true preaching of repentance is

implicitly a preaching of faith (Mat. 3:1‐12; _cf._ Acts 19:4), and

repentance toward God involves faith in the Lord Jesus Christ (Acts 20:21;

Luke 15:10, 24; 19:8, 9; _cf._ Gal. 3:7).

_John 12:32, 33_—“_And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will

draw all men unto myself. But this he said, signifying by what

manner of death he should die._” _Mat. 3:1‐12_—John the Baptist’s

preaching of repentance was also a preaching of faith; as is shown

by _Acts 19:4_—“_John baptized with the baptism of repentance,

saying unto the people that they should believe on him that should

come after him, that is, on Jesus._” Repentance involves faith:

_Acts 20:21_—“_testifying both to Jews and to Greeks repentance

toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ_”; _Luke 15:10,

24_—“_there is joy in the presence of the angels of God over one

sinner that repenteth.... this my son was dead, and is alive

again; he was lost, and is found_”; _19:8, 9_—“_the half of my

goods I give to the poor; and if I have wrongfully exacted aught

of any man, I restore fourfold. And Jesus said unto him, To‐day is

salvation come to this house, forasmuch as he also is a son of

Abraham_”—the father of all believers; _cf._ _Gal. 3:6, 7_—“_Even

as Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned unto him for

righteousness. Know therefore that they that are of faith, the

same are sons of Abraham._”

_Luke 3:18_ says of John the Baptist: “_he preached the gospel

unto the people_,” and the gospel message, the glad tidings, is

more than the command to repent,—it is also the offer of salvation

through Christ; see Prof. Wm. Arnold Stevens, on John the Baptist

and his Gospel, in Studies on the Gospel according to John. _2

Chron. 34:19_—“_And it came to pass, when the king had heard the

words of the law, that he rent his clothes._” Moberly, Atonement

and Personality, 44‐46—“Just in proportion as one sins, does he

render it impossible for him truly to repent. Repentance must be

the work of another in him. Is it not the Spirit of the Crucified

which is the reality of the penitence of the truly penitent?” If

this be true, then it is plain that there is no true repentance

which is not accompanied by the faith that unites us to Christ.

(_d_) That, conversely, wherever there is true faith, there is true

repentance also.

Since repentance and faith are but different sides or aspects of the same

act of turning, faith is as inseparable from repentance as repentance is

from faith. That must be an unreal faith where there is no repentance,

just as that must be an unreal repentance where there is no faith. Yet

because the one aspect of his change is more prominent in the mind of the

convert than the other, we are not hastily to conclude that the other is

absent. Only that degree of conviction of sin is essential to salvation,

which carries with it a forsaking of sin and a trustful surrender to

Christ.

Bishop Hall: “Never will Christ enter into that soul where the

herald of repentance hath not been before him.” _2 Cor.

7:10_—“_repentance unto salvation._” In consciousness, sensation

and perception are in inverse ratio to each other. Clear vision is

hardly conscious of sensation, but inflamed eyes are hardly

conscious of anything besides sensation. So repentance and faith

are seldom equally prominent in the consciousness of the converted

man; but it is important to know that neither can exist without

the other. The truly penitent man will, sooner or later, show that

he has faith; and the true believer will certainly show, in due

season, that he hates and renounces sin.

The question, how much conviction a man needs to insure his

salvation, may be answered by asking how much excitement one needs

on a burning steamer. As, in the latter case, just enough to

prompt persistent effort to escape; so, in the former case, just

enough remorseful feeling is needed, to induce the sinner to

betake himself believingly to Christ.

On the general subject of Repentance, see Anderson, Regeneration,

279‐288; Bp. Ossory, Nature and Effects of Faith, 40‐48, 311‐318;

Woods, Works, 3:68‐78; Philippi, Glaubenslehre, 5:1‐10, 208‐246;

Luthardt, Compendium, 3d ed., 206‐208; Hodge, Outlines of

Theology, 375‐381; Alexander, Evidences of Christianity, 47‐60;

Crawford, Atonement, 413‐419.

