Part 8

And why not? The sacred privilege of glorifying God does not belong to some peculiar class of Christians,—to persons who have been suddenly lifted into what they term ‘the higher life,’—but to all those who are abiding in Christ Jesus, and have Him abiding in them; for He says, ‘He that abideth in Me, and I in him; the same bringeth forth much fruit.’ You may have reason therefore to be most deeply humbled under the conviction of indwelling sin, and to be most heartily grieved for the mixed thoughts and motives that have intruded themselves into the holiest acts of your whole lives; you may be utterly displeased with yourselves for the utter poverty of your best services; you may be so convinced of what you consider the peculiar difficulties of your own character, that you may think it quite impossible that you yourselves should ever rise to a high standard of Christian holiness: but there is a power in the Lord Jesus so to raise you above your difficulties that you may not only be saved, but actually raised to such a standard that, though you may not know it, you may bring glory to His name. Nothing could be more hopelessly dead than Aaron’s rod, but in one night it ‘budded and brought forth buds, and bloomed blossoms, and yielded fruit.’ Nothing could be more hopeless than the case of David when he was in the horrible pit and the miry clay; but the Lord ‘set his feet on a rock and established his goings, and put a new song into his mouth, even praise unto his God,’ and the result was that God was glorified in his deliverance; for he adds, ‘Many shall see it and fear, and shall trust in the Lord.’ So you may say that you are dead, that you cannot rise, that there is no hope,—and there is no hope in your own efforts at self-quickening,—but He who raised the dead to life can so triumph even over your deadness as to bring out of your dead heart such an abundance of beautiful fruit, through the power of His own grace, that He Himself may be pleased with your loving and faithful service. Nay, more! Though you may never be able to see it, and though you may to the last be humbled to the dust for your shortcomings, He may still fulfil in you, and towards you, the prayer which St. Paul prayed for the Thessalonians: ‘That the name of our Lord Jesus Christ may be glorified in you and ye in Him, according to the grace of our God and the Lord Jesus Christ.’

Aim then at the highest possible standard. Never settle down contented with anything that falls short of it. Never consider that your case is too difficult for the Lord, the Deliverer, but trust Him so to abide in you with power, that His own words may be fulfilled: ‘Herein is my Father glorified, that ye bear much fruit.’

EXPOSITORY NOTES.

NOTE A.—ROMANS, VII.

I BELIEVE that a great deal of the difficulty felt respecting the seventh chapter of the Epistle to the Romans, arises from a mistaken idea that the different chapters are descriptive of consecutive periods of the Christian life. Persons are supposed to be justified in the fifth, brought to a new life in the sixth, and to be living in perfect peace in the eighth, and thus the conflict of the seventh is thought to be out of place. But surely there is no such consecutiveness to be found in the passage.

Both the sixth and seventh chapters are an answer to the question in the first verse of the sixth, ‘Shall we continue in sin?’ And this answer is founded on the principle that we must not do so, because such conduct would be inconsistent with the great change that has taken place in us. This change is then described under three figures.

(1.) A death unto sin through the death of our Lord Jesus Christ. (Ch. vi. 3–15.)

(2.) A change of service. (Ch. vi. 16–23.)

(3.) A release from the law, as a woman is loosed from the law of her husband when he dies (Ch. vii. 1–6); the result of which is that, therefore, we are now free from condemnation, etc. (Ch. viii. 1). The ‘therefore’ of this verse depends on the deliverance described in ch. vii. 6, and the intermediate passage (ver. 7–25) is a parenthesis. It is in the parenthesis that the difficulty is supposed to lie; and by the place which that parenthesis occupies in the argument that it must be explained.

In his argument the Apostle had connected sin with the law, which of course suggested the idea that the law was sinful; an idea which would have been shocking to Jewish minds, and was entirely contrary to his own. In accordance, therefore, with his usual style, he broke off from the direct line of his argument, in order to protect the truth against any such objection; and thus introduced the parenthesis.

This consists of two questions, with their respective answers.

