{"collection":"scripture-revelation","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_45283/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_45283","id":"gutenberg_45283","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/45283","summary":null,"tags":["Baptists -- Doctrines","Category: Religion/Spirituality","Theology, Doctrinal"],"text":"Systematic Theology\n\n A Compendium and Commonplace\u2010Book\n\n Designed For The Use Of Theological Students\n\n By\n\n Augustus Hopkins Strong, D.D., LL.D.\n\nPresident and Professor of Biblical Theology in the Rochester Theological\n Seminary\n\n Revised and Enlarged\n\n In Three Volumes\n\n Volume 3\n\n The Doctrine of Salvation\n\n The Griffith & Rowland Press\n\n Philadelphia\n\n 1909\n\n\n\n\n\nCONTENTS\n\n\nPart VI. Soteriology, Or The Doctrine Of Salvation Through The Work Of\nChrist And Of The Holy Spirit.\n Chapter II. The Reconciliation Of Man To God, Or The Application Of\n Redemption Through The Work Of The Holy Spirit.\n Section I.\u2014The Application Of Christ\u2019s Redemption In Its\n Preparation.\n I. Election.\n 1. Proof of the Doctrine of Election.\n 2. Objections to the Doctrine of Election.\n II. Calling.\n A. Is God\u2019s general call sincere?\n B. Is God\u2019s special call irresistible?\n Section II.\u2014The Application Of Christ\u2019s Redemption In Its Actual\n Beginning.\n I. Union with Christ.\n 1. Scripture Representations of this Union.\n 2. Nature of this Union.\n 3. Consequences of this Union as respects the Believer.\n II. Regeneration.\n 1. Scripture Representations.\n 2. Necessity of Regeneration.\n 3. The Efficient Cause of Regeneration.\n 4. The Instrumentality used in Regeneration.\n 5. The Nature of the Change wrought in Regeneration.\n III. Conversion.\n 1. Repentance.\n 2. Faith.\n IV. Justification.\n 1. Definition of Justification.\n 2. Proof of the Doctrine of Justification.\n 3. Elements of Justification.\n 4. Relation of Justification to God\u2019s Law and Holiness.\n 5. Relation of Justification to Union with Christ and the Work\n of the Spirit.\n 6. Relation of Justification to Faith.\n 7. Advice to Inquirers demanded by a Scriptural View of\n Justification.\n Section III.\u2014The Application Of Christ\u2019s Redemption In Its\n Continuation.\n I. Sanctification.\n 1. Definition of Sanctification.\n 2. Explanations and Scripture Proof.\n 3. Erroneous Views refuted by these Scripture Passages.\n II. Perseverance.\n 1. Proof of the Doctrine of Perseverance.\n 2. Objections to the Doctrine of Perseverance.\nPart VII. Ecclesiology, Or The Doctrine Of The Church.\n Chapter I. The Constitution Of The Church. Or Church Polity.\n I. Definition of the Church.\n A. The church, like the family and the state, is an institution\n of divine appointment.\n B. The church, unlike the family and the state, is a voluntary\n society.\n II. Organization of the Church.\n 1. The fact of organization.\n 2. The nature of this organization.\n 3. The genesis of this organization.\n III. Government of the Church.\n 1. Nature of this government in general.\n A. Proof that the government of the church is democratic or\n congregational.\n B. Erroneous views as to church government refuted by the\n foregoing passages.\n 2. Officers of the Church.\n A. The number of offices in the church is two:\u2014first, the\n office of bishop, presbyter, or pastor; and, secondly, the\n office of deacon.\n B. The duties belonging to these offices.\n C. Ordination of officers.\n (a) What is ordination?\n (b) Who are to ordain?\n 3. Discipline of the Church.\n IV. Relation of Local Churches to one another.\n 1. The general nature of this relation is that of fellowship\n between equals.\n 2. This fellowship involves the duty of special consultation with\n regard to matters affecting the common interest.\n 3. This fellowship may be broken by manifest departures from the\n faith or practice of the Scriptures, on the part of any church.\n Chapter II. The Ordinances Of The Church.\n I. Baptism.\n 1. Baptism an Ordinance of Christ.\n 2. The Mode of Baptism.\n A. The command to baptize is a command to immerse.\n B. No church has the right to modify or dispense with this\n command of Christ.\n 3. The Symbolism of Baptism.\n A. Expansion of this statement as to the symbolism of baptism.\n B. Inferences from the passages referred to.\n 4. The Subjects of Baptism.\n A. Proof that only persons giving evidence of being\n regenerated are proper subjects of baptism.\n B. Inferences from the fact that only persons giving evidence\n of being regenerate are proper subjects of baptism.\n C. Infant Baptism.\n (a) Infant baptism is without warrant, either express or\n implied, in the Scripture.\n (b) Infant baptism is expressly contradicted.\n (c) The rise of infant baptism in the history of the\n church.\n (d) The reasoning by which it is supported is unscriptural,\n unsound, and dangerous in its tendency.\n (e) The lack of agreement among pedobaptists.\n (f) The evil effects of infant baptism.\n II. The Lord\u2019s Supper.\n 1. The Lord\u2019s Supper an ordinance instituted by Christ.\n 2. The Mode of administering the Lord\u2019s Supper.\n 3. The Symbolism of the Lord\u2019s Supper.\n A. Expansion of this statement.\n B. Inferences from this statement.\n 4. Erroneous views of the Lord\u2019s Supper.\n A. The Romanist view.\n B. The Lutheran and High Church view.\n 5. Prerequisites to Participation in the Lord\u2019s Supper.\n A. There are prerequisites.\n B. The prerequisites are those only which are expressly or\n implicitly laid down by Christ and his apostles.\n C. On examining the New Testament, we find that the\n prerequisites to participation in the Lord\u2019s Supper are four.\n First,\u2014Regeneration.\n Secondly,\u2014Baptism.\n Thirdly,\u2014Church membership.\n Fourthly,\u2014An orderly walk.\n D. The local church is the judge whether these prerequisites\n are fulfilled.\n E. Special objections to open communion.\nPart VIII. Eschatology, Or The Doctrine Of Final Things.\n I. Physical Death.\n 1. Upon rational grounds.\n 2. Upon scriptural grounds.\n II. The Intermediate State.\n 1. Of the righteous.\n 2. Of the wicked.\n III. The Second Coming of Christ.\n 1. The nature of this coming.\n 2. The time of Christ\u2019s coming.\n 3. The precursors of Christ\u2019s coming.\n 4. Relation of Christ\u2019s second coming to the millennium.\n IV. The Resurrection.\n 1. The exegetical objection.\n 2. The scientific object.\n V. The Last Judgment.\n 1. The nature of the final judgment.\n 2. The object of the final judgment.\n 3. The Judge in the final judgment.\n 4. The subjects of the final judgment.\n 5. The grounds of the final judgment.\n VI. The Final States of the Righteous and of the Wicked.\n 1. Of the righteous.\n (a) Is heaven a place, as well as a state?\n (b) Is this earth to be the heaven of the saints?\n 2. Of the wicked.\n A. The future punishment of the wicked is not annihilation.\n B. Punishment after death excludes new probation and ultimate\n restoration of the wicked.\n C. Scripture declares this future punishment of the wicked to be\n eternal.\n D. This everlasting punishment of the wicked is not inconsistent\n with God\u2019s justice, but is rather a revelation of that justice.\n E. This everlasting punishment of the wicked is not inconsistent\n with God\u2019s benevolence.\n F. The proper preaching of the doctrine of everlasting punishment\n is not a hindrance to the success of the gospel.\nIndexes.\n Index Of Subjects.\n Index Of Authors.\n Index Of Scripture Texts.\n Index Of Apocryphal Texts.\n Index Of Greek Words.\n Index Of Hebrew Words.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n [Cover Art]\n\n[Transcriber\u2019s Note: The above cover image was produced by the submitter\nat Distributed Proofreaders, and is being placed into the public domain.]