Page Date:
02/23/2007
From: Anthology 2:4
See Also
Wholesome
Severity Reconciled with Christian Liberty
Historical
Introduction to English Popish Ceremonies
Preface
to Popish Ceremonies by Gillespie
George Gillespie On
Holidays |
 |
George Gillespie
Assurance of an Interest in Christ
Copyright © 1997
Naphtali Press |
Of an assurance of an interest in Christ by the marks and fruits of
sanctification, and, namely, by love to the brethren; also how this agrees with, or
differs from, assurance by the testimony of the Spirit? And whether there can be any well
grounded assurance without marks of grace?
It is a right, a safe, a sure way to seek after and to enjoy
assurance of our interest in Christ, and in the covenant of grace, by the marks and fruits
of sanctification: Which (before I come to the proof of it), that it may not be mistaken,
but understood aright, take these three cautions:
1. Our best marks can contribute nothing to our justification, but only
to our consolation; cannot avail to peace with God, but to peace with ourselves. Gracious
marks can prove our justification and peace with God, but cannot be instrumental towards
it; that is proper to faith. Faith cannot lodge in the soul alone, and without other
graces; yet faith alone justifies before God.
2. Beware that marks of grace do not lead us from Christ, or make us
look upon ourselves as anything at all out of Christ. Thou barest not the root, but the
root bears thee. Christ is made of God unto us sanctification as well as righteousness.
Your very inherent grace and sanctification is in Christ, as light in the sun, as water in
the fountain, as sap in the root, as money in the treasury. It is thine only by
irradiation, affluence, diffusion, and disbursement from Jesus Christ. It is Christ's by
propriety, thine only by participation. It is your union with Christ which conveys the
habits of grace to your soul. It is your communion with Christ which stirs up, actuates,
and puts forth those habits into holy duties and operations. It is no acceptable duty, no
good fruit, which flows not from the inward acting and exercising of grace in the soul. It
is no right acting of grace in the soul which flows not from habitual grace and a new
nature. It is no new nature which flows not from Christ.
3. All your marks will leave you in the dark if the Spirit of grace does
not open your eyes that you may know the things which are freely given you of God. Hagar
could not see the well, though she was beside it, till her eyes were opened. Marks of
grace are useless, indiscernible, unsatisfactory to the deserted and overclouded soul.
These cautions being in our eye, that we may not separate our marks,
either from the free grace of God, or from Christ, or from the Spirit, I proceed to the
proof of that point which I propounded in the beginning.
1. It may be abundantly proved form these texts, Ps. 17:3; 119:6; 2 Cor.
1:12; 1 John 1:6-7, 2:3, 3:9-10, 14.
2. Our passing from the state of nature and wrath into the state of
grace, and to be in Christ, is compared in Scripture to such things as are most
discernible and perceptible by their proper marks.1 It is called a passing from death to life, from darkness to light,
from being far off to being near, etc., all which things are known by manifest and certain
evidences. The Spirit of grace is compared to fire, water, wind, which are known by
sensible signs. Conversion is a returning of one who had turned away, and is not returning
discernible by certain tokens? The new creature is a good tree, and is not a good tree
known by good fruits (Matt. 7:17-18)?
3. Both in philosophy and divinity, yea, in common sense, it is allowed
to reason from the effects to the causes: Here is burning, therefore here is fire; here is
the blossoming of trees and flowers, therefore it is spring, and the sun is turning again
in his course; here is perfect daylight, therefore the sun is risen; here is good fruit
growing, therefore here is a good tree. It is a consequence no less sure and infallible,
here is unfeigned love to the brethren, therefore here is regeneration; here are spiritual
motions, affections, desires, acts and operations, therefore here is spiritual life.
4. The marks of grace have so much evidence in them as forms in others
of the saints and servants of God a well grounded judgment, yea, persuasion of charity,
that those in whom they behold these marks are in the state of grace and regeneration. If
they could see into the hearts of others, to be sure of the sincerity and soundness of
their graces, they could have a judgment of certainty concerning them; but his they
cannot, for who knows the things of a man save the spirit of a man which is in him?
Sure[ly] a saint may know more of himself that another saint can know of him, for he is
conscious to the sincerity of his own heart in those things whereof another saint sees but
the outside; and unless one will say, that a saint can know no more of himself by marks
than another saint can know of him by the same marks, it must needs be yielded, that a
saint may certainly and assuredly know himself by the marks of grace which are in him.
5. Without a trial by marks we cannot distinguish between a
well-grounded and an ill-grounded assurance, between a true and a false peace, between the
consolation of the Spirit of God and a delusion. How many times does a soul take Satan for
Samuel, and how shall the soul in such a case be undeceived without a trial by marks? But
it may be objected that this remedy may prove, and does often prove, no remedy; for may
not Satan deceive the soul in the way of marks, as well as without it? Can he not deceive
the soul syllogistically by false reasonings, as well as positively by false suggestions?
I answer, no doubt he can, and often does, yet the mistaking of marks may be rectified in
the children of God. Wisdom is justified of her children; but the rejecting and slighting
of all marks cannot be rectified, but is a certain and unavoidable snare to the soul. If
marks of grace become snares to the reprobate, that proves nothing against the use of
marks. The word of God is a snare and a gin2 to the reprobate, that they may go and fall backward, and be
broken, and snared, and taken, yet the word is in itself the power of God to salvation; so
the way of marks is a sure and safe way in itself, and to every well-informed conscience.
When any conscience, through error or presumption, mistakes the mark, that is the fault of
the person, not of the way of marks, and the personal error may be helped by personal
light and information, if the party will receive it. Whereas, to make no trial by marks,
and to trust an inward testimony, under the notion of the Holy Ghost's testimony, when it
is without the least evidence of any true gracious mark, this way (of its own nature, and
intrinsically, or in itself) is a deluding and ensnaring of the conscience.
QUESTION. But it may be asked, and it is a question worthy to be looked
into (though I must confess I have not read it, nor heard it handled before), "How
does this assurance by marks agree with, or differ from assurance by the testimony of the
Holy Ghost?" "May the soul have assurance either way, or must there be a
concurrence of both (for I suppose they are not one and the same thing) to make up the
assurance?"
ANSWER. For answer whereunto I
shall first of all distinguish a twofold certainty, even in reference to the mind of man,
or in his conscience (for I speak not here de certitudine entis, but mentis):3 the one may be called asphalia, when the conscience is in
tuto [in safety], may be secure; needs not fear and be troubled. The Grecians have
used the word asphalia when they were speaking of giving security and assurance by safe
conducts, or by pledges, or by sureties, or the like.4 The other is
Plerophoria, a full persuasion, when the soul does not only steer a right and safe
course, and needs not fear danger, but sails before the wind, and with all its sails full.
