Part 13

7. * Once more. The scriptures teach, _this is the love of God_ (the sure mark thereof) _that we keep his commandments_, _1 John_ v. 3. And our Lord himself saith, _he that keepeth my commandments, he it is that loveth me_, _John_ xiv. 21. Love rejoices to obey; to do in every point, whatever is acceptable to the Beloved. A true lover of God hastens to do his will on earth as it is done in heaven. But is this the character of the presumptuous pretender to the love of God? Nay, but his love gives him a liberty to disobey, to break, not to keep, the commandments of God. Perhaps when he was in fear of the wrath of God, he did labour to do his will. But now looking on himself as _not under the law_, he thinks he is no longer obliged to observe it. He is therefore less zealous of good works, less careful to abstain from evil; less watchful over his own heart, less jealous over his tongue. He is less earnest to deny himself, and to take up his cross daily. In a word, the whole form of his life is changed, since he has fancied himself to be at _liberty_. He is no longer _exercising himself unto godliness; wrestling not_ only _with flesh and blood, but with principalities and powers, enduring hardships, agonizing to enter in at the strait gate_. No; he has found an easier way to heaven; a broad, smooth, flowry path; in which he can say to his soul, “Soul, take thy ease, eat, drink, and be merry.” It follows with undeniable evidence, that he has not the true testimony of his own spirit. He cannot be conscious of having those marks which he hath not; that lowliness, meekness, and obedience. Nor yet can the Spirit of the God of truth bear witness to a lie; or testify that he is a child of God, when he is manifestly a child of the devil.

8. Discover thyself, thou poor self-deceiver! Thou who art confident of being a child of God, thou who sayest, “I have the witness in myself,” and therefore defiest all thy enemies. Thou art weighed in the balance and found wanting; even in the balance of the sanctuary. The word of the Lord hath tried thy soul, and proved thee to be reprobate silver. Thou art not lowly of heart. Therefore thou hast not received the Spirit of Jesus unto this day. Thou art not gentle and meek; therefore thy joy is nothing worth: it is not joy in the Lord. Thou dost not keep his commandments; therefore thou lovest him not, neither art thou partaker of the Holy Ghost. It is consequently, as certain and as evident, as the oracles of God can make it, his Spirit doth not bear witness with thy Spirit, that thou art a child of God. O cry unto him that the scales may fall off thine eyes, that thou mayst know thyself as thou art known; that thou mayst receive the sentence of death in thyself, till thou hear the voice that raises the dead, saying, “Be of good cheer: thy sins are forgiven; thy faith hath made thee whole.”

9. “But how may one who has the real witness in himself distinguish it from presumption?” How, I pray, do you distinguish day from night? How do you distinguish light from darkness? Or the light of a star, or glimmering taper, from the light of the noon-day sun? Is there not an inherent, obvious, essential difference between the one and the other? And do you not immediately and directly perceive that difference, provided your senses are rightly disposed? In like manner, there is an inherent, essential difference between spiritual light and spiritual darkness: and between the light wherewith the Sun of righteousness shines upon our heart, and that glimmering light, which arises only from _sparks of_ our _own kindling_. And this difference also is immediately and directly perceived, if our spiritual senses are rightly disposed.

10. * To require a more minute and philosophical account of the _manner_ whereby we distinguish these, and of the _criteria_, or intrinsick marks, whereby we know the voice of God, is to make a demand which can never be answered; no, not by one who has the deepest knowledge of God. Suppose, when _Paul_ answered before _Agrippa_, the wise _Roman_ had said, “Thou talkest of hearing the voice of the Son of God. How dost thou know, it was his voice? By what _criteria_, what intrinsick marks, dost thou know the voice of God? Explain to me, the _manner_ of distinguishing this, from a human or angelic voice.” Can you believe, the apostle himself would have once attempted to answer so idle a demand? And yet doubtless the moment he heard that voice, he knew it was the voice of God. But _how_ he knew this, who is able to explain? Perhaps neither man nor angel.