\n\n\n\n\n\n\u201cTHE EYE SEES ONLY THAT WHICH IT BRINGS WITH IT THE POWER OF\nSEEING.\u201d\u2014_Cicero._\n\n\u201cOPEN THOU MINE EYES, THAT I MAY BEHOLD WONDROUS THINGS OUT OF THY\nLAW.\u201d\u2014_Psalm 119:18._\n\n\u201cFOR WITH THEE IS THE FOUNTAIN OF LIFE: IN THY LIGHT SHALL WE SEE\nLIGHT.\u201d\u2014_Psalm 36:9._\n\n\u201cFOR WE KNOW IN PART, AND WE PROPHESY IN PART; BUT WHEN THAT WHICH IS\nPERFECT IS COME, THAT WHICH IS IN PART SHALL BE DONE AWAY.\u201d\u2014_1 Cor. 13:9,\n10._\n\n\n\n\n\nPART VI. SOTERIOLOGY, OR THE DOCTRINE OF SALVATION THROUGH THE WORK OF\nCHRIST AND OF THE HOLY SPIRIT.\n\n\n[Transcriber\u2019s Note: This Volume begins with \u201cChapter II\u201d, because\n\u201cChapter I\u201d of \u201cPart VI\u201d was printed in Volume II.]\n\n\n\n\nChapter II. The Reconciliation Of Man To God, Or The Application Of\nRedemption Through The Work Of The Holy Spirit.\n\n\n\nSection I.\u2014The Application Of Christ\u2019s Redemption In Its Preparation.\n\n\n(_a_) In this Section we treat of Election and Calling; Section Second\nbeing devoted to the Application of Christ\u2019s Redemption in its Actual\nBeginning,\u2014namely, in Union with Christ, Regeneration, Conversion, and\nJustification; while Section Third has for its subject the Application of\nChrist\u2019s Redemption in its Continuation,\u2014namely, in Sanctification and\nPerseverance.\n\n\n The arrangement of topics, in the treatment of the reconciliation\n of man to God, is taken from Julius M\u00fcller, Proof\u2010texts, 35.\n \u201cRevelation _to_ us aims to bring about revelation _in_ us. In any\n being absolutely perfect, God\u2019s intercourse with us by _faculty_,\n and by direct _teaching_, would absolutely coalesce, and the\n former be just as much God\u2019s voice as the latter\u201d (Hutton,\n Essays).\n\n\n(_b_) In treating Election and Calling as applications of Christ\u2019s\nredemption, we imply that they are, in God\u2019s decree, logically subsequent\nto that redemption. In this we hold the Sublapsarian view, as\ndistinguished from the Supralapsarianism of Beza and other hyper\u2010\nCalvinists, which regarded the decree of individual salvation as\npreceding, in the order of thought, the decree to permit the Fall. In this\nlatter scheme, the order of decrees is as follows: 1. the decree to save\ncertain, and to reprobate others; 2. the decree to create both those who\nare to be saved and those who are to be reprobated; 3. the decree to\npermit both the former and the latter to fall; 4. the decree to provide\nsalvation only for the former, that is, for the elect.\n\n\n Richards, Theology, 302\u2010307, shows that Calvin, while in his early\n work, the Institutes, he avoided definite statements of his\n position with regard to the extent of the atonement, yet in his\n latter works, the Commentaries, acceded to the theory of universal\n atonement. Supralapsarianism is therefore hyper\u2010Calvinistic,\n rather than Calvinistic. Sublapsarianism was adopted by the Synod\n of Dort (1618, 1619). By Supralapsarian is meant that form of\n doctrine which holds the decree of individual salvation as\n preceding the decree to permit the Fall; Sublapsarian designates\n that form of doctrine which holds that the decree of individual\n salvation is subsequent to the decree to permit the Fall.\n\n The progress in Calvin\u2019s thought may be seen by comparing some of\n his earlier with his later utterances. Institutes, 2:23:5\u2014\u201cI say,\n with Augustine, that the Lord created those who, as he certainly\n foreknew, were to go to destruction, and he did so because he so\n willed.\u201d But even then in the Institutes, 3:23:8, he affirms that\n \u201cthe perdition of the wicked depends upon the divine\n predestination in such a manner that the cause and matter of it\n are found in themselves. Man falls by the appointment of divine\n providence, but he falls by his own fault.\u201d God\u2019s blinding,\n hardening, turning the sinner he describes as the consequence of\n the divine _desertion_, not the divine _causation_. The relation\n of God to the origin of sin is not efficient, but permissive. In\n later days Calvin wrote in his Commentary on _1 John 2:2_\u2014\u201c_he is\n the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for\n the whole world_\u201d\u2014as follows: \u201cChrist suffered for the sins of the\n whole world, and in the goodness of God is offered unto all men\n without distinction, his blood being shed not for a part of the\n world only, but for the whole human race; for although in the\n world nothing is found worthy of the favor of God, yet he holds\n out the propitiation to the whole world, since without exception\n he summons all to the faith of Christ, which is nothing else than\n the door unto hope.\u201d\n\n Although other passages, such as Institutes, 3:21:5, and 3:23:1,\n assert the harsher view, we must give Calvin credit for modifying\n his doctrine with maturer reflection and advancing years. Much\n that is called Calvinism would have been repudiated by Calvin\n himself even at the beginning of his career, and is really the\n exaggeration of his teaching by more scholastic and less religious\n successors. Renan calls Calvin \u201cthe most Christian man of his\n generation.\u201d Dorner describes him as \u201cequally great in intellect\n and character, lovely in social life, full of tender sympathy and\n faithfulness to his friends, yielding and forgiving toward\n personal offences.\u201d The device upon his seal is a flaming heart\n from which is stretched forth a helping hand.\n\n Calvin\u2019s share in the burning of Servetus must be explained by his\n mistaken zeal for God\u2019s truth and by the universal belief of his\n time that this truth was to be defended by the civil power. The\n following is the inscription on the expiatory monument which\n European Calvinists raised to Servetus: \u201cOn October 27, 1553, died\n at the stake at Champel, Michael Servetus, of Villeneuve d\u2019Aragon,\n born September 29, 1511. Reverent and grateful sons of Calvin, our\n great Reformer, but condemning an error which was that of his age,\n and steadfastly adhering to liberty of conscience according to the\n true principles of the Reformation and of the gospel, we have\n erected this expiatory monument, on the 27th of October, 1903.\u201d\n\n John DeWitt, in Princeton Theol. Rev., Jan. 1904:95\u2014\u201cTake John\n Calvin. That fruitful conception\u2014more fruitful in church and state\n than any other conception which has held the English speaking\n world\u2014of the absolute and universal sovereignty of the holy God,\n as a revolt from the conception then prevailing of the sovereignty\n of the human head of an earthly church, was historically the\n mediator and instaurator of his spiritual career.\u201d On Calvin\u2019s\n theological position, see Shedd, Dogm. Theol., 1:409, note.\n\n\n(_c_) But the Scriptures teach that men as sinners, and not men\nirrespective of their sins, are the objects of God\u2019s saving grace in\nChrist (John 15:9; Rom. 11:5, 7; Eph. 1:4\u20106; 1 Pet. 1:2). Condemnation,\nmoreover, is an act, not of sovereignty, but of justice, and is grounded\nin the guilt of the condemned (Rom. 2:6\u201011; 2 Thess. 1:5\u201010). The true\norder of the decrees is therefore as follows: 1. the decree to create; 2.\nthe decree to permit the Fall; 3. the decree to provide a salvation in\nChrist sufficient for the needs of all; 4. the decree to secure the actual\nacceptance of this salvation on the part of some,\u2014or, in other words, the\ndecree of Election.