2. Faith.

Faith is that voluntary change in the mind of the sinner in which he turns

to Christ. Being essentially a change of mind, it involves a change of

view, a change of feeling, and a change of purpose. We may therefore

analyze faith also into three constituents, each succeeding term of which

includes and implies the preceding:

A. An intellectual element (_notitia, credere Deum_),—recognition of the

truth of God’s revelation, or of the objective reality of the salvation

provided by Christ. This includes not only a historical belief in the

facts of the Scripture, but an intellectual belief in the doctrine taught

therein as to man’s sinfulness and dependence upon Christ.

_John 2:23, 24_—“_How when he was in Jerusalem at the passover,

during the feast, many believed on his name, beholding his signs

which he did. But Jesus did not trust himself unto them, for that

he knew all men_”; _cf._ _3:2_—Nicodemus has this external faith:

“_no one can do these signs that thou doest, except God be with

him_.” _James 2:19_—“_Thou believest that God is one; thou doest

well: the demons also believe, and shudder._” Even this historical

faith is not without its fruits. It is the spring of much

philanthropic work. There were no hospitals in ancient Rome. Much

of our modern progress is due to the leavening influence of

Christianity, even in the case of those who have not personally

accepted Christ.

McLaren, S. S. Times, Feb. 22, 1902:107—“Luke does not hesitate to

say, in _Acts 8:13_, that ‘_Simon Magus also himself believed_.’

But he expects us to understand that Simon’s belief was not faith

that saved, but mere credence in the gospel narrative as true

history. It had no ethical or spiritual worth. He was ‘_amazed_,’

as the Samaritans had been at his juggleries. It did not lead to

repentance, or confession, or true trust. He was only ‘_amazed_’

at Philip’s miracles, and there was no salvation in that.” Merely

historical faith, such as Disciples and Ritschlians hold to, lacks

the element of affection, and besides this lacks the present

reality of Christ himself. Faith that does not lay hold of a

present Christ is not saving faith.

B. An emotional element (_assensus, credere Deo_),—assent to the

revelation of God’s power and grace in Jesus Christ, as applicable to the

present needs of the soul. Those in whom this awakening of the

sensibilities is unaccompanied by the fundamental decision of the will,

which constitutes the next element of faith, may seem to themselves, and

for a time may appear to others, to have accepted Christ.

_Mat. 13:20, 21_—“_he that was sown upon the rocky places, this is

he that heareth the word, and straightway with joy receiveth it;

yet hath he not root in himself, but endureth for a while; and

when tribulation or persecution ariseth because of the word,

straightway he stumbleth_”; _cf._ _Ps. 106:12, 13_—“_Then believed

they his words; they sang his praise. They soon forgat his works;

they waited not for his counsel_”; _Ez. 33:31, 32_—“_And they come

unto thee as the people cometh, and they sit before thee as my

people, and they hear thy words, but do them not; for with their

mouth they show much love, but their heart goeth after their gain.

And, lo, thou art unto them as a very lovely song of one that hath

a pleasant voice, and can play well on an instrument; for they

hear thy words, but they do them not_”; _John 5:35_—Of John the

Baptist: “_He was the lamp that burneth and shineth; and ye were

willing to rejoice for a season in his light_”; _8:30, 31_—“_As he

spake these things, many believed on him_ (εἰς αὐτόν). _Jesus

therefore said to those Jews that had believed him_ (αὐτῷ), _If ye

abide in my word, then are ye truly my disciples._” They believed

_him_, but did not yet believe _on_ him, that is, make him the

foundation of their faith and life. Yet Jesus graciously

recognizes this first faint foreshadowing of faith. It might lead

to full and saving faith.

“Proselytes of the gate” were so called, because they contented

themselves with sitting in the gate, as it were, without going

into the holy city. “Proselytes of righteousness” were those who

did their whole duty, by joining themselves fully to the people of

God. Not _emotion_, but _devotion_, is the important thing.