11. * To come yet closer. Suppose God were now to speak to any soul, “Thy sins are forgiven thee.” He must be willing, that soul should know his voice; otherwise he would speak in vain. And he is able to effect this; for whenever he wills, to do is present with him. And he does effect it. That soul is absolutely assured, “This voice is the voice of God.” But yet he who hath that witness in himself, cannot explain it to one who hath not. Nor indeed is it to be expected that he should. Were there any natural medium to prove, or natural method to explain the things of God, to unexperienced men; then the natural man might discern and know the things of the Spirit of God. But this is utterly contrary to the assertion of the apostle, that _he cannot know them; because they are spiritually discerned_; even by spiritual senses, which the natural man hath not.

12. “But how shall I know, that my spiritual senses are rightly disposed?” This also is a question of vast importance. For if a man mistake in this, he may run on in endless error and delusion. “And how am I assured, that this is not my case; and that I do not mistake the voice of the Spirit?” Even by the _testimony of your own Spirit_; by _the answer of a good conscience toward God_. By the fruits which he hath wrought in your spirit you shall know the _testimony of the Spirit of God_. Hereby you shall know, that you are in no delusion, that you have not deceived your own soul. The immediate fruits of the Spirit, ruling in the heart, are _love_, _joy_, _peace_; _bowels of mercies_, _humbleness of mind_, _meekness_, _gentleness_, _long-suffering_. And the outward fruits are, the doing good to all men; the doing no evil to any; and the walking in the light; a zealous, uniform obedience to all the commandments of God.

13. By the same fruits shall you distinguish this voice of God, from any delusion of the devil. That proud spirit cannot humble thee before God. He neither can nor would soften thy heart, and melt it first into earnest mourning after God, and then into filial love. It is not the adversary of God and man, that enables thee to love thy neighbour; or to put on meekness, gentleness, patience, temperance, and the whole armour of God. He is not divided against himself, or a destroyer of sin, his own work. No; it is none but the Son of God who cometh _to destroy the works of the devil_. As surely therefore as holiness is of God, and as sin is the work of the devil, so surely the witness thou hast in thyself is not of Satan, but of God.

14. Well then mayst thou say, _Thanks be unto God for his unspeakable gift_! Thanks be unto God, who giveth me to _know in whom I have believed_: who _hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into my heart, crying, Abba, Father_, and even now _bearing witness with my Spirit, that I am a child of God_! And see, that not only thy lips, but thy life shew forth his praise. He hath marked thee for his own; _glorify him_ then _in thy body and thy Spirit which are_ his. Beloved, if thou _hast this hope in_ thyself, _purify_ thyself _as he is pure_. While thou beholdest _what manner of love the Father hath given_ thee, that thou shouldst _be called a child of God: cleanse_ thyself _from all filthiness of flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God_: and let all thy thoughts, words, and works be a spiritual sacrifice, holy, acceptable to God through Christ Jesus!

SERMON XI.

THE WITNESS OF THE SPIRIT.

DISCOURSE II.

ROM. viii. 16.

_The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God._

I. 1. NONE who believes the scriptures to be the word of God, can doubt the _importance_ of such a truth as this: a truth revealed therein, not once only, not obscurely, not incidentally; but frequently, and that in express terms; but solemnly and of set purpose, as denoting one of the peculiar privileges of the children of God.

2. And it is the more necessary to explain and defend this truth, because there is a danger on the right hand and on the left. If we deny it, there is a danger lest our religion degenerate into mere formality: lest _having a form of godliness_, we neglect, if not _deny the power of it_. If we allow it, but do not understand what we allow, we are liable to run into all the wildness of enthusiasm. It is therefore needful in the highest degree, to guard those who fear God from both these dangers, by a scriptural and rational illustration and confirmation of this momentous truth.