The first is in the seventh verse: ‘What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid.’ This he answers by a reference to his own history, and by showing that the law, so far from being sin, had served to discover and develope it; and by doing so had slain him. (Ver. 7–12.) Thus far the passage is clearly historical, and the ‘I’ is his own historical self, as I believe it to be throughout.

But this answer suggested a further difficulty: viz., that a good thing had been the means of slaying him; and this led to the second question (ver. 13): ‘Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid.’ To this the answer was that the fault was not in the law, but in himself; for even in his new condition, when he heartily loved the law, the old nature of the flesh was still so powerful that he could not fulfil it as he would. (Ver. 14–24.)

This explains the strong language of the fourteenth verse,—‘I am carnal, sold under sin,’—which people find it difficult to reconcile with the account of complete deliverance in the sixth verse.

For my own part I have no difficulty, for

(1.) The explanation is suggested by the account he gives of the ‘me’ in the eighteenth verse. ‘In me, _that is_, _in my flesh_, dwelleth no good thing.’ It is clear that he is speaking there of his fallen human nature; and it is not unreasonable to believe that the explanation there given covers the fourteenth verse as well.

(2.) This is the only meaning that the words can bear in the context. He is showing that his death under the law was not the fault of the law, but of his own nature. And, therefore, he says, ‘The law is spiritual, but I am’ (by nature, that is) ‘carnal, sold under sin.’ He does not contradict his own words in ch. vi. 11, where he directs his readers to ‘reckon themselves alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord,’ for he is not speaking of his position in Christ Jesus, but asserting that by nature he was carnal; so that the law was not to blame for having been made death unto him. There is no difficulty in the use of the present tense if we bear in mind that the old nature is not eradicated by the new birth. He, so far as his nature was concerned, was as bad as ever to the last day of his life.

The remainder of the parenthesis is a proof of this corruption of his nature derived from his present experience. And the exclamation of the twenty-fourth verse is the cry of a holy man who, being regenerate, loved the law, and longed to be set free from that power of a fallen nature which kept him back from its complete fulfilment. He had been delivered from the law as a condemning power; but he delighted in it as a rule of life, and longed to be free from his evil nature, that so he might obey it without impediment.

NOTE B.—1 JOHN, III. 6.

_Whosoever abideth in Him sinneth not_.

THESE words, if detached from their context and from the remainder of the Epistle, apparently teach the absolute and perfect sinlessness of all those who abide in the Lord Jesus Christ. And if the words, ‘sinneth not,’ describe an entire freedom from all sin, they clearly do so.

But this cannot possibly be their meaning; for if it were,

(1.) The remainder of the verse would teach us that if any person should ever sin in thought, word, or deed, he would be thereby proved never to have seen or known Christ. ‘He that sinneth hath not seen Him, neither known Him.’

(2.) In the same manner the eighth and ninth verses would teach us that if any person ever did wrong in any way whatever, he would be of the devil, and not born of God. ‘He that committeth sin is of the devil.’ (Ver. 8.) ‘Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin.’ (Ver. 9.)

(3.) This passage would be in direct contradiction to the first chapter, in the seventh verse of which those who are walking in the light are described as being cleansed from sin; in the eighth, as having sin; in the ninth, as confessing it, and being forgiven; and in the tenth, as having sinned.

Some other meaning, therefore, must be sought for the expression, ‘sinneth not.’ What this meaning is may be gathered from the great object of the Epistle: which was to correct the leading heresies of the day. (See ch. ii. 26.) Of these heresies one of the most prominent was that of the Gnostics, who taught that if a man had the knowledge, or the light, he might live as he pleased in practical life. Against that corrupt notion this passage is directed; and its great object is to show that if there be the new birth, or a union with the Lord Jesus, there is certain to be a practical change of life and character. That this is the meaning is plain from the context. It is there proved that he is speaking of practical and habitual religion.

I. OF PRACTICAL RELIGION.

In the seventh verse he shows that all true religion is practical: ‘He that _doeth_ righteousness is righteous, even as He is righteous.’ Our Blessed Lord was practically righteous, so His people will be the same.