Temporary faith is as irrational and valueless as temporary

repentance. It perhaps gained temporary blessing in the way of

healing in the time of Christ, but, if not followed by complete

surrender of the will, it might even aggravate one’s sin; see

_John 5:14_—“_Behold, thou art made whole; sin no more, lest a

worse thing befall thee._” The special faith of miracles was not a

high, but a low, form of faith, and it is not to be sought in our

day as indispensable to the progress of the kingdom. Miracles have

ceased, not because of decline in faith, but because the Holy

Spirit has changed the method of his manifestations, and has led

the church to seek more spiritual gifts.

Saving faith, however, includes also:

C. A voluntary element (_fiducia, credere in Deum_),—trust in Christ as

Lord and Savior; or, in other words—to distinguish its two aspects:

(_a_) Surrender of the soul, as guilty and defiled, to Christ’s

governance.

_Mat. 11:28, 29_—“_Come unto me all ye that labor and are heavy

laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn

of me_”; _John 8:12_—“_I am the light of the world: he that

followeth me shall not walk in the darkness_”; _14:1_—“_Let not

your heart be troubled: believe in God, believe also in me_”;

_Acts 16:31_—“_Believe on the Lord Jesus, and thou shalt be

saved._” Instances of the use of πιστεύω, in the sense of trustful

committance or surrender, are: _John 2:24_—“_But Jesus did not

trust himself unto them, for that he knew all men_”; _Rom.

3:2_—“_they were intrusted with the oracles of God_”; _Gal.

2:7_—“_when they saw that I had been intrusted with the gospel of

the uncircumcision._” πίστις = “trustful self‐surrender to God”

(Meyer).

In this surrender of the soul to Christ’s governance we have the

guarantee that the gospel salvation is not an unmoral trust which

permits continuance in sin. Aside from the fact that saving faith

is only the obverse side of true repentance, the very nature of

faith, as submission to Christ, the embodied law of God and source

of spiritual life, makes a life of obedience and virtue to be its

natural and necessary result. Faith is not only a declaration of

dependence, it is also a vow of allegiance. The sick man’s faith

in his physician is shown not simply by trusting him, but by

obeying him. Doing what the doctor says is the very proof of

trust. No physician will long care for a patient who refuses to

obey his orders. Faith is self‐surrender to the great Physician,

and a leaving of our case in his hands. But it is also the taking

of his prescriptions, and the active following of his directions.

We need to emphasize this active element in saving faith, lest men

get the notion that mere indolent acquiescence in Christ’s plan

will save them. Faith is not simple receptiveness. It gives

itself, as well as receives Christ. It is not mere passivity,—it

is also self‐committal. As all reception of knowledge is active,

and there must be attention if we would learn, so all reception of

Christ is active, and there must be intelligent giving as well as

taking. The Watchman, April 30, 1896—“Faith is more than belief

and trust. It is the action of the soul going out toward its

object. It is the exercise of a spiritual faculty akin to that of

sight; it establishes a personal relation between the one who

exercises faith and the one who is its object. When the

intellectual feature predominates, we call it belief; when the

emotional element predominates, we call it trust. This faith is at

once ‘An affirmation and an act Which bids eternal truth be

present fact.’ ”

There are great things received in faith, but nothing is received

by the man who does not first give himself to Christ. A conquered

general came into the presence of his conqueror and held out to

him his hand: “Your sword first, sir!” was the response. But when

General Lee _offered_ his sword to General Grant at Appomattox,

the latter returned it, saying: “No, keep your sword, and go to

your home.” Jacobi said that “Faith is the reflection of the

divine knowing and willing in the finite spirit of man.” G. B.

Foster, in Indiana Baptist Outlook, June 19, 1902—“Catholic

orthodoxy is wrong in holding that the authority for faith is the

church; for that would be an external authority. Protestant

orthodoxy is wrong in holding that the authority for faith is the

book; for that would be an external authority. Liberalism is wrong

in holding that the reason is the authority for faith. The

authority for faith is the revelation of God.” Faith in this

revelation is faith in Christ the Revealer. It puts the soul in

connection with the source of all knowledge and power. As the

connection of a wire with the reservoir of electric force makes it

the channel of vast energies, so the smallest measure of faith,

any real connection of the soul with Christ, makes it the

recipient of divine resources.