So there is answerably a double uncertainty, the one may be called aporia when a
man is in himself perplexed and difficulted, and not without cause, having no grounds of
assurance; when a man does doubt and hesitate concerning a conclusion, because he has no
reasons nor arguments to prove it; when a man is in a wilderness where he can have no way,
or shut up where he can have no safe escaping. The other is epoxi, which is a
doubting that arises not from want of arguments, or from the inextricable difficulty of
the grounds, but from a disease of the mind, which makes it suspend or retain its assent,
even when it has sufficient grounds upon which it may be assured. Now it is the evidence
of signs of marks of grace which gives that first kind of certainty, but it is the
testimony of the Spirit of the Lord which gives the second kind of certainty, and removes
the second kind of uncertainty. Take two or three similes for illustration.
The Scripture is known to be indeed the word of God, by the beams of
divine authority which it has in itself, and by certain distinguishing characters, which
do infallibly prove it to be the word of God; such as the heavenliness of the matter; the
majesty of the style; the irresistible power over the conscience; the general scope, to
abase man and to exalt God; nothing driven at but God's glory and man's salvation; the
extraordinary holiness of the penmen of the Holy Ghost, without respect to any particular
interests of their own, or of others of their nearest relations (which is manifest by
their writings); the supernatural mysteries revealed therein, which could never have
entered into the reason of men; the marvelous consent of all parts and passages (though
written by divers and several penmen), even where there is some appearance of difference;
the fulfilling of prophecies; the miracles wrought by Christ, by the prophets and
apostles; the conservation of the Scriptures against the malice of Satan and fury of
persecutors; these, and the like, are characters and marks which evidence the Scriptures
to be the word of God; yet all these cannot beget in the soul a full persuasion of faith
that the Scriptures are the word of God; this persuasion is from the Holy Ghost in our
hearts. And it has been the common resolution of sound
protestant writers (though now called in question by the sceptics of this age)5 that these arguments and infallible characters in the Scripture
itself, which most certainly prove it to be the word of God, cannot produce a certainty of
persuasion in our hearts, but this is done by the Spirit of God with us, according to
these scriptures, 1 Cor. 2:10-15; 1 Thess. 1:5; 1 John 2:27; 5:6-8, 10; John 6:45.
In like manner a scholar, or a young disputant, may argue and dispute
(be it in philosophy or divinity) upon very right and sure principles, yet peradventure
not without great fear and doubting in his own thoughts, till he be put out of that fear
by the approbation and testimony of his learned master who presides in the dispute. The
evidence of good marks, while it is opened unto us, may make our hearts to burn within
us, as those disciples said who were going to Emmaus, but yet our eyes are held (as it
was with them) that we do not know Christ in us, or talking with us, until our eyes are
opened by the Spirit. No doubt they had much light breaking in upon their understandings
while Christ expounded unto them the Scriptures by the way, and this light was with life
and heat in their hearts; but after they knew Christ in braking of bread, then, and not
till then, came the fulness of persuasion, and then they could say, The Lord is risen
indeed (Luke 24). Our inward evidence of graces, or use of signs, may bring the
children to the birth (I mean in point of assurance), but it is the evidence of the Spirit
of God which gives strength to come fourth. Without this evidence of the Spirit of God the
soul does but grope after a full assurance, as it were in the dark; but when the Holy
Ghost comes to do the office of a comforter, then there is light and liberty.
Our assurance of justification, adoption, grace and salvation, is
virtually in a syllogistical way: Whoever believes on the Son of God shall not perish, but
have life everlasting. But I believe on the Son of God; therefore, etc. Whoever judge
themselves shall not be judged of the Lord. But I judge myself; therefore, etc. Whosoever
loves the brethren has passed from death to life. But I love the brethren; therefore, etc.
In these or the like proofs it is the Spirit of grace which gives us the right
understanding and firm belief to the proposition. As for the assumption which has in it
the evidence of graces, it is made good by a twofold testimony; the testimony of our
consciences,(2 Cor. 1:12; 1 John 3:19-21), and the testimony of the Spirit itself bearing
witness together with our consciences. And although both propositions are made good, yet
we are so slow of heart to believe, that we cannot, without the special help of the
Comforter, the Holy Ghost, freely, boldly, joyfully, and with a firm persuasion, infer the
conclusion as a most certain truth. So that, in the business of assurance and full
persuasion, the evidence of graces, and the testimony of the Spirit, are two concurrent
causes or helps, both of them necessary without the evidence of graces. It is not a safe
nor a well-grounded assurance without the testimony of the Spirit; it is not a plerophory
of full assurance.
There were two evidences of purchase in use among the Jews, one sealed,
another open (Jer. 32:11). Which custom, Jerome says, was continued till his time. The
evidence of the Spirit is like that which was sealed; the evidence of marks like that
which was open. Therefore let no man divide the things which God has joined together. See
them joined in three texts of Scripture: Rom. 8:16 Neither our spirit alone, nor the
Spirit of the Lord alone, bears witness that we are the children of God, but both these
together bear witness of this thing: The Spirit itself bears witness with our spirit.
1 Cor. 2:10,12, we read that the Spirit reveals unto us, and makes us to know the
things which are freely given to us of God. But withal (v. 13), there is a comparing
spiritual things with spiritual, and so among other things compared together, there is
a comparing of spiritual marks with a spiritual state, of spiritual fruit with a spiritual
tree, etc. 1 John :6 The Spirit's witnessing is joined with the witnessing of the water
and blood, that is, with the evidence of grace, the evidence of justification, and a pacified
conscience, sprinkled with the blood of Christ and purged from the guilt of sin; also the
evidence of sanctification and a pure conscience, purged from the inherent filth
and stain of corruption; the former of these is the testimony of the blood, the latter is
the testimony of the water, and both these not enough (as to the point of assurance)
without the testimony of the Spirit, nor is it enough without them.
In the next place, let us take a trial of this way of assurance so far
as concerns the evidence of graces, so much opposed by the Antinomians. Let us take the
notable evidence (1 John 3:14). And now hear the Antinomian objections against this
assurance from the evidence of love to the brethren.
It is objected,6 that a soul must be exceedingly
puzzled with this mark of love to the brethren, before it can clear the case that it
belongs to Christ; for if you will try yourself by this mark, you must know, first, what
it is to love the brethren; secondly, that they are the brethren whom you love. The nature
of love is described, 1 cor. 13:4-7: Charity (or love) suffereth long, and is
kind; charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up. Doth not behave
itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil; rejoiceth
not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth; beareth all things, believeth all things,
hopeth all things, endureth all things. Come, now, and bring your hearts to these
particulars in your examination: Is there not envying in me at all towards the brethren?