3. It may seem, something of this kind is the more needful, because so little has been wrote on the subject with any clearness: unless some discourses on the wrong side of the question, which explain it quite away. And it cannot be doubted, but these were occasioned, at least in great measure, by the crude, unscriptural, irrational explication of others, who _knew not what they spake, nor whereof they affirmed_.

4. It more nearly concerns the _Methodists_, so called, clearly to understand, explain and defend this doctrine, because it is one grand part of the testimony, which God has given them to bear to all mankind. It is by his peculiar blessing upon them in searching the scriptures, confirmed by the experience of his children, that this great evangelical truth has been recovered, which had been for many years well nigh lost and forgotten.

II. 1. But what is _the witness of the Spirit_? The original word μαρτυρία, may be rendered either, (as it is in several places,) _the witness_, or less ambiguously, _the testimony_ or _the record_: so it is rendered in our translation, _1 John_ v. 11. _This is the record_ (the testimony, the sum of what God testifies in all the inspired writings) _that God hath given unto us eternal life, and this life is in his Son_. The testimony now under consideration is given by the Spirit of God to and with our spirit. He is the person testifying. What he testifies to us is, _that we are the children of God_. The immediate result of this testimony, is _the fruit of the Spirit_; namely, _love_, _joy_, _peace_, _long-suffering_, _gentleness_, _goodness_. And without these the testimony itself cannot continue. For it is inevitably destroyed, not only by the commission of any outward sin, or the omission of known duty, but by giving way to any inward sin: in a word, by whatever grieves the Holy Spirit of God.

2. I observed many years ago, “It is hard to find words in the language of men, to explain the deep things of God. Indeed there are none that will adequately express, what the Spirit of God works in his children. But perhaps one might say (desiring any who are taught of God, to correct, soften or strengthen the expression) By _the testimony of the Spirit_ I mean, an inward impression of the soul, whereby the Spirit of God immediately and directly witnesses to my spirit, that I am a child of God, that _Jesus Christ hath loved me, and given himself for me_. That all my sins are blotted out, and I, even I am reconciled to God.”

3. After twenty years further consideration, I see no cause to retract any part of this. Neither do I conceive, how any of these expressions may be altered, so as to make them more intelligible. I can only add, that if any of the children of God will point out any other expressions, which are more clear, or more agreeable to the word of God, I will readily lay these aside.

4. Meantime let it be observed, I do not mean hereby, that the Spirit of God testifies this by any outward voice: no, nor always by an inward voice, altho’ he may do this sometimes. Neither do I suppose, that he always applies to the heart, (tho’ he often may) one or more texts of scripture. But he so works upon the soul by his immediate influence, and by a strong, tho’ inexplicable operation, that the stormy wind and troubled waves subside, and there is a sweet calm: the heart resting as in the arms of Jesus, and the sinner being clearly satisfied, that God is reconciled, that all his _iniquities are forgiven, and his sins covered_.

5. Now, what is the matter of dispute concerning this? Not, whether there be a witness or testimony of the Spirit? Not, whether the Spirit does testify with our spirit, that we are the children of God? None can deny this, without flatly contradicting the scripture, and charging a lie upon the God of truth. Therefore that there is a testimony of the Spirit, is acknowledged by all parties.

6. Neither is it questioned, whether there is an _indirect_ witness or testimony, that we are the children of God. This is nearly, if not exactly the same with _the testimony of a good conscience towards God_; and is the result of reason, or reflection on what we feel in our own souls. Strictly speaking, it is a conclusion drawn partly from the word of God, and partly from our own experience. The word of God says, every one who has the fruit of the Spirit is a child of God. Experience, or inward consciousness tells me, that I have the fruit of the Spirit. And hence I rationally conclude, therefore I am a child of God. This is likewise allowed on all hands, and so is no matter of controversy.