\n\n\n That saving grace presupposes the Fall, and that men as sinners\n are the objects of it, appears from _John 15:19_\u2014\u201c_If ye were of\n the world, the world would love its own: but because ye are not of\n the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world\n hateth you_\u201d; _Rom. 11:5\u20107_\u2014\u201c_Even so then at this present time\n also there is a remnant according to the election of grace. But if\n it is by grace, it is no more of works: otherwise grace is no more\n grace. What then? That which Israel seeketh for, that he obtained\n not; but the election obtained it, and the rest were hardened._\u201d\n _Eph. 1:4\u20106_\u2014\u201c_even as he chose us in him before the foundation of\n the world, that we should be holy and without blemish before him\n in love: having foreordained us unto adoption as sons through\n Jesus Christ unto himself, according to the good pleasure of his\n will, to the praise of the glory of his grace, which he freely\n bestowed on us in the Beloved_\u201d; _1 Pet. 1:2_\u2014elect, \u201c_according\n to the foreknowledge of God the Father, in sanctification of the\n Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus: Grace\n to you and peace be multiplied._\u201d\n\n That condemnation is not an act of sovereignty, but of justice,\n appears from _Rom. 2:6\u20109_\u2014\u201c_who will render to every man according\n to his works ... wrath and indignation ... upon every soul of man\n that worketh evil_\u201d; _2 Thess. 1:6\u20109_\u2014\u201c_a righteous thing with God\n to recompense affliction to them that afflict you ... rendering\n vengeance to them that know not God and to them that obey not the\n gospel of our Lord Jesus: who shall suffer punishment._\u201d\n Particular persons are elected, not to have Christ die for them,\n but to have special influences of the Spirit bestowed upon them.\n\n\n(_d_) Those Sublapsarians who hold to the Anselmic view of a limited\nAtonement, make the decrees 3. and 4., just mentioned, exchange\nplaces,\u2014the decree of election thus preceding the decree to provide\nredemption. The Scriptural reasons for preferring the order here given\nhave been already indicated in our treatment of the extent of the\nAtonement (pages 771\u2010773).\n\n\n When \u201c3\u201d and \u201c4\u201d thus change places, \u201c3\u201d should be made to read:\n \u201cThe decree to provide in Christ a salvation sufficient for the\n elect\u201d; and \u201c4\u201d should read: \u201cThe decree that a certain number\n should be saved,\u2014or, in other words, the decree of Election.\u201d\n Sublapsarianism of the first sort may be found in Turretin, loc.\n 4, qu\u00e6s. 9; Cunningham, Hist. Theol., 416\u2010439. A. J. F. Behrends:\n \u201cThe divine decree is our last word in theology, not our first\n word. It represents the _terminus ad quem_, not the _terminus a\n quo_. Whatever comes about in the exercise of human freedom and of\n divine grace\u2014that God has decreed.\u201d Yet we must grant that\n Calvinism needs to be supplemented by a more express statement of\n God\u2019s love for the world. Herrick Johnson: \u201cAcross the Westminster\n Confession could justly be written: \u2018The Gospel for the elect\n only.\u2019 That Confession was written under the absolute dominion of\n one idea, the doctrine of predestination. It does not contain one\n of three truths: God\u2019s love for a lost world; Christ\u2019s compassion\n for a lost world, and the gospel universal for a lost world.\u201d\n\n\nI. Election.\n\n\nElection is that eternal act of God, by which in his sovereign pleasure,\nand on account of no foreseen merit in them, he chooses certain out of the\nnumber of sinful men to be the recipients of the special grace of his\nSpirit, and so to be made voluntary partakers of Christ\u2019s salvation.\n\n\n1. Proof of the Doctrine of Election.\n\n\nA. From Scripture.\n\nWe here adopt the words of Dr. Hovey: \u201cThe Scriptures forbid us to find\nthe reasons for election in the moral action of man before the new birth,\nand refer us merely to the sovereign will and mercy of God; that is, they\nteach the doctrine of personal election.\u201d Before advancing to the proof of\nthe doctrine itself, we may claim Scriptural warrant for three preliminary\nstatements (which we also quote from Dr. Hovey), namely:\n\nFirst, that \u201cGod has a sovereign right to bestow more grace upon one\nsubject than upon another,\u2014grace being unmerited favor to sinners.\u201d\n\n\n _Mat. 20:12\u201015_\u2014\u201c_These last have spent but one hour, and thou\n hast made them equal unto us.... Friend, I do thee no wrong.... Is\n it not lawful for me to do what I will with mine own?_\u201d _Rom.\n 9:20, 21_\u2014\u201c_Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why\n didst thou make me thus? Or hath not the potter a right over the\n clay, from the same lump to make one part a vessel unto honor, and\n another unto dishonor?_\u201d\n\n\nSecondly, that \u201cGod has been pleased to exercise this right in dealing\nwith men.\u201d\n\n\n _Ps. 147:20_\u2014\u201c_He hath not dealt so with any nation; And as for\n his ordinances, they have not known them_\u201d. _Rom. 3:1, 2_\u2014\u201c_What\n advantage then hath the Jew? or what is the profit of\n circumcision? Much every way: first of all, that they were\n intrusted with the oracles of God_\u201d; _John 15:16_\u2014\u201c_Ye did not\n choose me, but I chose you, and appointed you, that ye should go\n and bear fruit_\u201d; _Acts 9:15_\u2014\u201c_he is a chosen vessel unto me, to\n bear my name before the Gentiles and kings, and the children of\n Israel._\u201d\n\n\nThirdly, that \u201cGod has some other reason than that of saving as many as\npossible for the way in which he distributes his grace.\u201d\n\n\n n\n\n _Mat. 11:21_\u2014Tyre and Sidon \u201c_would have repented,_\u201d if they had\n had the grace bestowed upon Chorazin and Bethsaida; _Rom.\n 9:22\u201025_\u2014\u201c_What if God, willing to show his wrath, and to make his\n power known, endured with much longsuffering vessels of wrath\n fitted unto destruction: and that he might make known the riches\n of his glory upon vessels of mercy, which he afore prepared unto\n glory?_\u201d\n\n\nThe Scripture passages which directly or indirectly support the doctrine\nof a particular election of individual men to salvation may be arranged as\nfollows:\n\n(_a_) Direct statements of God\u2019s purpose to save certain individuals:\n\n\n Jesus speaks of God\u2019s elect, as for example in _Mark 13:27_\u2014\u201c_then\n shall he send forth the angels, and shall gather together his\n elect_\u201d; _Luke 18:7_\u2014\u201c_shall not God avenge his elect, that cry to\n him day and night?_\u201d\n\n _Acts 13:48_\u2014\u201c_as many as were ordained_ (\u03c4\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b3\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9) _to eternal\n life believed_\u201d\u2014here Whedon translates: \u201cdisposed unto eternal\n life,\u201d referring to \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b7\u03c1\u03c4\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b1 in _verse 23_, where \u201c_fitted_\u201d =\n \u201cfitted themselves.