Is there no thinking evil of any of the brethren? Is there no seeking of myself, or my own
good, in my love to them? Is there a bearing all things for their sakes? Is there no being
puffed up, or vaunting above the brethren? Is there no thinking better of myself than of
them? So that a soul must attain to a mighty high measure of sanctification and victory
over a man's self, before it can reach to this, to say, I love the brethren.
But suppose you find all this love in yourselves, do you know they are
the brethren you love? You know the brotherhood consists in being united unto Christ, that
is an invisible thing, none can know it but God only; no man can say such an one is a
brother. And if you say, though I am not certain that he is a brother, yet I love him
under the notion of a brother, to this it is replied, "Take all the sects in the
world, they will love their own sects as brethren:" and, after a description of the
Antinomians, it is added, "These are the brethren, do you love these men? Oh, there
are many that go by signs and marks that cannot endure the brethren; they go with them
under the name of libertines."
I have now the objection before me, as full and strong as one of the
best gifted Antinomians of this age could make it. For answer whereunto I will demonstrate
these three things: I. That this objection destroys as much, and more, their own
exposition of this text in 1 John 3:14. II. That the Antinomian way of removing scruples
and doubts of conscience, and settling a soul in peace and assurance, is a most
inextricable labyrinth, and lays knots faster upon the conscience, instead of loosing
them. III. That this way of assurance, by the mark of love to the brethren, is a sure and
safe way, and has no such inextricableness in it as is here objected.
I. I say, their objection militates as strongly, yea much more strongly,
against their own interpretation of my text; for the same Antinomian, in that same sermon,
and others of that way, understand the scope of this text to be for comforting the
brethren against the disesteem the world had of them. The world hates them, (v. 13); but
we know, says he, that we are translated from death to life, because we love the brethren;
that is, whatever the world judges of us, we perceive and know one another by this mark,
that we love the brethren. In short, they say, "This seems rather to be a mark how my
brother may know me, than that by which I should know myself," which interpretation,
how ill-grounded it is, and how inconsistent with verses 18-21, who sees not. Only I now
observe, that they cast down what [they] themselves build; for if I cannot know myself by
the inside of love, much less can my brother know me by the outside of love; and if I
cannot have any solid or safe comfort from this, that I love the brethren, how much less
can this comfort me, that others judge me to be a lover of the brethren? And how do I know
them to be the brethren who judge so of me? For (by their rule) no man can say such an one
is a brother, so that they do but tie themselves with their own knots, and must therefore
either quit their sense of the text and take ours, or else hold that this text has no
comfort at all in it; which yet is most full of comfort, and sweet as the honey and the
honeycomb.
II. But, will you see these men falling yet more foully in the ditch
they have digged for others? While they object so much against a believer's examining or
assuring his conscience by fruits of sanctification, sincerity of heart, hatred of sin,
respect to all the commandments, love to the brethren; while they tell us that none of
these can be sure evidences to the soul; and while they pretend to show other
soul-satisfying evidences, which can resolve, quiet, comfort, and assure the conscience,
they do but more and more lead the soul into as
labyrinth, and make the spirits of men to wander from mountain to hill, and to forget
their resting-place.7
I might here take notice of the six remedies against doubting, which one
of them offers as an antidote and preservative against all objections whatsoever, yet all
the six put together cannot resolve nor clear the conscience in the point of a personal or
particular interest in Christ. I hear much (will the perplexed soul say) of the nature of
faith, of free justification, of the things sealed in baptism, etc.; but I cannot see that
I have any interest for my part in these things. Not to insist upon these six remedies,
which are indeed most insufficient as to this point, my present work shall be to speak
unto those personal and particular evidences of an interest in Christ, which are held
forth by their chief writers. Do but observe their way, and you shall see that either they
fall in at last into our way of gracious marks and qualifications, or otherwise leave the
conscience much more perplexed and unsatisfied than they found it.
They tell us of two evidences, a revealing evidence and a receiving
evidence; that by the Spirit's testimony, this by
faith:8 The revealing evidence of interest in the
privileges of Christ, which will put an end to all objections, is the voice of the Spirit
of God to a man's own spirit; This is the great evidence indeed, and the evidence which at
last does determine the question, and put an end to all objections. Well, but does the
Spirit of God give testimony to the soul any otherwise than according to the word of God?
No, says the same writer,9 by no means; for it is most
certainly true, that every voice in man speaking peace, being contrary to the word of
grace, that voice is not the voice of the Spirit of the Lord, it is the voice of the
spirit of delusion. Immediately he moves this doubt: But how shall I know that this
voice, though it be according to the word of grace, is indeed the voice of the Spirit of
the Lord, and be satisfied that it is so? He might have moved this doubt, which is
greater, How shall I know that this voice or this testimony does indeed speak according to
the word, or whether it speak contrary to the word, and so be the voice of the spirit of
delusion? Peradventure he had found it difficult, and even impossible, to answer this
doubt, without making use of and having recourse unto the way of signs or marks, such as
the word holds forth: and this agrees to that twofold joint witnessing, (Rom. 8:16).
The Spirit of God is not simply martur, a witness, but summartur,
qui simul testimonium dicit, he bears witness not only to, but with our spirit;
that is, with our conscience. So that if the witness of our conscience is blank, and can
testify nothing of sincerity, hatred of sin, love to the brethren, or the like, then the
Spirit of God witnesses no peace nor comfort to that soul; and the voice which speaks
peace to a person who has no gracious mark of qualification in him, does not speak
according to the word, but contrary to the word, and is therefore a spirit of delusion. I
shall not contend about the precedence or order between these two testimonies in the soul,
so that we hold them together, and do not separate them in our assuring or comforting of
our hearts before God.
And here I must take notice of another
passage, where he whose principles I now examine, says, I do not determine peremptorily
that a man cannot, by way of evidence, receive any comfort from his sanctification,10 which he thus clears: The Spirit of the Lord must first reveal
the gracious mind of the Lord to our spirits, and give to us faith to receive that
testimony of the Spirit, and to sit down as satisfied with his testimony, before ever any
work of sanctification can possibly give any evidence; but when the testimony of the
Spirit of the Lord is received by faith, and the soul sits down satisfied with that
testimony of the Lord, then also all the gifts of God's Spirit do bear witness together
with the Spirit of the Lord, and the faith of a believer. Surely such a testimony or
voice in the soul, as the soul sits down satisfied with, before ever any work of
sanctification can possibly give any evidence, is not an evidence according to the word,
but contrary to the word, and therefore not the revealing evidence of the Spirit of God;
so that, in this, I must needs dissent from him, for he casts the soul upon a most
dangerous precipice; neither is the danger helped, but rather increased, by that posterior
evidence, or after-comfort of sanctification, which he speaks of; for the soul being
before set down, satisfied with the testimony of the Spirit of the Lord, and faith
receiving that testimony (so he supposes), it cannot now examine whether its
sanctification is sound or not sound, whether its graces are common or special, seeming or
real. It implies a contradiction if I say that I am assured, by the evidence of the Spirit
of God, and by the evidence of faith, that I am in Christ and in covenant with God, and
that notwithstanding I sit down satisfied with this assurance, yet I am not sure of the
soundness of my sanctification; therefore, to put the soul upon a looking after the
evidence of graces; and the comfort of sanctification, when the soul is beforehand fully
assured and satisfied against all objections and doubtings, is not only to lay no weight
at all upon these marks of sanctification, in the point of resolving or clearing the
conscience, but it is much worse than doing so, it is a confirming or strengthening of the
soul in such a testimony or assurance, as it has settled upon contrary to the Scripture.