While faith is the act of the whole man, and intellect, affection,

and will are involved in it, will is the all‐inclusive and most

important of its elements. No other exercise of will is such a

revelation of our being and so decisive of our destiny. The

voluntary element in faith is illustrated in marriage. Here one

party pledges the future in permanent self‐surrender, commits

one’s self to another person in confidence that this future, with

all its new revelations of character, will only justify the

decision made. Yet this is rational; see Holland, in Lux Mundi,

46‐48. To put one’s hand into molten iron, even though one knows

of the “spheroidal state” that gives impunity, requires an

exertion of will; and not all workmen in metals are courageous

enough to make the venture. The child who leaped into the dark

cellar, in confidence that her father’s arms would be open to

receive her, did not act irrationally, because she had heard her

father’s command and trusted his promise. Though faith in Christ

is a leap in the dark, and requires a mighty exercise of will, it

is nevertheless the highest wisdom, because Christ’s word is

pledged that “_him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out_”

(_John 6:37_).

J. W. A. Stewart: “Faith is 1. a bond between persons, trust,

confidence; 2. it makes ventures, takes much for granted; 3. its

security is the character and power of him in whom we believe,—not

our faith, but his fidelity, is the guarantee that our faith is

rational.” Kant said that nothing in the world is good but the

good will which freely obeys the law of the good. Pfleiderer

defines faith as the free surrender of the heart to the gracious

will of God. Kaftan, Dogmatik, 21, declares that the Christian

religion is essentially faith, and that this faith manifests

itself as 1. doctrine; 2. worship; 3. morality.

(_b_) Reception and appropriation of Christ, as the source of pardon and

spiritual life.

_John 1:12_—“_as many as received him, to them gave he the right

to become children of God, even to them that believe on his

name_”; _4:14_—“_whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give

him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall

become in him a well of water springing up unto eternal life_”;

_6:53_—“_Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his

blood, ye have not life in yourselves_”; _20:31_—“_these are

written, that ye may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of

God; and that believing ye may have life in his name_”; _Eph.

3:17_—“_that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith_”;

_Heb. 11:1_—“_Now faith is assurance of things hoped for, a

conviction of things not seen_”; _Rev. 3:20_—“_Behold, I stand at

the door and knock: if any man hear my voice and open the door, I

will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me._”

The three constituents of faith may be illustrated from the

thought, feeling, and action of a person who stands by a boat,

upon a little island which the rising stream threatens to

submerge. He first regards the boat from a purely intellectual

point of view,—it is merely an _actually existing boat_. As the

stream rises, he looks at it, secondly, with some accession of

emotion,—his prospective danger awakens in him the conviction that

it is a _good boat for a time of need_, though he is not yet ready

to make use of it. But, thirdly, when he feels that the rushing

tide must otherwise sweep him away, a volitional element is

added,—he gets into the boat, trusts himself to it, accepts it as

his _present, and only, means of safety_. Only this last faith in

the boat is faith that saves, although this last includes both the

preceding. It is equally clear that the getting into the boat may

actually save a man, while at the same time he may be full of

fears that the boat will never bring him to shore. These fears may

be removed by the boatman’s word. So saving faith is not

necessarily assurance of faith; but it becomes assurance of faith

when the Holy Spirit “_beareth witness with our spirit, that we

are children of God_” (_Rom. 8:16_). On the nature of this

assurance, and on the distinction between it and saving faith, see

pages 844‐846.