7. Nor do we assert, that there can be any real testimony of the Spirit, without the fruit of the Spirit. We assert, on the contrary, that the fruit of the Spirit immediately springs from this testimony: not always indeed in the same degree, even when the testimony is first given. And much less afterwards; neither joy nor peace are always at one stay. No, nor love: as neither is the testimony itself always equally strong and clear.

8. But the point in question is, whether there be any _direct testimony_ of the Spirit at all? Whether there be any other testimony of the Spirit, than that which arises from a consciousness of the fruit?

III. 1. I believe there is, because that is the plain, natural meaning of the text, _the Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God_. It is manifest, here are two witnesses mentioned, who together testify the same thing, the Spirit of God, and our own spirit. The late Bishop of _London_ in his sermon on this text, seems astonished that any one can doubt of this, which appears upon the very face of the words. Now, “_The testimony of our own spirit_, says the Bishop is one, which is the consciousness of our own sincerity:” or, to express the same thing a little more clearly, the consciousness of the fruit of the Spirit. When our spirit is conscious of this, of love, joy, peace, long-suffering, gentleness, goodness, it easily infers from these premises, that we are the children of God.

2. It is true, that great man supposes the other witness to be “The consciousness of our own good works.” This, he affirms, is _the testimony of God’s Spirit_. But this is included in the testimony of our own spirit: Yea, and in sincerity, even according to the common sense of the word. So the Apostle. _Our rejoicing is this, the testimony of our conscience, that in simplicity and godly sincerity we have had our conversation in the world_: where it is plain, sincerity refers to our words and actions, at least as much as to our inward dispositions. So that this is not another witness, but the very same that he mentioned before: the consciousness of our good works being only one branch of the consciousness of our sincerity. Consequently here is only one witness still. If therefore the text speaks of two witnesses, one of these is not the consciousness of our good works, neither of our sincerity: all this being manifestly contained in _the testimony of our spirit_.

3. What then is the other witness? This might easily be learned, if the text itself were not sufficiently clear, from the verse immediately preceding. _Ye have received, not the Spirit of bondage_, but _the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father_. It follows, _The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God_.

4. This is farther explained by the parallel text, _Gal._ iv. 6. _Because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying Abba, Father._ Is not this something _immediate_ and _direct_, not the result of reflection or argumentation? Does not this Spirit cry _Abba, Father, in our hearts_, the moment it is given? Antecedently to any reflection upon our sincerity, yea, to any reasoning whatsoever? And is not this the plain, natural sense of the words, which strikes any one, as soon as he hears them? All these texts then, in their most obvious meaning, describe a direct testimony of the Spirit.

5. That _the testimony of the Spirit of God_, must in the very nature of things, be antecedent to _the testimony of our own spirit_, may appear from this single consideration. We must be holy in heart and life, before we can be conscious that we are so. But we must love God before we can be holy at all, this being the root of all holiness. Now we cannot love God, ’till we know he loves us: _we love him, because he first loved us_. And we cannot know his love to us, ’till his Spirit witnesses it to our spirit. ’Till then we cannot believe it: we cannot say, _the life which I now live, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me_.

Then, only then we feel Our interest in his blood, And cry with joy unspeakable, Thou art my Lord, my God.

Since therefore the testimony of his Spirit must precede the love of God and all holiness, of consequence it must precede our consciousness thereof.

6. And here properly comes in, to confirm this scriptural doctrine, the experience of the children of God: the experience not of two or three, not of a few, but of a great multitude which no man can number. It has been confirmed, both in this and in all ages by _a cloud of_ living and dying _witnesses_. It is confirmed by _your_ experience and _mine_. The Spirit itself bore witness to my spirit, that I was a child of God, gave me an _evidence_ hereof, and I immediately cried, _Abba, Father_! And this I did, (and so did you) before I reflected on, or was conscious of any fruit of the Spirit. It was from this testimony received, that love, joy, peace, and the whole fruit of the Spirit flowed. First I heard,

Thy sins are forgiven! Accepted thou art! I listened, and heaven Sprung up in my heart.