And here is a great difference between these Antinomian principles and ours. We hold the
assurance or evidence of marks to be privative, they yield no more but that it is
at most cumulative to the evidence of the Spirit of God and of faith. For my part,
I dare not think otherwise, but that person is deluded who thinks himself fully assured of
his interest in Christ by the voice of the Spirit of the Lord, and by the evidenced of
faith, when, in the meantime, his conscience cannot bear him witness of the least mark of
true grace or sanctification in him; and I must needs hold, that whatsoever voice in man,
speaking peace to him, is antecedent unto, and separated or disjoined from, all or any
evidence of the marks of true (although very imperfect) sanctification, is not the voice
of the Spirit of the Lord, neither speaks according, but contrary, to the written word of
God.
I heartily yield that the Spirit of the Lord is a Spirit of revelation,
and it is by the Spirit of God that we know the things which are freely given us of God,
so that without the Comforter, the Holy Ghost himself, bearing witness with our spirit,
all our marks cannot give us a plerophory or comfortable assurance; but this I say, that
which we have seen described by the Antinomians as the testimony of the Spirit of the
Lord, is a very unsafe and unsure evidence, and speaks beside, yea, contrary, to the
written word. The word speaks no peace to the wicked, to the ungodly, to hypocrites, to
moral Christians, to the presumptuous, to the self-confident, to the unmortified carnal
professors, to temporary believers. Christ and his benefits are indeed offered and held
forth unto all that are in the church, and all called upon to come unto Christ, that they
may have life in him, and whosoever comes shall not be cast out; this is certain. But yet
the word speaks no peace nor assurance, save to the humble and contrite; to those that
tremble at his word; to those that are convinced of sin; to those that do not regard
iniquity in their hearts; but hate sin with sincere hatred; to those that believe on the
Son of God, that love the brethren, etc. Now, therefore, the Spirit of the Lord, which
speaks not to the soul but according to the word of grace (as is confessed), does not
speak comfort or assurance to any others but these only; and if a man would know certainly
whether the voice or testimony which speaks to his spirit is a delusion or not, he must
[go] to the law and the testimony, and search whether it speaks according to this word. It
is granted to us, that if the voice which speaks peace in man, is not according to the
written word of God, it is not the Spirit of the Lord; but withal it is cautiously
declined by these men, that the voice which speaks in the soul be tried by the written
word.
They tell us:11 It
is not the written word that makes us believe the Spirit, but it is the Spirit that makes
us give credit to the word: That as, in all arts and sciences, there are some
principles beyond which there must be no inquiry, so also in divine things. Is there
anything in the word of better credit, or that may rather be believed with men than the
Spirit himself? Nay, can any believe but by this Spirit? If not, then nothing else is able
satisfyingly to bear witness to the Spirit but itself. This is as if we should receive the
testimony of the Spirit upon the credit of some other thing.
1. Whereunto I answer, it is to be remembered the question is not,
whether the word of the Lord can satisfy or pacify a sinner's conscience without the
Spirit; for we say plainly, that as the best marks of grace, so the richest and sweetest
promises and comforts of the word, cannot make the soul sit down satisfied, till the
Spirit of the Lord himself speak peace and comfort within us. Whence it was that after Nathan
had said to David, in the name of the Lord, "The Lord has put away thy sin, thou
shall not die," yet even then David prayed: Make me to have joy and gladness; that
the bones which thou hast broken may rejoice. Restore unto me the joy of thy salvation;
and uphold me with thy free Spirit (Ps. 51:8,12, with 2 Sam. 12:13). But it is another
which is here in question, for clearing whereof observe, that the efficient cause, or
revealing evidence, which makes us believe and be assured, is one thing, the objectum
formale fidei, or that for which we believe and are assured, is another thing. In
human sciences, a teacher is necessary to a young student, yet the student does not
believe the conclusions because his teacher teaches him so, but because these conclusions
follow necessarily from the known and received principles of the sciences; and although he
had never understood either the principles or the conclusions without the help of a
teacher, yet he were an ill scholar who cannot give an account of his knowledge from
demonstration, but only from this, that he was taught so.
In seeking a legal assurance or security we consult our lawyers, who
peradventure will give us light and knowledge of that which we little imagined; yet a man
cannot build a well-grounded assurance, nor be secure, because of the testimony of
lawyers, but because of the deeds themselves, charters, contracts, or the like. So we
cannot be assured of our interest in Christ without the work of the Holy Ghost, and his
revealing evidence in our hearts; yet the ground and reason of our assurance, or that for
which we are assured, is not his act of revealing, but the truth of the thing itself which
he does reveal unto us from the word of God.
2. This is not to receive the testimony of the Spirit upon the credit of
some other thing, for the Spirit that speaks in the word is not another thing from the
Spirit that speaks in our hearts, and says we are the children of God. When we receive the
testimony or evidence in our hearts upon the credit of the word, we receive it upon the
Holy Ghost's own credit, comparing spiritual things with spiritual, as the Apostle
says. The holy Scripture is called a more sure word than that voice of God which
came from heaven concerning his well-beloved Son (2 Pet. 1:17-19), and so by parity of
reason, if not a fortiori, the written word of God is surer than any voice which
can speak in the soul of a man, and an inward testimony may sooner deceive us than the
written word can; which being so, we may and ought to try the voice which speaks in the
soul by the voice of the Lord which speaks in the Scripture. If it agree not, then we have
not lost, but have made a right discovery, and found out a depth of Satan, and so gained
by the trial. If it do agree, so likewise we are gainers, being confirmed in the
assurance, not upon the testimony of another, but upon the surest and best-known
testimony, of the holy Ghost himself.
3. If these things are not admitted, and if the Antinomian argument,
which now I speak to, stands good, then it shall be easy for any deluded person to repel
the most searching convictions which can be offered to him from Scripture; for he shall
still think within himself (thought unhumbled and unregenerate), "It is the voice of
the Spirit of the Lord which speaks peace to my soul, and this voice I know is according
to the word, because I am assured by the same Spirit that it is indeed according to the
word; and other evidence I will not look after, because I am to receive the testimony of
the Spirit upon his own credit, and not upon the credit of some other thing. The voice of
the Spirit which speaks in my soul is that beyond which there must be no inquiry." I
ask now, how shall the Antinomians convince such an one from Scripture? Nay, how can they
choose but (according to their principles) confirm him in his delusory, imaginary
assurance?