“Coming to Christ,” “looking to Christ,” “receiving Christ,” are

all descriptions of faith, as are also the phrases: “surrender to

Christ,” “submission to Christ,” “closing in with Christ.” Paul

refers to a confession of faith in _Rom. 10:9_—“_if thou shalt

confess with thy mouth Jesus as Lord._” Faith, then, is a taking

of Christ as both Savior and Lord; and it includes both

appropriation of Christ, and consecration to Christ. The voluntary

element in faith, however, is a giving as well as a taking. The

giving, or surrender, is illustrated in baptism by submergence;

the taking, or reception, by emergence. See further on the

Symbolism of Baptism. McCosh, Div. Government: “Saving faith is

the consent of the will to the assent of the understanding, and

commonly accompanied with emotion.” Pres. Hopkins, in Princeton

Rev., Sept. 1878:511‐540—“In its intellectual element, faith is

receptive, and believes that God _is_; in its affectional element,

faith is assimilative, and believes that God is a _rewarder_; in

its voluntary element, faith is operative, and actually _comes_ to

God (_Heb. 11:6_).”

Where the element of surrender is emphasized and the element of

reception is not understood, the result is a legalistic

experience, with little hope or joy. Only as we _appropriate_

Christ, in connection with our _consecration_, do we realize the

full blessing of the gospel. Light requires two things: the sun to

shine, and the eye to take in its shining. So we cannot be saved

without Christ to save, and faith to take the Savior for ours.

Faith is the act by which we receive Christ. The woman who touched

the border of Jesus’ garment received his healing power. It is

better still to keep in touch with Christ so as to receive

continually his grace and life. But best of all is taking him into

our inmost being, to be the soul of our soul and the life of our

life. This is the essence of faith, though many Christians do not

yet realize it. Dr. Curry said well that faith can never be

defined because it is a fact of life. It is a merging of our life

in the life of Christ, and a reception of Christ’s life to

interpenetrate and energize ours. In faith we must take Christ as

well as give ourselves. It is certainly true that surrender

without trust will not make us possessors of God’s peace. F. L.

Anderson: “Faith is submissive reliance on Jesus Christ for

salvation: 1. Reliance on Jesus Christ—not mere intellectual

belief; 2. Reliance on him for salvation—we can never undo the

past or atone for our sins; 3. Submissive reliance on Christ.

Trust without surrender will never save.”

The passages already referred to refute the view of the Romanist, that

saving faith is simply implicit assent to the doctrines of the church; and

the view of the Disciple or Campbellite, that faith is merely intellectual

belief in the truth, on the presentation of evidence.

The Romanist says that faith can coëxist with mortal sin. The

Disciple holds that faith may and must exist before

regeneration,—regeneration being completed in baptism. With these

erroneous views, compare the noble utterance of Luther, Com. on

Galatians, 1:191, 247, quoted in Thomasius, III, 2:183—“True

faith,” says Luther, “is that assured trust and firm assent of

heart, by which Christ is laid hold of,—so that Christ is the

object of faith. Yet he is not merely the object of faith; but in

the very faith, so to speak, Christ is present. Faith lays hold of

Christ, and grasps him as a present possession, just as the ring

holds the jewel.” Edwards, Works, 4:71‐73; 2:601‐641—“Faith,” says

Edwards, “includes the whole act of unition to Christ as a Savior.

The entire active uniting of the soul, or the whole of what is

called coming to Christ, and receiving of him, is called faith in

the Scripture.” See also Belief, What Is It? 150‐179, 290‐298.

Hatch, Hibbert Lectures, 530—“Faith began by being: 1. a simple

trust in God; then followed, 2. a simple expansion of that

proposition into the assent to the proposition that God is good,

and, 3. a simple acceptance of the proposition that Jesus Christ

was his Son; then, 4. came in the definition of terms, and each

definition of terms involved a new theory; finally, 5. the

theories were gathered together into systems, and the martyrs and

witnesses of Christ died for their faith, not outside but inside

the Christian sphere; and instead of a world of religious belief

which resembled the world of actual fact in the sublime unsymmetry

of its foliage and the deep harmony of its discords, there

prevailed the most fatal assumption of all, that the symmetry of a

system is the test of its truth and the proof thereof.” We regard

this statement of Hatch as erroneous, in that it attributes to the

earliest disciples no larger faith than that of their Jewish

brethren. We claim that the earliest faith involved an implicit

acknowledgement of Jesus as Savior and Lord, and that this faith

of simple obedience and trust became explicit recognition of our

Lord’s deity and atonement just so soon as persecution and the

Holy Spirit disclosed to them the real contents of their own

consciousness.