In the eighth verse he shows that the practice of sin is of the Devil: ‘He that _committeth_ sin is of the Devil.’

In ver. 5–8 he teaches that to destroy the works of the Devil was the great object of the manifestation of our Blessed Redeemer: ‘For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that He might destroy the _works_ of the Devil.’

In the tenth verse he asserts that this practical righteousness is the distinguishing test between the children of God and the children of the Devil. It was clearly such conduct as was visible to other men, or the distinction would not have been manifest. ‘In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the Devil.’

II. OF HABITUAL RELIGION.

The present tense, indicating a continued habit, is employed throughout the passage. So the word sometimes rendered ‘committeth,’ and sometimes ‘doeth,’ is used to express the habit. This may be seen from the use of it in these words of our Blessed Saviour (John, ix. 19): ‘None of you keepeth the law.’ If we adopt the rendering of that verse, and substitute ‘keepeth’ for ‘committeth’ in this passage there will be very little difficulty in understanding the meaning of the Apostle. The fourth verse would then be, ‘He that keepeth sin transgresseth also the law;’ and the eighth, ‘He that keepeth sin is of the Devil.’

The whole passage teaches us the great importance of being most earnest in urging the necessity of a practically consistent life on the children of God, and in showing that there must be a change in heart, in principle, and in habitual practice, whenever a person is born of God; but it has no reference whatever to the secret heart-struggles of the true believer in his earnest conflict with indwelling sin. They are not the subject of the passage. There are other Scriptures which speak of them, but this refers to practical and habitual conduct.

NOTE C.—ON THE WORD ‘PERFECT.’

The word τέλειος is of so frequent occurrence in Scripture that it requires our careful study.

Its original sense is ‘complete,’ and the corresponding verb τελειόω is to complete, or finish. The derived senses will vary with the subjects to which it applied.

(1.) In the Septuagint version of the Old Testament, it stands for sincere, upright, undivided in heart.

‘Noah was a just man, and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God.’ (Gen. vi. 9.)

Amaziah had a great deal of religion about him, but he was inconsistent; and, therefore, it says of him, ‘He did that which was right in the sight of the Lord, but not with a perfect heart.’ (2 Chron. xxv. 2.)

(2.) In Matt. v. 48, it means complete, or comprehensive, as opposed to being limited and partial.

Our Lord is exhorting His disciples to love their enemies as well as their friends (verses 43, 44); and says, ‘That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for He maketh His sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.’

He then goes on to show that there is no value in merely partial love (46, 47); and concludes with the words, ‘Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.’ That is, like Him; show your love to your opponents as well as to your brethren.

(3.) In Heb. v. 14, it is used of those who are ‘of full age,’ or complete in their growth, and therefore capable of strong meat; as contrasted with those who are babes, and therefore fed on milk. It is the same in Eph. iv. 13, 14; and 1 Cor. xiv. 20.

(4.) In 1 Cor. ii. 6, it means ‘fully initiated.’ A mystery was something not known to the world, but revealed to those who were initiated, and those who were initiated were called τέλειοι. So here St. Paul says, ‘We speak wisdom amongst them that are perfect,’ or the initiated: ‘yet not the wisdom of this world, nor of the princes of this world, that come to nought: but we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory.’

I am not sure whether Phil. iii. 15, expresses full initiation, or full manhood. I am inclined to think that it means initiation, as the verse speaks of a yet further manifestation of God’s will. ‘Let us therefore, as many as be perfect,’ or initiated, ‘be thus minded: and if in anything you be otherwise minded, God shall reveal even this unto you.’

At all events it is perfectly clear that it does not mean personal perfection, for St. Paul says, verse 12, ‘Not as though I had already attained, either were already perfect.’