4. The very same Antinomian author, who speaks of the testimony of the
Spirit of God in the soul, as that beyond which there must be no inquiry, and which puts
an end to all objections, even he himself does, by and by, tell us of aliquid ultra,
and put the soul upon a further inquiry, which, as I said before, shall either resolve
into our way of assurance by marks, or otherwise leave the soul overclouded and more in
the dark than at the beginning.
And so I come to his second evidence,
which he calls the receiving evidence: Though the Spirit of the Lord
(says he12) do reveal the mind of the Lord to men, yet they are
not fully resolved concerning this mind of the Lord to their own spirits till, by faith,
they do receive it. Now, till men do receive this testimony, and believe it, they are
never resolved; but when men do receive it and believe it, that it is a true testimony,
then they sit down satisfied. Again,13 Faith in an
evidence, as it does take possession of that which the Spirit of the Lord reveals, and
manifests and gives to a person. The Spirit, indeed, makes the title good, but faith makes
good the entry and possession, and so clears the title to us, though good in itself
before. Is there a voice behind thee, or within thee, saying particularly to thee in
thyself, Thy sins are forgiven thee? Do you see this voice agree with the word of grace?
If you do receive the testimony of the Spirit according to that word; if you do indeed
receive it, here is your evidence.
Thereafter he moves this
objection; But you will say, if there be not fruits of faith following, that faith
is a dead faith, and therefore there must be something to evidence with it.14 For answer whereunto, first, he reflects this as a great
indignity to faith. If faith be not able of itself to give testimony, or must not be
credited when it does give testimony, except something will come and testify for it, to
give credit unto it.
Next he answers thus: That which has the whole essence of faith is not a
dead, but a living faith. Now the whole essence of faith is nothing else but the echo of
the heart answering the foregoing voice of the Spirit and word of grace; Thy sins are
forgiven thee, saith the Spirit and word of grace; My sins are forgiven me, saith faith;
If, therefore, the echo to the voice of the Spirit and word of grace be the essence, nay,
be the whole essence of believing, this is certain, where there is receiving or believing
there cannot be a dead faith.
Now, behold him at a loss, all resolves into this issue, no assurance by
the testimony of the Spirit and word of grace unless this testimony be received by faith,
no entry and possession, no clearing of the title to the soul, no resolution or
satisfaction to the conscience till it believes. But then, while the soul examines itself,
whether it have a true lively faith, or only a dead faith, he dare not admit the trial of
faith by the fruits of it; as if it were an indignity to the tree to be known by the
fruit, or to the fire to be known by the heat. Faith purifies the heart, says the
Scripture. Faith works by love. Faith shows itself by works. This Antinomian durst not
adventure upon this trial by the Scripture marks of faith; yea, to avoid this, he runs
into a great and dangerous error, that the whole essence of faith is nothing else but the
echo of the heart answering the voice of the Spirit and saying, My sins are forgiven me;
as if there were no faith where there is no assurance of the forgiveness of sins, and as
if faith were quite lost as often and as long as the soul cannot say with assurance, My
sins are forgiven me.
Again, may there not be a false echo in the heart? May not a temporary
believer, who receives the word of grace with joy, say within himself, My sins are
forgiven me? Where is the clearing of the conscience now? Is it in that last word, Where
there is receiving or believing there cannot be a dead faith? But how shall I know
that there is indeed a receiving and believing?
The essence of faith is the
receiving of Christ in the word of grace, and a resting upon him for righteousness and
life. Now another Antinomian tells us,15 that to receive
Christ and his benefits truly, does necessarily include these four particular points:
1. To know our lost state by the least sin, our misery without Christ, and what need we
have of him. 2. To see the excellency and worth of Christ and his benefits. 3. A taking
and having of Christ and his benefits to one's own self in particular. 4. To be filled
with great joy and thankful zeal.
If these things be so, then, I am sure, many do imagine they have
received Christ and his benefits by faith who have not truly and really received him; so
that the soul (searching itself in this point, whether have I any more than a dead faith,
or a counterfeit faith?) dare not acquiesce nor sit down satisfied with that resolution, Where
there is receiving or believing there cannot be a dead faith. For the soul must still inquire, "Whether is my receiving
or believing true, real, sound, lively, and such as cannot agree to a dead faith?"
The same author whom I last cited, where he puts a difference between a counterfeit faith
and a true faith, says,16 that the counterfeit faith neither
renews nor changes the heart; it makes not a new man, but leaves him in the vanity of his
former opinion and conversation. Whence I infer that he who will thoroughly and
rightly examine himself in this particular, "Have I true faith, yea or no?" must
needs (before he have a solid resolution) be put upon this further inquiry, "Is there
any heart-renewing or heart-changing work in me? or am I still in the vanity of may former
opinion and conversation, yea or no?"
I shall now, after all this, appeal to any tender conscience, which is
sadly and seriously searching itself, whether it be in the faith, whether Christ be in the
soul and the soul in Christ. Let any poor wearied soul, which is longing and seeking after
rest, refreshment, ease, peace, comfort and assurance, judge and say whether it can
possibly, or dare, sit down satisfied with the Antinomian way of assurance, before largely
declared, which yet has been held forth by those of that stamp as the only way to satisfy
and assure the conscience, and to put an end to all objections. I begin to hear, as it
were sounding in mine ears, the sad lamentation of a poor soul, which has gone along with
their way of comfort and assurance, and has followed it to the utmost, as far as it will
go: "Oh (saith the soul) I have applied myself to search and find out, and to be
clearly resolved in this great and tender point, whether I be in Christ or not? Whether I
have passed from death to life, from the state of nature into the state of grace, or not?
Whether I be acquit from the curse and condemnation of the law, and my sins pardoned, or
not? When, O when shall I be truly, clearly, and certainly resolved in this thing? It is
as darkness and death to me to be unresolved and unsatisfied in it. I refused to be
comforted without this comfort."