An illustration of the simplicity and saving power of faith is

furnished by Principal J. R. Andrews, of New London, Conn.,

Principal of the Bartlett Grammar School. When the steamer

Atlantic was wrecked off Fisher’s Island, though Mr. Andrews could

not swim, he determined to make a desperate effort to save his

life. Binding a life‐preserver about him, he stood on the edge of

the deck waiting his opportunity, and when he saw a wave moving

shoreward, he jumped into the rough breakers and was borne safely

to land. He was saved by faith. He accepted the conditions of

salvation. Forty perished in a scene where he was saved. In one

sense he saved himself; in another sense he depended upon God. It

was a combination of personal activity and dependence upon God

that resulted in his salvation. If he had not used the life‐

preserver, he would have perished; if he had not cast himself into

the sea, he would have perished. So faith in Christ is reliance

upon him for salvation; but it is also our own making of a new

start in life and the showing of our trust by action. Tract 357,

Am. Tract Society—“What is it to believe on Christ? It is: To feel

your need of him; To believe that he is able and willing to save

you, and to save you now; and To cast yourself unreservedly upon

his mercy, and trust in him alone for salvation.”

In further explanation of the Scripture representations, we remark:

(_a_) That faith is an act of the affections and will, as truly as it is

an act of the intellect.

It has been claimed that faith and unbelief are purely intellectual

states, which are necessarily determined by the facts at any given time

presented to the mind; and that they are, for this reason, as destitute of

moral quality and as far from being matters of obligation, as are our

instinctive feelings of pleasure and pain. But this view unwarrantably

isolates the intellect, and ignores the fact that, in all moral subjects,

the state of the affections and will affects the judgment of the mind with

regard to truth. In the intellectual act the whole moral nature expresses

itself. Since the tastes determine the opinions, faith is a moral act, and

men are responsible for not believing.

_John 3:18‐20_—“_He that believeth on him is not judged: he that

believeth not hath been judged already, because he hath not

believed on the name of the only begotten Son of God. And this is

the judgment, that the light is come into the world, and men loved

the darkness rather than the light; for their works were evil. For

every one that doeth evil hateth the light, and cometh not to the

light, lest his works should be reproved_”; _5:40_—“_ye will not

come to me, that ye may have life_”; _16:8, 9_—“_And he, when he

is come, will convict the world in respect of sin ... of sin,

because they believe not on me_”; _Rev. 2:21_—“_she willed not to

repent._” Notice that the Revised Version very frequently

substitutes the voluntary and active terms “disobedience” and

“disobedient” for the “_unbelief_” and “_unbelieving_” of the

Authorized Version,—as in _Rom. 15:31_; _Heb. 3:18; 4:6, 11;

11:31_. See Park, Discourses, 45, 46.

Savages do not know that they are responsible for their physical

appetites, or that there is any right and wrong in matters of

sense, until they come under the influence of Christianity. In

like manner, even men of science can declare that the intellectual

sphere has no part in man’s probation, and that we are no more

responsible for our opinions and beliefs than we are for the color

of our skin. But faith is not a merely intellectual act,—the

affections and will give it quality. There is no moral quality in

the belief that 2 + 2 = 4, because we can not help that belief.

But in believing on Christ there is moral quality, because there

is the element of choice. Indeed it may be questioned, whether, in

every judgment upon moral things, there is not an act of will.

Hence on _John 7:17_—“_If any man willeth to do his will, he shall

know of the teaching, whether it is of God, or whether I speak

from myself_”—F. L. Patton calls attention to the two common

errors: (1) that obedience will certify doctrine,—which is untrue,

because obedience is the result of faith, not _vice versa_; (2)

that personal experience is the ultimate test of faith,—which is

untrue, because the Bible is the only rule of faith, and it is one

thing to receive truth through the feelings, but quite another to

test truth by the feelings. The text really means, that if any man

is willing to do God’s will, he shall know whether it be of God;

and the two lessons to be drawn are: (1) the gospel needs no

additional evidence; (2) the Holy Ghost is the hope of the world.