(5.) In Heb. x. 1, it means the complete removal of the guilt of sin through the sprinkling of blood. The law by its sacrifices could never ‘make the comers thereunto perfect.’ If they could have done so those sacrifices would have ceased to be offered, ‘because that the worshippers once purged should have had no more conscience of sins.’ It should be observed that the passage is not speaking of the purifying of the heart, but of the purging of the conscience. To purify the heart, is to render it so pure that it will love only pure things; to purge the conscience is to remove from it the guilt of which it is conscious in consequence of the impurity of the heart. Thanks be to God, this purifying is complete through the offering of the Lord Jesus Christ once for all; and the comers thereunto are through it perfect before God!

I know of no passage in which the word is applied to a present sinlessness, or a present perfect purifying of the heart.

NOTE D.—TEMPTATION. HEB. IV. 15.

It is said of our Blessed Saviour, ‘For we have not an High Priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.’ And it has been argued that because He was tempted, yet without sin, therefore there is no sin in temptation. I can scarcely imagine a more dangerous fallacy.

The meaning of the word, ‘to tempt,’ is to test, or to try. So ‘God tempted Abraham,’ or put him to the test. (Gen. xxii. 1.) Thus our Lord was in all points tried, or tested, like as we are: that is, by the sinless infirmities of the body; by the surrounding circumstances of life; by the influence of man, both friends and foes; by the Devil; and even, we may reverently say it, by God Himself, when He called Him to bear a burden much more heavy than that laid on Abraham. But He was never tempted by any corruption in His own heart or nature, for if He had been He would not have been ‘without sin,’ even though He had resisted it. There was clearly no sin in being thus tested, nor did He ever sin in yielding.

Temptation to evil must always be considered in its origin, as well as in its effect. In daily life we think worse of the author of the temptation than of the victim. But no temptation originated in the heart of our blessed Redeemer. According to this text He was ‘without sin;’ for not only did He never yield, but there was no evil in His heart in which sin could originate. We are not, therefore, justified in quoting the temptation of our sinless Saviour, that came upon Him from without, as proving that there is no sin in those temptations which arise out of the evil of our own hearts. There is certainly sin in such temptation as that described by our Lord Himself, when He said, ‘Out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders,’ etc., (Matt. xv. 19); and in that condemned by St. James in the words, ‘Every man is tempted when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed.’ (James, i. 14.) In no such cases are we covered by our Lord’s example; for, even if we are preserved from falling, the temptation itself is sin, and the result of sin within the soul.

DOCTRINAL NOTES.

IN the first edition of these Sermons I added a short review of two books that have lately excited some attention in the Church. I understand that their author is himself so much dissatisfied with them, that he has been for some time past engaged in re-writing them. It is, therefore, not worth my while to republish my review, and, instead of it, I have added the following Notes.

Some of them are of a controversial character; but my object is to promote agreement rather than controversy. Several excellent persons, both clergymen and laymen, have lately experienced a remarkable answer to their prayers for an increase of faith, and in consequence of the peculiarities of the channel through which the answer has been given, they have been supposed to have deviated from old paths, and to have embraced new opinions at variance with the Word of God. I fear that this may be the case in some instances, though I hope it is not so to any great extent, for I find that many of them have never read the books to which some of us have thought it our duty to object, and are as earnest for the old truths as ourselves. I have therefore drawn up these Notes, embodying what I believe to be the teaching of Scripture, in the hope that they may prove a basis of union amongst those who are of one heart and one mind in their common desire to exalt the name of their most blessed Saviour.

The texts quoted must be regarded as only specimens, and not supposed to contain the whole teaching of Scripture on the subject.

GENERAL PRINCIPLES.

1. The only standard of holiness recognised in Scripture is the perfect character and will of God.

1 Peter, i. 15, 16; Rom. xii. 2.

There is no allusion in the Word of God to any lower standard of any kind whatever. We are never taught there that ‘We are not called to walk by the rule of angels, who excel, in strength,’ or that ‘our standard is not that which it will be in our glorified bodies.’ According to Scripture, our rule is exactly the same as that of angels: our standard is exactly the same as it will be after the resurrection: and our constant prayer is, ‘Thy will be done in earth as it is in heaven.’ It is not the object of the Gospel to lower God’s standard to man’s level, but in, and through, the Lord Jesus Christ, to raise us to His standard, and at length present us as faultless before His throne.