"I said, Go to now, and prove and see this Antinomian way. And when
I had proved it, I communed with my own heart, and my spirit made diligent search. Then
said I of it, Thou art madness and folly. Their doctrine pretends to drop as the
honeycomb, yet at the last it bites like a serpent, and stings like an adder. I find their
words at first to be soft as oil and butter, yet I find them at last as swords and spears
to my perplexed heart. I am forbidden to try my spiritual condition, or to seek after
assurance of my interest in Christ by any mark of fruit of sanctification, be it sincerity
of heart, hatred of sin, love to the brethren, or be what it will be. I am told it is
unsafe and dangerous for me to adventure upon any such marks; I do not mean as causes,
conditions, or any way instrumental in my justification (for in that consideration I have
ever disclaimed my graces), nay, I do not mean of any comfort or assurance by my
sanctification as well as righteousness. But I am told by these Antinomians, that even in
the point of consolation and assurance it is not safe for me to reason and conclude from
the fruit to the tree, from the light to the sun, from the heat to the fire, from the
effect to the cause: I love the brethren with true and unfeigned love, therefore I have
passed from death to life. They say I dare not, I cannot have any true comfort or
assurance grounded upon this or any such mark. They promised me a shorter, an easier, a
surer, a sweeter way to come by the assurance which I so much long after. They put me upon
the revealing evidence of testimony of the Holy Ghost, which I know indeed to be so
necessary that without it all my marks will leave me in the dark; but, as they open and
explain it unto me, I must not try by the written word whether the voice of testimony that
speaks in my heart is indeed the voice of the Spirit of the Lord, yet they themselves tell
me, that every voice in man which speaks peace to him, but not according to the word of
grace, is a spirit of delusion."
"Again, they tell me this testimony of the Spirit of the Lord will
put an end to all objections, and is that beyond which there must be no inquiry, yet by
and by they tell me there must be more than this, there must be a receiving evidence of
faith, and, till I believe, I do not possess Christ or his benefits, neither can sit down
satisfied and assured. Oh then, said I, How shall I know that I have true faith? Shall I
try faith by the fruits of faith? No, say they, by no means, but try it by the echo in the
heart, which answers the voice of the Spirit as face answers to face in water. But what if
there be no such echo in my heart? What if I cannot say with assurance, My sins are
forgiven me? Must I then conclude I have no faith? And what if there be such an echo
in my heart? How shall I know whether it be the voice of a true faith, or whether it is a
delusion? Has every one a true faith whose heart suggests and sings, My sins are
forgiven me?"
"But where there is a receiving and believing, said they, there
cannot be a dead faith. Alas, said I, they leave me
where I was. How shall I know whether there be a believing or receiving? Do not they
themselves tell me17 there is a great difference between a true
faith and a counterfeit faith? Are not these miserable comforters who tell me that true
faith has fruits, and yet will not give me leave to try it by its fruits?"
"They teach me18
that justification is like the fire, so that he that is not zealous in holiness and
righteousness by sanctification, it is to be feared that he never had the fire of
justification. Another of them says, does not love manifested as truly and
infallibly kindle love again as fire kindles fire? Sure[ly], then, if I do not love
God and his children, the echo in my heart, which says my sins are forgiven me, is but a
delusion. Oh how have these men been charming and cheating me out of the right way! They
have unsettled me, and frightened me out of all my marks of grace, or fruits of faith, and
when they have promised me a clear resolution, behold they leave me much more unsatisfied.
They have deceived me, and I was deceived. When all comes to all in their way, I must
either conclude (which I dare not) that I have true faith, because my heart suggests, and
says, My sins are forgiven me, without any trial of faith by the fruits thereof, or
otherwise I am left in a labyrinth. Believe I must, and they will allow me not marks to
know whether I believe or not; wherefore I will not come into their secret, I will come
out of their paths, which lead down to the chambers of death, I will return to the good
old way, the Scripture way, Christ's way, the apostles' way, in which I shall find rest to
my soul."
III. The third point now remains, viz., that there is no such
inextricable difficulty, darkness or mist in this mark, the love of the brethren; but that
the children of God may, and sometimes do, clearly and safely assure their hearts by this
mark that they have passed from death to life. Which, that it may appear, I shall speak
first to the object, the brethren, then to the act, which is love.
1. Touching the object, let four things be observed: (1.) This we
certainly know, that there are saints on earth, we believe, the holy universal church. Now
all who have passed from death to life, those, and none but those, have a true and sincere
love to the saints in general, praying heartily for them, sympathizing with their
suffering, and rejoicing at their felicity. None but a saint can say in truth, and with a
sincere self-denying affection, If I forget the, O Jerusalem, let my right hand forget
her cunning. If I do not remember thee, let my tongue cleave to the roof of my mouth; if I
prefer not Jerusalem above my chief joy (Ps. 137:5-6). The Apostle commends praying for
all saints (Eph. 6:18); and love to all the saints (Col 1:4). I conceive he
means, not only all the saints known to us, but the whole invisible church of saints on
earth. That prayer and protestation (Ps. 122:7-8), when uttered in spirit and truth, can
proceed from no other but a gracious renewed heart; "Peace be within thy walls, and
prosperity within thy palaces; for my brethren and companions' sakes, I will now say,
Peace be within thee." This very love to the saints in general, as to the excellent
and precious ones of the earth, is a fruit of sanctification, and a mark of a renewed and
gracious estate; even as, contrariwise, they that have no love to the saints in their
species or kind, that love and esteem men only for some earthly respect and consideration,
the rich, the honorable, the mighty, etc., or for some particular human relation, parents,
wives, children, kindred, friends, benefactors, etc., much more they that delight in the
company and fellowship of the profane and ungodly, prove themselves to be such as have not
yet passed from death to life.
(2.) It is neither necessary nor possible that we have a certain and
infallible knowledge of the true saintship and regeneration of those particular persons
whom we love, under the notion of brethren and saints. The apostles themselves did once
look upon and love some as saints who were no saints, Judas, Simon Magus, Ananias and
Sapphira, and others of that kind. It is God's own prerogative to know certainly the
hearts of men. To require a certain knowledge of the saintship of others before we can say
we love the brethren does not only strike at the mark of love, but at the duty of love,
and makes the yoke of Christ heavy, yea, unsupportable, and the very evangelical
commandment of love to be most grievous, yea, impossible. And, if the Antinomian objection
hold good, no man on earth can perform acceptably this duty of love, except he knows the
hearts of those whom he loves under the notion of saints. If it be replied that the
commandment of Christ is acceptably performed before, when, to my best knowledge and
observation, and according to the best trial which one Christian is allowed by Christ to
take of another, they are saints whom I love under that notion, and that it is not
necessary to the acceptable performance of the duty of love that I know infallibly such a
one to be a true saint; then it will follow, by the like rule, and by parity of reason,
that comfort and assurance may be had from this mark, "I love the brethren,"
although I cannot certainly and infallibly say those whom I love are true saints. For if I
can be clear in point of the duty, and that my obedience to the new commandment of Christ,
"Love one another," is acceptable to God, then may I also be clear in point of
the mark or sign: this proposition, "I love the brethren," being a necessary
consequent from that proposition, "I have, through the grace of Christ, so far
performed the duty of love, as that it is acceptable to God in point of new
obedience." And this leads me to a third answer.