\u201d The only instance, however, where \u03c4\u03ac\u03c3\u03c3\u03c9 is\n used in a middle sense is in _1 Cor. 16:15_\u2014\u201c_set themselves_\u201d;\n but there the object, \u1f11\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c2, is expressed. Here we must compare\n _Rom. 13:1_\u2014\u201c_the powers that be are ordained_ (\u03c4\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b3\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9) _of\n God_\u201d; see also _Acts 10:42_\u2014\u201c_this is he who is ordained_\n (\u1f61\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2) _of God to be the Judge of the living and the dead._\u201d\n\n _Rom. 9:11\u201016_\u2014\u201c_for the children being not yet born, neither\n having done anything good or bad, that the purpose of God\n according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that\n calleth.... I will have mercy upon whom I have mercy.... So then\n it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God\n that hath mercy_\u201d; _Eph. 1:4, 5, 9, 11_\u2014\u201c_chose us in him before\n the foundation of the world,_ [not _because_ we were, or were to\n be, holy, but] _that we should be holy and without blemish before\n him in love: having foreordained us unto adoption as sons through\n Jesus Christ unto himself, according to the good pleasure of his\n will ... the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure\n ... in whom also we were made a heritage, having been foreordained\n according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the\n counsel of his will_\u201d; _Col. 3:12_\u2014\u201c_God\u2019s elect_\u201d; _2 Thess.\n 2:13_\u2014\u201c_God chose you from the beginning unto salvation in\n sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth._\u201d\n\n\n(_b_) In connection with the declaration of God\u2019s foreknowledge of these\npersons, or choice to make them objects of his special attention and care;\n\n\n _Rom. 8:27\u201030_\u2014\u201c_called according to his purpose. For whom he\n foreknew, he also foreordained to be conformed to the image of his\n Son_\u201d; _1 Pet. 1:1, 2_\u2014\u201c_elect ... according to the foreknowledge\n of God the Father, in sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience\n and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ._\u201d On the passage in\n Romans, Shedd, in his Commentary, remarks that \u201c_foreknew,_\u201d in\n the Hebraistic use, \u201cis more than simple prescience, and something\n more also than simply \u2018to fix the eye upon,\u2019 or to \u2018select.\u2019 It is\n this latter, but with the additional notion of a benignant and\n kindly feeling toward the object.\u201d In _Rom. 8:27\u201030_, Paul is\n emphasizing the divine sovereignty. The Christian life is\n considered from the side of the divine care and ordering, and not\n from the side of human choice and volition. Alexander, Theories of\n the Will, 87, 88\u2014\u201cIf Paul is here advocating indeterminism, it is\n strange that in _chapter 9_ he should be at pains to answer\n objections to determinism. The apostle\u2019s protest in _chapter 9_ is\n not against predestination and determination, but against the man\n who regards such a theory as impugning the righteousness of God.\u201d\n\n That the word \u201c_know,_\u201d in Scripture, frequently means not merely\n to \u201capprehend intellectually,\u201d but to \u201cregard with favor,\u201d to\n \u201cmake an object of care,\u201d is evident from _Gen. 18:19_\u2014\u201c_I have\n known him, to the end that he may command his children and his\n household after him, that they may keep the way of Jehovah, to do\n righteousness and justice_\u201d; _Ex. 2:25_\u2014\u201c_And God saw the children\n of Israel, and God took knowledge of them_\u201d; _cf._ _verse\n 24_\u2014\u201c_God heard their groaning, and God remembered his covenant\n with Abraham, with Isaac, and with Jacob_\u201d; _Ps. 1:6_\u2014\u201c_For\n Jehovah knoweth the way of the righteous; But the way of the\n wicked shall perish_\u201d; _101:4,_ marg.\u2014\u201c_I will know no evil\n person_\u201d; _Hosea 13:5_\u2014\u201c_I did know thee in the wilderness, in the\n land of great drought. According to their pasture, so were they\n filled_\u201d; _Nahum 1:7_\u2014\u201c_he knoweth them that take refuge in him_\u201d;\n _Amos 3:2_\u2014\u201c_You only have I known of all the families of the\n earth_\u201d; _Mat. 7:23_\u2014\u201c_then will I profess unto them, I never knew\n you_\u201d; _Rom. 7:15_\u2014\u201c_For that which I do I know not_\u201d; _1 Cor.\n 8:3_\u2014\u201c_if any man loveth God, the same is known by him_\u201d; _Gal.\n 4:9_\u2014\u201c_now that ye have come to know God, or rather, to be known\n by God_\u201d; _1 Thess. 5:12, 13_\u2014\u201c_we beseech you, brethren, to know\n them that labor among you, and are over you in the Lord, and\n admonish you; and to esteem them exceeding highly in love for\n their work\u2019s sake._\u201d So the word \u201cforeknow\u201d: _Rom. 11:2_\u2014\u201c_God did\n not cast off his people whom he foreknew_\u201d; _1 Pet. 1:20_\u2014Christ,\n \u201c_who was foreknown indeed before the foundation of the world._\u201d\n\n Broadus on _Mat. 7:23_\u2014\u201c_I never knew you_\u201d\u2014says; \u201cNot in all the\n passages quoted above, nor elsewhere, is there occasion for the\n oft\u2010repeated arbitrary notion, derived from the Fathers, that\n \u2018know\u2019 conveys the additional idea of approve or regard. It\n denotes acquaintance, with all its pleasures and advantages;\n \u2018_knew,_\u2019 _i. e._, as mine, as my people.\u201d\n\n But this last admission seems to grant what Broadus had before\n denied. See Thayer, Lex. N. T., on \u03b3\u03b9\u03bd\u03ce\u03c3\u03ba\u03c9: \u201cWith acc. of person,\n to recognize as worthy of intimacy and love; so those whom God has\n judged worthy of the blessings of the gospel are said \u1f51\u03c0\u1f78 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03b8\u03b5\u03bf\u1fe6\n \u03b3\u03b9\u03bd\u03ce\u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 (_1 Cor. 8:3; Gal. 4:9_); negatively in the sentence\n of Christ: \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u1f10\u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03b5 \u1f14\u03b3\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u1f51\u03bc\u1fb6\u03c2, \u2018_I never knew you,_\u2019 never had\n any acquaintance with you.\u201d On \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03b3\u03b9\u03bd\u03ce\u03c3\u03ba\u03c9, _Rom. 8:29_\u2014\u03bf\u1f52\u03c2\n \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03ad\u03b3\u03bd\u03c9, \u201c_whom he foreknew,_\u201d see Denney, in Expositor\u2019s Greek\n Testament, _in loco_: \u201cThose whom he foreknew\u2014in what sense? as\n persons who would answer his love with love? This is at least\n irrelevant, and alien to Paul\u2019s general method of thought. That\n salvation begins with God, and begins in eternity, are fundamental\n ideas with him, which he here applies to Christians, without\n raising any of the problems involved in the relation of the human\n will to the divine. Yet we may be sure that \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03ad\u03b3\u03bd\u03c9 has the\n pregnant sense that \u03b3\u03b9\u03bd\u03ce\u03c3\u03ba\u03c9 often has in Scripture, _e. g._, in\n _Ps. 1:6; Amos 3:2;_ hence we may render: \u2018those of whom God took\n knowledge from eternity\u2019 (_Eph. 1:4_).\u201d\n\n In _Rom. 8:28\u201030_, quoted above, \u201c_foreknew_\u201d = elected\u2014that is,\n made certain individuals, in the future, the objects of his love\n and care; \u201c_foreordained_\u201d describes God\u2019s designation of these\n same individuals to receive the special gift of salvation. In\n other words, \u201cforeknowledge\u201d is of persons: \u201cforeordination\u201d is of\n blessings to be bestowed upon them. Hooker, Eccl. Pol., appendix\n to book v. (vol. 2:751)\u2014\u201c \u2018_whom he did foreknow_\u2019 (know before as\n his own, with determination to be forever merciful to them) \u2018_he\n also predestinated to be conformed to the image of his\n Son_\u2019\u2014predestinated, not to opportunity of conformation, but to\n conformation itself.\u201d So, for substance, Calvin, R\u00fcckert, DeWette,\n Stuart, Jowett, Vaughan. On _1 Pet. 1:1, 2,_ see Com. of Plumptre.