On responsibility for opinions and beliefs, see Mozley, on Blanco

White, in Essays Philos. and Historical, 2:142; T. T. Smith,

Hulsean Lectures for 1839. Wilfrid Ward, The Wish to Believe,

quotes Shakespeare: “Thy wish was father, Harry, to that thought”;

and Thomas Arnold: “They dared not lightly believe what they so

much wished to be true.”

Pascal: “Faith is an act of the will.” Emerson, Essay on Worship:

“A man bears beliefs as a tree bears apples. Man’s religious faith

is the expression of what he is.” Bain: “In its essential

character, belief is a phase of our active nature, otherwise

called the will.” Nash, Ethics and Revelation, 257—“Faith is the

creative human answer to the creative divine offer. It is not the

passive acceptance of a divine favor.... By faith man, laying hold

of the personality of God in Christ, becomes a true person. And by

the same faith he becomes, under God, a creator and founder of

true society.” Inge, Christian Mysticism, 52—“Faith begins with an

experiment and ends with an experience. But even the power to make

the experiment is given from above. Eternal life is not γνῶσις,

but the state of acquiring knowledge—ἴνα γιγνώσκωσιν. It is

significant that John, who is so fond of the verb ‘to know,’ never

uses the substantive γνῶσις.” Crane, Religion of To‐morrow,

148—“ ‘I will not obey, because I do not yet know’? But this is

making the intellectual side the only side of faith, whereas the

most important side is the will‐side. Let a man follow what he

does believe, and he shall be led on to larger faith. Faith is the

reception of the personal influence of a living Lord, and a

corresponding action.”

William James, Will to Believe, 61—“This life is worth living,

since it is what we make it, from the moral point of view....

Often enough our faith beforehand in an uncertified result is the

only thing that makes the result come true.... If your heart does

not _want_ a world of moral reality, your head will assuredly

never make you believe in one.... Freedom to believe covers only

living options which the intellect cannot by itself resolve.... We

are not to put a stopper on our heart, and meantime act as if

religion were not true”; Psychology, 2:282, 321—“Belief is

consent, willingness, turning of our disposition. It is the mental

state or function of cognizing reality. We never disbelieve

anything except for the reason that we believe something else

which contradicts the first thing. We give higher reality to

whatever things we select and emphasize and turn to with a

will.... We need only in cold blood act as if the thing in

question were real, and keep acting as if it were real, and it

will infallibly end by growing into such a connection with our

life that it will become real. Those to whom God and duty are mere

names, can make them much more than that, if they make a little

sacrifice to them every day.”

E. G. Robinson: “Campbellism makes intellectual belief to be

saving faith. But saving faith is consent of the heart as well as

assent of the intellect. On the one hand there is the intellectual

element: faith is belief upon the ground of evidence; faith

without evidence is credulity. But on the other hand faith has an

element of affection; the element of love is always wrapped up in

it. So Abraham’s faith made Abraham like God; for we always become

like that which we trust.” Faith therefore is not chronologically

subsequent to regeneration, but is its accompaniment. As the

soul’s appropriation of Christ and his salvation, it is not the

result of an accomplished renewal, but rather the medium through

which that renewal is effected. Otherwise it would follow that one

who had not yet believed (_i. e._, received Christ) might still be

regenerate, whereas the Scripture represents the privilege of

sonship as granted only to believers. See _John 1:12, 13_—“_But as

many as received him, to them gave he the right to become children

of God, even to them that believe on his name: who were born, not

of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man,

but of God_”; also _3:5, 6, 10‐15_; _Gal. 3:26_; _2 Pet. 1:3_;

_cf._ _1 John 5:1_.

(_b_) That the object of saving faith is, in general, the whole truth of

God, so far as it is objectively revealed or made known to the soul; but,

in particular, the person and work of Jesus Christ, which constitutes the

centre and substance of God’s revelation (Acts 17:18; 1 Cor. 1:23; Col.