2. Personal holiness is the work of God.

Of God the Father.

Jer. xxxi. 33; John, xvii. 17.

Of God the Son.

Matt. i. 21; 1 Cor. i. 30.

Of God the Holy Ghost.

Acts, xv. 9; 2 Cor. iii. 18.

3. It is the action of the believer.

Heb. xii. 1; 1 John, iii. 3.

I have seen God’s work in holiness described as the same as God’s work in the pardon of sin. But there is this essential difference: Forgiveness is an act of God in His own mind alone; holiness is a work of God in the mind of man, controlling and directing all the activities of the mind. Forgiveness is, therefore, altogether external to man, and must be received in trust alone; but holiness is a power and principle of human action, and therefore is developed in human activities. The distinction may be illustrated by repentance and forgiveness. Both are the gifts of our exalted Saviour. (Acts, v. 31.) But God forgives, and man repents.

4. It commences with a new creation in Christ Jesus.

2 Cor. v. 17; Eph. ii. 10.

5. It is the result of acceptance with God, and of the realization of His mercy.

1 John, iii. 2, 3; Rom. xii. 1.

6. The principle which God employs to produce it is faith.

Acts, xv. 9; 1 John, v. 4.

7. The instrument which He employs to produce it is the truth as revealed in His own Word.

John, xvii. 17.

8. The means by which it will be finally perfected will be the full view of Christ Himself.

1 John, iii. 2.

PRACTICAL RESULTS.

If there is any difference on the subject of Personal Holiness amongst those who hold the great principles of the Gospel, it is not likely to appear so much in General Principles as in their practical application to present life. It is, therefore, clearly important to ascertain what should be the extent, and what the limits, of the Believer’s expectation. If we do not expect all that He has promised, we cannot hope to rise to His standard; and if, on the other hand, we expect what He has not promised, we shall involve ourselves in either disappointment or delusion. It is well, therefore, to consider from the Word of God what we are taught to expect, and what we are not taught to expect.

WE ARE TAUGHT—

1. That when we are created in Christ Jesus old things will pass away, and all things become new.

2 Cor. v. 17, 18.

2. That the Holy Spirit will dwell in our hearts.

John, xiv. 17.

3. That He will purify them.

Acts, xv. 9.

4. That we shall love the Lord Jesus Christ, and acknowledge our love.

2 Cor. v. 14; 1 John, iv. 19.

5. That we shall love the law of God, and delight in it

Ps. cxix. 97; Rom. vii. 22.

6. That we shall be set free from the dominion of sin.

Rom. vi. 14.

7. That we shall overcome external temptation.

1 John, v. 4, 5.

8. That we shall habitually live righteously in practical conduct.

Tit. ii. 12; 1 John, iii. 4–10.

9. That we shall be continually growing in grace.

2 Pet. iii. 18.

10. That in this present life, though we fail to fulfil God’s perfect law, we may have the joy of pleasing God, and of actually bringing glory to His name.

John, xv. 8; Col. i. 10; Heb. xiii. 16.

WE ARE NOT TAUGHT—

1. That the most eminent believers will be sinless.

1 John, i. 7–10.

From that passage we learn that those who are walking in the light, as He is in the light,—

(1) Are continuously being cleansed from sin (ver. 7).

(2) ‘Have sin’ (ver. 8), ‘and have sinned’ (ver. 10).

(3) ‘Have sin to confess, for which they need forgiveness’ (ver. 9).

2. That original sin will ever in this present life be either ‘destroyed,’ ‘dead,’ or ‘rendered inert.’

Rom. vi. 12.

The words, ‘Let not sin reign in your mortal body, that ye should obey it in the lusts thereof,’ are addressed to those who are to ‘reckon themselves dead unto sin and alive unto God.’ It is clear, therefore, that sin was still alive in them, or else it would have been quite needless to exhort them not to let it reign, and not to obey its lusts.

Compare also Rom. viii. 13; Col. iii. 5.