\n The Arminian interpretation of \u201c_whom he foreknew_\u201d (_Rom. 8:29_)\n would require the phrase \u201cas conformed to the image of his Son\u201d to\n be conjoined with it. Paul, however, makes conformity to Christ to\n be the result, not the foreseen condition, of God\u2019s\n foreordination; see Commentaries of Hodge and Lange.\n\n\n(_c_) With assertions that this choice is matter of grace, or unmerited\nfavor, bestowed in eternity past:\n\n\n _Eph. 1:5\u20108_\u2014\u201c_foreordained ... according to the good pleasure of\n his will, to the praise of the glory of his grace, which he freely\n bestowed on us in the Beloved ... according to the riches of his\n grace_\u201d; _2:8_\u2014\u201c_by grace have ye been saved through faith; and\n that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God_\u201d\u2014here \u201c_and that_\u201d\n (neuter \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf, _verse 8_) refers, not to \u201cfaith\u201d but to\n \u201csalvation.\u201d But faith is elsewhere represented as having its\n source in God,\u2014see page 782, (_k_). _2 Tim. 1:9_\u2014\u201c_his own purpose\n and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before times\n eternal._\u201d Election is not because of our merit. McLaren: \u201cGod\u2019s\n own mercy, spontaneous, undeserved, condescending, moved him. God\n is his own motive. His love is not drawn out by our loveableness,\n but wells up, like an artesian spring, from the depths of his\n nature.\u201d\n\n\n(_d_) That the Father has given certain persons to the Son, to be his\npeculiar possession:\n\n\n _John 6:37_\u2014\u201c_All that which the Father giveth me shall come unto\n me_\u201d; _17:2_\u2014\u201c_that whatsoever thou hast given him, to them he\n should give eternal life_\u201d; _6_\u2014\u201c_I manifested thy name unto the\n men whom thou gavest me out of the world: thine they were, and\n thou gavest them to me_\u201d; _9_\u2014\u201c_I pray not for the world, but for\n those whom thou hast given me_\u201d; _Eph. 1:14_\u2014\u201c_unto the redemption\n of God\u2019s own possession_\u201d; _1 Pet. 2:9_\u2014\u201c_a people for God\u2019s own\n possession._\u201d\n\n\n(_e_) That the fact of believers being united thus to Christ is due wholly\nto God:\n\n\n _John 6:44_\u2014\u201c_No man can come to me, except the Father that sent\n me draw him_\u201d; _10:26_\u2014\u201c_ye believe not, because ye are not of my\n sheep_\u201d; _1 Cor. 1:30_\u2014\u201c_of him_ [God] _are ye in Christ Jesus_\u201d =\n your being, as Christians, in union with Christ, is due wholly to\n God.\n\n\n(_f_) That those who are written in the Lamb\u2019s book of life, and they\nonly, shall be saved:\n\n\n _Phil. 4:3_\u2014\u201c_the rest of my fellow\u2010workers, whose names are in\n the book of life_\u201d; _Rev. 20:15_\u2014\u201c_And if any was not found\n written in the book of life, he was cast into the lake of fire_\u201d;\n _21:27_\u2014\u201c_there shall in no wise enter into it anything unclean\n ... but only they that are written in the Lamb\u2019s book of life_\u201d =\n God\u2019s decrees of electing grace in Christ.\n\n\n(_g_) That these are allotted, as disciples, to certain of God\u2019s servants:\n\n\n _Acts 17:4_\u2014(literally)\u2014\u201c_some of them were persuaded, and were\n allotted_ [by God] _to Paul and Silas_\u201d\u2014as disciples (so Meyer and\n Grimm); _18:9, 10_\u2014\u201c_Be not afraid, but speak and hold not thy\n peace: for I am with thee, and no man shall set on thee to harm\n thee: for I have much people in this city._\u201d\n\n\n(_h_) Are made the recipients of a special call of God:\n\n\n _Rom. 8:28, 30_\u2014\u201c_called according to his purpose ... whom he\n foreordained, them he also called_\u201d; _9:23, 24_\u2014\u201c_vessels of\n mercy, which he afore prepared unto glory, even us, whom he also\n called, not from the Jews only, but also from the Gentiles_\u201d;\n _11:29_\u2014\u201c_for the gifts and the calling of God are not repented\n of_\u201d; _1 Cor. 1:24\u201029_\u2014\u201c_unto them that are called ... Christ the\n power of God, and the wisdom of God.... For behold your calling,\n brethren, ... the things that are despised, did God choose, yea\n and the things that are not, that he might bring to naught the\n things that are: that no flesh should glory before God_\u201d; _Gal.\n 1:15, 16_\u2014\u201c_when it was the good pleasure of God, who separated\n me, even from my mother\u2019s womb, and called me through his grace,\n to reveal his Son in me_\u201d; _cf._ _James 2:23_\u2014\u201c_and he_ [Abraham]\n _was called_ [to be] _the friend of God_.\u201d\n\n\n(_i_) Are born into God\u2019s kingdom, not by virtue of man\u2019s will, but of\nGod\u2019s will:\n\n\n _John 1:13_\u2014\u201c_born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh,\n nor of the will of man, but of God_\u201d; _James 1:18_\u2014\u201c_Of his own\n will he brought us forth by the word of truth_\u201d; _1 John\n 4:10_\u2014\u201c_Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved\n us._\u201d S. S. Times, Oct. 14, 1899\u2014\u201cThe law of love is the\n expression of God\u2019s loving nature, and it is only by our\n participation of the divine nature that we are enabled to render\n it obedience. \u2018Loving God,\u2019 says Bushnell, \u2018is but letting God\n love us.\u2019 So John\u2019s great saying may be rendered in the present\n tense: \u2018not that we love God, but that he loves us.\u2019 Or, as Madame\n Guyon sings: \u2018I love my God, but with no love of mine, For I have\n none to give; I love thee, Lord, but all the love is thine, For by\n thy life I live\u2019.\u201d\n\n\n(_j_) Receiving repentance, as the gift of God:\n\n\n _Acts 5:31_\u2014\u201c_Him did God exalt with his right hand to be a Prince\n and a Savior, to give repentance to Israel, and remission of\n sins_\u201d; _11:18_\u2014\u201c_Then to the Gentiles also hath God granted\n repentance unto life_\u201d; _2 Tim. 2:25_\u2014\u201c_correcting them that\n oppose themselves; if peradventure God may give them repentance\n unto the knowledge of the truth._\u201d Of course it is true that God\n might give repentance simply by inducing man to repent by the\n agency of his word, his providence and his Spirit. But more than\n this seems to be meant when the Psalmist prays: \u201c_Create in me a\n clean heart, O God; And renew a right spirit within me_\u201d (_Ps.\n 51:10_).\n\n\n(_k_) Faith, as the gift of God:\n\n\n _John 6:65_\u2014\u201c_no man can come unto me, except it be given unto him\n of the Father_\u201d; _Acts 15:8, 9_\u2014\u201c_God ... giving them the Holy\n Spirit ... cleansing their hearts by faith_\u201d; _Rom.\n 12:3_\u2014\u201c_according as God hath dealt to each man a measure of\n faith_\u201d; _1 Cor. 12:9_\u2014\u201c_to another faith, in the same Spirit_\u201d;\n _Gal. 5:22_\u2014\u201c_the fruit of the Spirit is ... faith_\u201d (A. V.);\n _Phil. 2:13_\u2014In all faith, \u201c_it is God who worketh in you both to\n will and to work, for his good pleasure_\u201d; _Eph. 6:23_\u2014\u201c_Peace be\n to the brethren, and love with faith, from God the Father and the\n Lord Jesus Christ_\u201d; _John 3:8_\u2014\u201c_The Spirit breatheth where he\n wills, and thou_ [as a consequence] _hearest his voice_\u201d (so\n Bengel); see A. J. Gordon, Ministry of the Spirit, 166; _1 Cor.\n 12:3_\u2014\u201c_No man can say, Jesus is Lord, but in the Holy\n Spirit_\u201d\u2014but calling Jesus \u201c_Lord_\u201d is an essential part of\n faith,\u2014faith therefore is the work of the Holy Spirit; _Tit.