7. But this is confirmed, not only by the experience of the children of God, thousands of whom can declare, that they never did know themselves to be in the favour of God, ’till it was directly witnessed to them by his Spirit: but by all those who are convinced of sin, who feel the wrath of God abiding on them. These cannot be satisfied with any thing less than a direct testimony from his Spirit, that he is _merciful to their unrighteousness, and remembers their sins and iniquities no more_. Tell any of these, “You are to know you are a child, by reflecting on what he has wrought in you, on your love, joy and peace:” and will he not immediately reply, by all this I know, I am a child of the devil. I have no more love to God than the devil has: my carnal mind is enmity against God. I have no joy in the Holy Ghost: my soul is sorrowful even unto death. I have no peace: my heart is a troubled sea: I am all storm and tempest. And which way can these souls possibly be comforted, but by a divine testimony, (not that they are good, or sincere, or conformable to the scripture in heart and life, but) that God _justifieth the ungodly_: him that ’till the moment he is justified, is all ungodly, void of all true holiness? _Him that worketh not_, that worketh nothing that is truly good, ’till he is conscious that he is accepted, _not for_ any _works of righteousness which he hath done_, but by the mere, free mercy of God? Wholly and solely for what the Son of God hath done and suffered for him? And can it be any otherwise, if _a man is justified by faith, without the works of the law_? If so, what inward or outward goodness can he be conscious of, antecedent to his justification? Nay, is not the _having nothing to pay_, that is, the being conscious that _there dwelleth in us no good thing_, neither inward nor outward goodness, essentially, indispensably necessary, before we can be _justified freely, thro’ the redemption that is in Jesus Christ_? Was ever any man justified since his coming into the world, or can any man ever be justified, ’till he is brought to that point,

“I give up every plea, beside Lord, I am damned――But thou hast died!”

8. Every one therefore who denies the existence of such a testimony, does in effect deny justification by faith. It follows, that either he never experienced this, either he never was justified, or that he has forgotten, (as St. _Peter_ speaks,) τοῦ καθαρισμοῦ τῶν πάλαι ἁμαρτιῶν, _the purification from his former sins_, the experience he then had himself, the manner wherein God wrought in his own soul, when his former sins were blotted out.

9. And the experience even of the children of the world, here confirms that of the children of God. Many of these have a desire to please God: some of them take much pains to please him. But do they not, one and all, count it the highest absurdity, for any to talk of “_knowing_ his sins are forgiven?” Which of _them_ even pretends to any such thing? And yet many of them are conscious of their own sincerity. Many of them undoubtedly have, in a degree, the testimony of their own spirit, a consciousness of their own uprightness. But this brings them no consciousness, that they are forgiven, no knowledge that they are the children of God. Yea, the more sincere they are, the more uneasy they generally are, for want of knowing it: plainly shewing that this cannot be known, in a satisfactory manner, by the bare testimony of our own spirit, without God’s directly testifying, that we are his children.

IV. But abundance of objections have been made to this; the chief of which it may be well to consider.

1. It is objected first, “Experience is not sufficient, to prove a doctrine which is not founded on scripture.” This is undoubtedly true; and it is an important truth; but it does not affect the present question. For it has been shewn, that this doctrine is founded on scripture. Therefore experience is properly alledged to confirm it.

2. “But madmen, French prophets and enthusiasts of every kind have imagined they experienced this witness.” They have so. And perhaps not a few of them did, although they did not retain it long. But if they did not, this is no proof at all, that others have not experienced it: as a madman’s _imagining_ himself a king, does not prove, that there are no _real_ kings.

“Nay many who pleaded strongly for this, have utterly decried the bible.” Perhaps so; but this was no necessary consequence: thousands plead for it, who have the highest esteem for the bible.

“Yea, but many have fatally deceived themselves hereby, and got above all conviction.”

And yet a scriptural doctrine is no worse, tho’ men abuse it to their own destruction.