(3.) Particular or individual saints may be so far known by their
fruits, and are so far discernible and visible, as that our love to them under that notion
may be known to be an acceptable service to God, and so a comfortable mark or evidence to
ourselves: which plainly appears from what Christ says (Matt. 10:41-42), He that
receiveth a prophet in the name of a prophet shall receive a prophet's reward; and he that
receiveth a righteous man in the name of a righteous man shall receive a righteous man's
reward. And whosoever shall give to drink unto one of these little ones a cup of cold
water only, in the name of a disciple, verily I say unto you, he shall in no wise lose his
reward. Before (v. 11.), Into whatsoever city or town ye shall enter, inquire who
in it is worthy, and there abide till ye go thence. (Heb. 6:10), For God is not
unrighteous, to forget your work and labor of love which ye have showed towards his name,
in that ye have ministered to the saints, and do minister. These believing Hebrews did
not infallibly know that they were saints to whom they ministered, yet the Apostle tells
them their work was acceptable to God, and made himself to be persuaded of them things
that accompany salvation. They to whom he writes, being conscience to themselves of the
truth and sincerity of their love, might much more be persuaded of themselves things that
accompany salvation from this mark of love, although they could not know infallibly the
hearts of those whom they love as saints. We may, without either revelation or
infallibility of judgment, by the marks which the word gives us for judging and discerning
of others, so far be persuaded, in a judgment of charity, that this or that person is a
saint, a brother, a sister, one in Christ, as that our love to the person under that
notion is according to the rules of Christ, flows from faith which works by love, and is
acceptable to God as a part of our new obedience. If it were not so, this absurdity would
also follow, there could be no communion of saints one with another, at least no such
thing done in faith. Do not believers act in faith, and not doubtingly, when they have
communion one with another, when they exhort and comfort one another, when they pray one
with another, when they sympathize one with another? If they do not act these things in
faith they sin; for whatsoever is not of faith is sin.
(4.) It is to be observed, that he who objects to others, they cannot
know whether this or that man be a brother, even he himself takes upon him to judge who
are the brethren. He makes a description of the Antinomians, under fair and plausible
expressions, and then concludes, These are the brethren, do you love these men? It
seems, if it had been condescended upon that the Antinomians are the brethren, there had
been an end of his objection. But is not this popish, Donatistical, pharisaical, to
appropriate to themselves the name of the brethren, the godly party, the true church,
excluding many thousands of those who are truly godly and dear to Jesus Christ, although
different in opinion from them? And what if one should fancy that the Antinomians are only
the brethren, yet how should one know that this or that Antinomian is a brother? Does not
his own objection fall upon him: The brotherhood consists in being united unto Christ,
that is an invisible thing; none can know it but God only; no man can say such an one is a
brother? So much of the certainty of the object -- the brethren, now to the certainty of
the act, which is love.
2. The nature of love was described
out of 1 Cor. 13:4-7, then, to fright the soul from examining itself by this mark, it was
added, Is there no envying at all towards the brethren? Is there no thinking evil of
any of the brethren? Is there no seeking myself or my own good, in my love to them,19 etc. Who is the legal preacher now? Here is a racking of the
conscience with necessity of legal perfection in our sanctification and evangelical
graces? Do not themselves say that our "justification is perfect, but our
sanctification imperfect." Why, then, will they not suffer the soul to take any
comfort from the fruits of sanctification, except they be perfect? When John says, Hereby
we know that we have passed from death to life, because we love the brethren, I ask,
does he mean perfect love, which is every way what it ought to be? If so, then they put a
false sense upon the text; for there neither is now, nor was then, any such love in the
world. Does he mean of true, unfeigned, sound love, although imperfect? Then there is no
place for this objection. For a true believer has in himself a true love to the brethren,
which love puts fourth and exercises itself in a sincere and conscionable endeavor of all
those duties which are reckoned forth (1 Cor. 13), as effects or (if you will) acts of
love. This soundness and sincerity of love may be a sure mark to the soul, although, I
confess, without this sincerity the very work and labor of love is no sure mark to the
conscience to examine itself by; for, as the Apostle there teaches us, a man may give all
his goods to the poor, and yet not have true love. O, but how shall I know, says
the doubting Christian, that my love to the brethren is a true, sincere, sound love?
To that I say, you may know it by these tokens:
(1.) If you love the saints because they are saints; not for their
excellent gifts or parts so much as for their graces; not for any relation to yourself so
much as for relation to Christ. It is true repentance when we sorrow for sin as sin: It is
true love when we love the saints as saints; that is, for this cause and consideration
chiefly, because the image of God appears in them. Papists pretend that with one act of
adoration they worship Christ and his image; but we say, with more truth and reason, with
one affecting and one act of love we love both Christ himself and those who bear his
image, both God and his children; I mean, it is Christ himself whom we love in his saints.
(2.) Your love, when you love all saints (Col. 1:4; Phil. 5). And this
follows necessarily from the first mark; for a quatenus ad omne [from specific
to general]: If as saints, then all saints. Love you all the saints in general,
praying for them all? Love you all the saints in particular whom you know; that is, you
dare not confine or limit this love to those saints only who are altogether of your
opinion (which, it appears from the objection before mentioned, the Antinomians have dared
to do), or who have some intimacy of friendship with you, nay, nor to those who never
wronged you, never strove with you, who never spake evil of you, but all whom you have
reason to judge to be saints, you love them, wish well to them, are ready to do them good
according to you power, and if you be at variance or difference with any of them, you pray
God to make them and yourself of one heart and of one mind, and it is an affliction of
spirit to you to be at variance with any that are Christ's. Can you thus clear yourself in
you conscience, and dare you say these things before the Searcher of hearts? Then is your
love a true love.
(3.) You are a sincere lover of the brethren when you love them in all
their different estates and conditions. The poor as well as the rich; them of low degree
as well as them of high degree; the persecuted as well as the prospering; the reproached
as well as the commended. This is also a necessary consectary [consequence] upon the first
mark; for if you love saints as saints, the variation of difference of their outward
condition will not make your love towards them to cease. Obadiah was a sincere lover of
the brethren, and he gave this good testimony of it, he was kind friend to the prophets of
the Lord when they were persecuted by Ahab and Jezebel.
(4.) Your love to the brethren is true and sincere when it puts forth
itself in all your relations. When a man desires to choose a wife that fears God, and a
woman desires to marry none who is not godly; when a master seeks godly servants, and a
servant seeks a godly master; when a people choose godly ministers and godly magistrates,
godly commanders and officers of armies, etc., and again, magistrates, commanders,
ministers, love, countenance, encourage and strengthen the hands of such under their
charge as are godly; when a man, if he be to choose a friend to consult with, yea, if he
were but to choose a lodging where he is a sojourner, he desires and seeks after a godly
friend, a godly family, etc.