\n 1:1_\u2014\u201c_the faith of God\u2019s elect_\u201d\u2014election is not in consequence\n of faith, but faith is in consequence of election (Ellicott). If\n they get their faith of themselves, then salvation is not due to\n grace. If God gave the faith, then it was in his purpose, and this\n is election.\n\n\n(_l_) Holiness and good works, as the gift of God.\n\n\n _Eph. 1:4_\u2014\u201c_chose us in him before the foundation of the world,\n that we should be holy_\u201d; _2:9, 10_\u2014\u201c_not of works, that no man\n should glory. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus\n for good works, which God afore prepared that we should walk in\n them_\u201d; _1 Pet. 1:2_\u2014elect \u201c_unto obedience._\u201d On Scripture\n testimony, see Hovey, Manual of Theol. and Ethics, 258\u2010261; also\n art. on Predestination, by Warfield, in Hastings\u2019 Dictionary of\n the Bible.\n\n\nThese passages furnish an abundant and conclusive refutation, on the one\nhand, of the Lutheran view that election is simply God\u2019s determination\nfrom eternity to provide an objective salvation for universal humanity;\nand, on the other hand, of the Arminian view that election is God\u2019s\ndetermination from eternity to save certain individuals upon the ground of\ntheir foreseen faith.\n\n\n Roughly stated, we may say that Schleiermacher elects all men\n subjectively; Lutherans all men objectively; Arminians all\n believers; Augustinians all foreknown as God\u2019s own. Schleiermacher\n held that decree logically precedes foreknowledge, and that\n election is individual, not national. But he made election to\n include all men, the only difference between them being that of\n earlier or of later conversion. Thus in his system Calvinism and\n Restorationism go hand in hand. Murray, in Hastings\u2019 Bible\n Dictionary, seems to take this view.\n\n Lutheranism is the assertion that original grace preceded original\n sin, and that the _Quia Voluit_ of Tertullian and of Calvin was\n based on wisdom, in Christ. The Lutheran holds that the believer\n is simply the non\u2010resistant subject of common grace; while the\n Arminian holds that the believer is the co\u00f6perant subject of\n common grace. Lutheranism enters more fully than Calvinism into\n the nature of faith. It thinks more of the human agency, while\n Calvinism thinks more of the divine purpose. It thinks more of the\n church, while Calvinism thinks more of Scripture. The Arminian\n conception is that God has appointed men to salvation, just as he\n has appointed them to condemnation, in view of their dispositions\n and acts. As Justification is in view of _present_ faith, so the\n Arminian regards Election as taking place in view of _future_\n faith. Arminianism must reject the doctrine of regeneration as\n well as that of election, and must in both cases make the act of\n man precede the act of God.\n\n All varieties of view may be found upon this subject among\n theologians. John Milton, in his Christian Doctrine, holds that\n \u201cthere is no particular predestination or election, but only\n general.... There can be no reprobation of individuals from all\n eternity.\u201d Archbishop Sumner: \u201cElection is predestination of\n communities and nations to external knowledge and to the\n privileges of the gospel.\u201d Archbishop Whately: \u201cElection is the\n choice of individual men to membership in the external church and\n the means of grace.\u201d Gore, in Lux Mundi, 320\u2014\u201cThe elect represent\n not the special purpose of God for a few, but the universal\n purpose which under the circumstances can only be realized through\n a few.\u201d R. V. Foster, a Cumberland Presbyterian, opposed to\n absolute predestination, says in his Systematic Theology that the\n divine decree \u201cis unconditional in its origin and conditional in\n its application.\u201d\n\n\nB. From Reason.\n\n(_a_) What God does, he has eternally purposed to do. Since he bestows\nspecial regenerating grace on some, he must have eternally purposed to\nbestow it,\u2014in other words, must have chosen them to eternal life. Thus the\ndoctrine of election is only a special application of the doctrine of\ndecrees.\n\n\n The New Haven views are essentially Arminian. See Fitch, on\n Predestination and Election, in Christian Spectator, 3:622\u2014\u201cGod\u2019s\n foreknowledge of what would be the results of his present works of\n grace _preceded_ in the order of nature the purpose to pursue\n those works, and presented the _grounds_ of that purpose. Whom he\n foreknew\u2014as the people who would be guided to his kingdom by his\n present works of grace, in which result lay the whole objective\n motive for undertaking those works\u2014he did also, by resolving on\n those works, predestinate.\u201d Here God is very erroneously said to\n _foreknow_ what is as yet included in a merely _possible_ plan. As\n we have seen in our discussion of Decrees, there can be no\n foreknowledge, unless there is something fixed, in the future, to\n be foreknown; and this fixity can be due only to God\u2019s\n predetermination. So, in the present case, election must precede\n prescience.\n\n The New Haven views are also given in N. W. Taylor, Revealed\n Theology, 373\u2010444; for criticism upon them, see Tyler, Letters on\n New Haven Theology, 172\u2010180. If God desired the salvation of Judas\n as much as of Peter, how was Peter elected in distinction from\n Judas? To the question, \u201c_Who made thee to differ?_\u201d the answer\n must be, \u201cNot God, but my own will.\u201d See Finney, in Bib. Sac.,\n 1877:711\u2014\u201cGod must have foreknown whom he _could_ wisely save,\n prior in the order of nature to his determining to save them. But\n his knowing who _would_ be saved, must have been, in the order of\n nature, subsequent to his election or determination to save them,\n and dependent upon that determination.\u201d Foster, Christian Life and\n Theology, 70\u2014\u201cThe doctrine of election is the consistent\n formulation, _sub specie eternitatis_, of prevenient grace....\n 86\u2014With the doctrine of prevenient grace, the evangelical doctrine\n stands or falls.\u201d\n\n\n(_b_) This purpose cannot be conditioned upon any merit or faith of those\nwho are chosen, since there is no such merit,\u2014faith itself being God\u2019s\ngift and foreordained by him. Since man\u2019s faith is foreseen only as the\nresult of God\u2019s work of grace, election proceeds rather upon foreseen\nunbelief. Faith, as the effect of election, cannot at the same time be the\ncause of election.\n\n\n There is an analogy between prayer and its answer, on the one\n hand, and faith and salvation on the other. God has decreed answer\n in connection with prayer, and salvation in connection with faith.\n But he does not change his mind when men pray, or when they\n believe. As he fulfils his purpose by inspiring true prayer, so he\n fulfils his purpose by giving faith. Augustine: \u201cHe chooses us,\n not because we believe, but that we may believe: lest we should\n say that we first chose him.\u201d (_John 15:16_\u2014\u201c_Ye did not choose\n me, but I chose you_\u201d; _Rom. 9:21_\u2014\u201c_from the same lump_\u201d;\n _16_\u2014\u201c_not of him that willeth_\u201d.)\n\n Here see the valuable discussion of Wardlaw, Systematic Theol.,\n 2:485\u2010549\u2014\u201cElection and salvation on the ground of works foreseen\n are not different in principle from election and salvation on the\n ground of works performed.