1:27; Rev. 19:10).

The patriarchs, though they had no knowledge of a personal Christ, were

saved by believing in God so far as God had revealed himself to them; and

whoever among the heathen are saved, must in like manner be saved by

casting themselves as helpless sinners upon God’s plan of mercy, dimly

shadowed forth in nature and providence. But such faith, even among the

patriarchs and heathen, is implicitly a faith in Christ, and would become

explicit and conscious trust and submission, whenever Christ were made

known to them (Mat. 8:11, 12; John 10:16; Acts 4:12; 10:31, 34, 35, 44;

16:31).

_Acts 17:18_—“_he preached Jesus and the resurrection_”; _1 Cor.

1:23_—“_we preach Christ crucified_”; _Col. 1:27_—“_this mystery

among the Gentiles, which is Christ in you, the hope of glory:

whom we proclaim_”; _Rev. 19:10_—“_the testimony of Jesus is the

spirit of prophecy._” Saving faith is not belief in a dogma, but

personal trust in a personal Christ. It is, therefore, possible to

a child. Dorner: “The object of faith is the Christian

revelation—God in Christ.... Faith is union with objective

Christianity—appropriation of the real contents of Christianity.”

Dr. Samuel Hopkins, the great uncle, defined faith as “an

understanding, cordial receiving of the divine testimony

concerning Jesus Christ and the way of salvation by him, in which

the heart accords and conforms to the gospel.” Dr. Mark Hopkins,

the great nephew, defined it as “confidence in a personal being.”

Horace Bushnell: “Faith rests on a person. Faith is that act by

which one person, a sinner, commits himself to another person, a

Savior.” In _John 11:25_—“_I am the resurrection and the

life_”—Martha is led to substitute belief in a person for belief

in an abstract doctrine. Jesus is “_the resurrection_,” because he

is “_the life_.” All doctrine and all miracle is significant and

important only because it is the expression of the living Christ,

the Revealer of God.

The object of faith is sometimes represented in the N. T., as

being God the Father. _John 5:24_—“_He that heareth my word, and

believeth him that sent me, hath eternal life_”; _Rom. 4:5_—“_to

him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the

ungodly, his faith is reckoned for righteousness._” We can explain

these passages only when we remember that Christ is God

“_manifested in the flesh_” (_1 Tim. 3:16_), and that “_he that

hath seen me hath seen the Father_” (_John 14:9_). Man may receive

a gift without knowing from whom it comes, or how much it has

cost. So the heathen, who casts himself as a sinner upon God’s

mercy, may receive salvation from the Crucified One, without

knowing who is the giver, or that the gift was purchased by agony

and blood. Denney, Studies in Theology, 154—“No N. T. writer ever

_remembered_ Christ. They never thought of him as belonging to the

past. Let us not preach about the _historical_ Christ, but rather,

about the _living_ Christ; nay, let us preach _him_, present and

omnipotent. Jesus could say: ‘_Whither I go, ye know the way_’

(_John 14:4_); for they knew _him_, and he was both the _end_ and

the _way_.”

Dr. Charles Hodge unduly restricts the operations of grace to the

preaching of the incarnate Christ: Syst. Theol., 2:648—“There is

no faith where the gospel is not heard; and where there is no

faith, there is no salvation. This is indeed an awful doctrine.”

And yet, in 2:668, he says most inconsistently: “As God is

everywhere present in the material world, guiding its operations

according to the laws of nature; so he is everywhere present with

the minds of men, as the Spirit of truth and goodness, operating

on them according to laws of their free moral agency, inclining

them to good and restraining them from evil.” This presence and

revelation of God we hold to be through Christ, the eternal Word,

and so we interpret the prophecy of Caiaphas as referring to the

work of the personal Christ: _John 11:51, 52_—“_he prophesied that

Jesus should die for the nation; and not for the nation only, but

that he might also gather together into one the children of God

that are scattered abroad._”