(5.) Love is true and sincere when the action of love is not without the
affection of love (1 Cor. 13:3), and when the affection of love is not without the action
of love (1 John 3:17); when love opens both the heart and the hand, both the bowels and
the bosom.
I do not mean that all or any of these marks can be found in any saint
on earth without some mixture of the contrary corruptions; for we must not look that an
imperfect grace (such as love to the brethren is in this world) must needs be proved by
such marks as have no imperfection in them. If the marks be true then is the grace true,
and that is enough to the point which I now assert. But as the grace is not perfect, no
more are the marks of it perfect. And as there is no faith here without some unbelief, no
repentance without some impenitency, no watchfulness without some security, no contrition
without some hardness, no self-denial without some self-seeking, so no love to the
brethren without some want of love to the brethren, no marks of true love without some
imperfection and falling short; and no marvel, because no spirit without flesh, no grace
without corruption. Feel you then those contrary corruptions, those roots of bitterness in
your heart? If you war against them through the strength of Jesus Christ, and endeavor to
have your love every way such as has been described, then God looks upon you, and would
have you to look upon yourself, as a lover of the brethren. As long as you are in this
world you shall have cause to walk humbly with your God, because of the great imperfection
of all your graces, and of your love to the brethren among the rest, and still you shall
have flesh and corruption to war against all the powers, parts and acts of your inward
man. Let there be but a reciprocal warring of the spirit against the flesh (Gal. 5:17), so
shall you pass in Christ's account for a spiritual, and not for a carnal person. Neither
do I say that you must always find a perpetual conflict or battle between the flesh and
the spirit, or otherwise no ground of assurance. The Apostle speaks of warring, not of
conflicting or fighting; there is always bellum
[war], though not always Praelium [battle], between the flesh
and the spirit. The new man dare not make peace with the old man, nay, nor agree to a
cessation of arms with him, dare not allow or approve corruption, nor allow the neglect of
means and endeavors; yet the new man is sometimes taken napping and sleeping, sometimes
assaulted and spoiled, and bond hand and foot. He may be carried away as a poor prisoner;
but Christ will again relieve his own prisoner, and set him in a fresh military posture
against Satan and sin.
I hope I have now so far scattered those mists and clouds cast by
Antinomians, and so far extricated a poor soul out of those doubtings into which they
would drive it, as that a believer may knowingly, confidently say, I love the brethren
sincerely, unfeignedly, and hereby I know that I have passed from death to life; which is
a good and sure argument, whether we consult Scripture or the experience of saints.
FOOTNOTES.
1 Isi. de Hispal. de Differ. Spirit., diff.
32: Dilectio in Deum origo est dilectionis in proximum; et dilectio in proximum,
cognitio est dilectionis in Deum. [Isidore of Seville, Differences, difference
32: Love of God is the origin of love of one's neighbor; and love of one's neighbor is
closely related to love of God. ][Back]
2 Gin: a trap or device for catching game. [Back]
3 Latin: (for I speak not here of certainty of
being, but of mind). [Back]
4 H. Steph. in Thes. Ling. Gr., tom. 3, p. 1173. [Back]
5 Mr. J. Godwin in his Hagiomastix.[Back]
6 Dr. Crisp's
Sermons, Vol. 2, Sermon 15.[Back]
7 John Eaton's Honey-Comb of Free
Justification, ch. 9.[Back]
8 Dr. Crisp's Sermons, Vol. 2, Sermon 16.[Back]
9 Ibid., p. 483, 484.[Back]
10 Dr. Crisp, Vol. 2., Sermon 17, p. 497.[Back]
11 Ibid., Sermon 16, pp. 482-486.[Back]
12 Ibid., Sermon 17, p. 504[Back]
13 Ibid., p. 514-416.[Back]
14 Ibid., p. 518-520.[Back]
15 Eaton, Honey-Comb. chap. 9.[Back]
16 Ibid., chap. 16, pp. 481, 482.[Back]
17 Ibid., p. 475.[Back]
18 Robert Lancaster's preface to Dr. Crisp's
Sermons.[Back]
19 Honey-comb, chap. 6, p. 459.[Back] |
Articles Online
Return to Naphtali
Press main page James Bannerman Rites
& Ceremonies in Public Worship
Thomas Boston
The Evil, Nature and Danger of Schism
William Cunningham
Relation Between Church and State
The Westminster Confession on the Relation Between Church and
State
Albert Dod: Review of Charles Finney's Revival
Methods
Part One
Part Two
James Durham
Repentance
The Fourth Commandment
Introduction
1. Morality of the Fourth Commandment
Excurses: Family Worship
2. The Particular Morality of the Fourth Commandment
3. The Change of the Day
4. The Sanctification of the day.
Lectures on Job
Extracts: To the Reader, Job Chapter One
A Treatise Concerning Scandal
Extracts: Historical Introduction,
Author's
Introduction, 2-2 Public Scandals
George Gillespie
Assurance of an Interest in Christ
Holy Days
Wholesome Severity Reconciled with Christian Liberty
The English Popish Ceremonies
Extracts: Historical Introduction, Gillespie's Introduction
Against Holy Days
EPC Bibliography
David Hay Fleming
Discipline of the Reformation part one
part two part three
John M. Mason
Letters on Frequent
Communion
Thomas M'Crie:
Brief View of the evidence for the exercise of Civil
Authority about religion.
Sermon: Grief for the Sins of Men
Sermon: Christian Friendship
Sermon: The Fan in Christ's Hand
Samuel Miller
Nature and Effects of the Stage
Conversation
Religious Conversation
Revivals of Religion
Samuel Rutherfurd
Against Separatism § Part One § Part
Two § Part Three § Part Four
William Sprague
Danger of Being Overwise (On Use of Wine in the Lord's Supper)
James Wood
Separation from Corrupt Churches
Church Government
Thomas M'Crie: Brief View of
the evidence for the exercise of Civil Authority about religion.
Divine Right of Church Government
Extracts: Publisher's Preface, 1-2 What is a Jus Divinum?
Revivals of Religion
Samuel Miller: Revivals of Religion
Dod on Finney Part One
Dod on Finney Part Two
Schism and Separatism
James Wood: Separation from Corrupt Churches
John MacPherson: Unity of the Church
Thomas Boston: The Evil, Nature and Danger of Schism
Samuel Rutherford: Against Separatism § Part One § Part
Two § Part Three § Part Four
Worship
James Gilfillan, Holidays
David Calderwood, Against Festival
Days
John L. Girardeau: The
Discretionary Power of the Church
Robert L. Dabney: Review of Girardeau's
Instrumental Music in Worship
William Sprague: Danger of Being Overwise: Wine in Communion
|