\u201d _Cf._ _Prov. 21:1_\u2014\u201c_The king\u2019s heart\n is in the hand of Jehovah as the watercourses; He turneth it\n whithersoever he will_\u201d\u2014as easily as the rivulets of the eastern\n fields are turned by the slightest motion of the hand or the foot\n of the husbandman; _Ps. 110:3_\u2014\u201c_Thy people offer themselves\n willingly In the day of thy power._\u201d\n\n\n(_c_) The depravity of the human will is such that, without this decree to\nbestow special divine influences upon some, all, without exception, would\nhave rejected Christ\u2019s salvation after it was offered to them; and so all,\nwithout exception, must have perished. Election, therefore, may be viewed\nas a necessary consequence of God\u2019s decree to provide an objective\nredemption, if that redemption is to have any subjective result in human\nsalvation.\n\n\n Before the prodigal son seeks the father, the father must first\n seek him,\u2014a truth brought out in the preceding parables of the\n lost money and the lost sheep (_Luke 15_). Without election, all\n are lost. Newman Smyth, Orthodox Theology of To\u2010day, 56\u2014\u201cThe worst\n doctrine of election, to\u2010day, is taught by our natural science.\n The scientific doctrine of natural selection is the doctrine of\n election, robbed of all hope, and without a single touch of human\n pity in it.\u201d\n\n Hodge, Syst. Theol., 2:335\u2014\u201cSuppose the deistic view be true: God\n created men and left them; surely no man could complain of the\n results. But now suppose God, foreseeing these very results of\n creation, should create. Would it make any difference, if God\u2019s\n purpose, as to the futurition of such a world, should precede it?\n Augustine supposes that God did purpose such a world as the deist\n supposes, with two exceptions: (1) he interposes to restrain evil;\n (2) he intervenes, by providence, by Christ, and by the Holy\n Spirit, to save some from destruction.\u201d Election is simply God\u2019s\n determination that the sufferings of Christ shall not be in vain;\n that all men shall not be lost; that some shall be led to accept\n Christ; that to this end special influences of his Spirit shall be\n given.\n\n At first sight it might appear that God\u2019s appointing men to\n salvation was simply permissive, as was his appointment to\n condemnation (_1 Pet. 2:8_), and that this appointment was merely\n indirect by creating them with foresight of their faith or their\n disobedience. But the decree of salvation is not simply\n permissive,\u2014it is efficient also. It is a decree to use special\n means for the salvation of some. A. A. Hodge, Popular Lectures,\n 143\u2014\u201cThe dead man cannot spontaneously originate his own\n quickening, nor the creature his own creating, nor the infant his\n own begetting. Whatever man may do after regeneration, the first\n quickening of the dead must originate with God.\u201d\n\n Hovey, Manual of Theology, 287\u2014\u201cCalvinism, reduced to its lowest\n terms, is election of believers, not on account of any foreseen\n conduct of theirs, either before or in the act of conversion,\n which would be spiritually better than that of others influenced\n by the same grace, but on account of their foreseen greater\n usefulness in manifesting the glory of God to moral beings and of\n their foreseen non\u2010commission of the sin against the Holy Spirit.\u201d\n But even here we must attribute the greater usefulness and the\n abstention from fatal sin, not to man\u2019s unaided powers but to the\n divine decree: see _Eph. 2:10_\u2014\u201c_For we are his workmanship,\n created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God afore prepared\n that we should walk in them._\u201d\n\n\n(_d_) The doctrine of election becomes more acceptable to reason when we\nremember: first, that God\u2019s decree is eternal, and in a certain sense is\ncontemporaneous with man\u2019s belief in Christ; secondly, that God\u2019s decree\nto create involves the decree of all that in the exercise of man\u2019s freedom\nwill follow; thirdly, that God\u2019s decree is the decree of him who is all in\nall, so that our willing and doing is at the same time the working of him\nwho decrees our willing and doing. The whole question turns upon the\ninitiative in human salvation: if this belongs to God, then in spite of\ndifficulties we must accept the doctrine of election.\n\n\n The timeless existence of God may be the source of many of our\n difficulties with regard to election, and with a proper view of\n God\u2019s eternity these difficulties might be removed. Mason, Faith\n of the Gospel, 349\u2010351\u2014\u201cEternity is commonly thought of as if it\n were a state or series anterior to time and to be resumed again\n when time comes to an end. This, however, only reduces eternity to\n time again, and puts the life of God in the same line with our\n own, only coming from further back.... At present we do not see\n how time and eternity meet.\u201d\n\n Royce, World and Individual, 2:374\u2014\u201cGod does not temporally\n foreknow anything, except so far as he is expressed in us finite\n beings. The knowledge that exists in time is the knowledge that\n finite beings possess, in so far as they are finite. And no such\n foreknowledge can predict the special features of individual deeds\n precisely so far as they are unique. Foreknowledge in time is\n possible only of the general, and of the causally predetermined,\n and not of the unique and free. Hence neither God nor man can\n foreknow perfectly, at any temporal moment, what a free will agent\n is yet to do. On the other hand, the Absolute possesses a perfect\n knowledge at one glance of the whole of the temporal order, past,\n present and future. This knowledge is ill called foreknowledge. It\n is eternal knowledge. And as there is an eternal knowledge of all\n individuality and of all freedom, free acts are known as\n occurring, like the chords in the musical succession, precisely\n when and how they actually occur.\u201d While we see much truth in the\n preceding statement, we find in it no bar to our faith that God\n can translate his eternal knowledge into finite knowledge and can\n thus put it for special purposes in possession of his creatures.\n\n E. H. Johnson, Theology, 2d ed., 250\u2014\u201cForeknowing what his\n creatures would do, God decreed their destiny when he decreed\n their creation; and this would still be the case, although every\n man had the partial control over his destiny that Arminians aver,\n or even the complete control that Pelagians claim. The decree is\n as absolute as if there were no freedom, but it leaves them as\n free as if there were no decree.\u201d A. H. Strong, Christ in\n Creation, 40, 42\u2014\u201cAs the Logos or divine Reason, Christ dwells in\n humanity everywhere and constitutes the principle of its being.\n Humanity shares with Christ in the image of God. That image is\n never wholly lost. It is completely restored in sinners when the\n Spirit of Christ secures control of their wills and leads them to\n merge their life in his.... If Christ be the principle and life of\n all things, then divine sovereignty and human freedom, if they are\n not absolutely reconciled, at least lose their ancient antagonism,\n and we can rationally \u2018_work out our own salvation_,\u2019 for the very\n reason that \u2018_it is God that worketh in us, both to will and to\n work, for his good pleasure_\u2019 (_Phil. 2:12, 13_).\u201d\n\n\n2. Objections to the Doctrine of Election.\n\n\n(_a_) It is unjust to those who are not included in this purpose of\nsalvation.\u2014Answer: Election deals, not simply with creatures, but with\nsinful, guilty, and condemned creatures. That any should be saved, is\nmatter of pure grace, and those who are not included in this purpose of\nsalvation suffer only the due reward of their deeds. There is, therefore,\nno injustice in God\u2019s election. We may better praise God that he saves\nany, than charge him with injustice because he saves so few.\n\n\n God can say to all men, saved or unsaved, \u201c_Friend, I do thee no\n wrong.... Is it not lawful for me to do what I will with mine\n own?_\u201d (_Mat. 20:13, 15_). The question is not whether a father\n will treat his children alike, but whether a sovereign must treat\n condemned rebels alike. It is not true that, because the Governor\n pardons one convict from the penitentiary, he must therefore\n pardon all. When he pardons one, no injury is done to those who\n are left. But, in God\u2019s government, there is still less reason for\n objection; for God offers pardon to all. Nothing prevents men from\n being pardoned but their unwillingness to accept his pardon.\n Election is simply God\u2019s determination to make certain persons\n willing to accept it. Because justice cannot save all, shall it\n therefore save none?\n\n Augustine, De Predest. Sanct., 8\u2014\u201cWhy does not God teach all?\n Because it is in mercy that he teaches all whom he does teach,\n while it is in judgment that he does not teach those whom he does\n not teach.\u201d In his Manual of Theology and Ethics, 260, Hovey\n remarks that _Rom. 9:20_\u2014\u201c_who art thou that repliest against\n God?_\u201d\u2014teaches, not that might makes right, but that God is\n morally entitled to glorify either his righteousness or his mercy\n in disposing of a guilty race. It is not that he chooses to save\n only a few ship\u2010wrecked and drowning creatures, but that he\n chooses to save only a part of a great company who are bent on\n committing suicide. _Prov. 8:36_\u2014\u201c_he that sinneth against me\n wrongeth his own soul: All they that hate me love death._\u201d It is\n best for the universe at large that some should be permitted to\n have their own way and show how dreadful a thing is opposition to\n God. See Shedd, Dogm. Theol., 1:455.\n\n\n(_b_) It represents God as partial in his dealings and a respecter of\npersons.\u2014Answer: Since there is nothing in men that determines God\u2019s\nchoice of one rather than another, the objection is invalid. It would\nequally apply to God\u2019s selection of certain nations, as Israel, and\ncertain individuals, as Cyrus, to be recipients of special temporal gifts.\nIf God is not to be regarded as partial in not providing a salvation for\nfallen angels, he cannot be regarded as partial in not providing\nregenerating influences of his Spirit for the whole race of fallen men.\n\n\n _Ps. 44:3_\u2014\u201c_For they gat not the land in possession by their own\n sword, Neither did their own arm save them; But thy right hand,\n and thine arm, and the light of thy countenance, Because thou wast\n favorable unto them_\u201d; _Is. 45:1, 4, 5_\u2014\u201c_Thus saith Jehovah to\n his anointed, to Cyrus, whose right hand I have holden, to subdue\n nations before him.... For Jacob my servant\u2019s sake, and Israel my\n chosen, I have called thee by thy name: I have surnamed thee,\n though thou hast not known me_\u201d; _Luke 4:25\u201027_\u2014\u201c_There were many\n widows in Israel ... and unto none of them was Elijah sent, but\n only to Zarephath, in the land of Sidon, unto a woman that was a\n widow. And there were many lepers in Israel ... and none of them\n was cleansed, but only Naaman the Syrian_\u201d; _1 Cor. 4:7_\u2014\u201c_For who\n maketh thee to differ? and what hast thou that thou didst not\n receive? but if thou didst receive it, why dost thou glory, as if\n thou hadst not received it?_\u201d _2 Pet. 2:4_\u2014\u201c_God spared not angels\n when they sinned, but cast them down to hell_\u201d; _Heb. 2:16_\u2014\u201c_For\n verily not to angels doth he give help, but he giveth help to the\n seed of Abraham._\u201d\n\n Is God partial, in choosing Israel, Cyrus, Naaman? Is God partial,\n in bestowing upon some of his servants special ministerial gifts?\n Is God partial, in not providing a salvation for fallen angels? In\n God\u2019s providence, one man is born in a Christian land, the son of\n a noble family, is endowed with beauty of person, splendid\n talents, exalted opportunities, immense wealth. Another is born at\n the Five Points, or among the Hottentots, amid the degradation and\n depravity of actual, or practical, heathenism. We feel that it is\n irreverent to complain of God\u2019s dealings in providence. What right\n have sinners to complain of God\u2019s dealings in the distribution of\n his grace? Hovey: \u201cWe have no reason to think that God treats all\n moral beings alike. We should be glad to hear that other races are\n treated better than we.\u201d\n\n Divine election is only the ethical side and interpretation of\n natural selection. In the latter God chooses certain forms of the\n vegetable and animal kingdom without merit of theirs. They are\n preserved while others die. In the matter of individual health,\n talent, property, one is taken and the other left. If we call all\n this the result of system, the reply is that God chose the system,\n knowing precisely what would come of it. Bruce, Apologetics,\n 201\u2014\u201cElection to distinction in philosophy or art is not\n incomprehensible, for these are not matters of vital concern; but\n election to holiness on the part of some, and to unholiness on the\n part of others, would be inconsistent with God\u2019s own holiness.\u201d\n But there is no such election to unholiness except on the part of\n man himself. God\u2019s election secures only the good. See (_c_)\n below.\n\n J. J. Murphy, Natural Selection and Spiritual Freedom, 73\u2014\u201cThe\n world is ordered on a basis of inequality; in the organic world,\n as Darwin has shown, it is of inequality\u2014of favored races\u2014that all\n progress comes; history shows the same to be true of the human and\n spiritual world. All human progress is due to elect human\n individuals, elect not only to be a blessing to themselves, but\n still more to be a blessing to multitudes of others. Any\n superiority, whether in the natural or in the mental and spiritual\n world, becomes a vantage\u2010ground for gaining a greater\n superiority.... It is the method of the divine government, acting\n in the provinces both of nature and of grace, that all benefit\n should come to the many through the elect few.\u201d\n\n\n(_c_) It represents God as arbitrary.\u2014Answer: It represents God, not as\narbitrary, but as exercising the free choice of a wise and sovereign will,\nin ways and for reasons which are inscrutable to us. To deny the\npossibility of such a choice is to deny God\u2019s personality. To deny that\nGod has reasons for his choice is to deny his wisdom. The doctrine of\nelection finds these reasons, not in men, but in God.\n\n\n When a regiment is decimated for insubordination, the fact that\n every tenth man is chosen for death is for reasons; but the\n reasons are not in the men. In one case, the reason for God\u2019s\n choice seems revealed: _1 Tim. 1:16_\u2014\u201c_howbeit for this cause I\n obtained mercy, that in me as chief might Jesus Christ show forth\n all his longsuffering, for an ensample of them that should\n thereafter believe on him unto eternal life_\u201d\u2014here Paul indicates\n that the reason why God chose him was that he was so great a\n sinner: _verse 15_\u2014\u201c_Christ Jesus came into the world to save\n sinners; of whom I am chief._\u201d Hovey remarks that \u201cthe uses to\n which God can put men, as vessels of grace, may determine his\n selection of them.\u201d But since the naturally weak are saved, as\n well as the naturally strong, we cannot draw any general\n conclusion, or discern any general rule, in God\u2019s dealings, unless\n it be this, that in election God seeks to illustrate the greatness\n and the variety of his grace,\u2014the reasons lying, therefore, not in\n men, but in God. We must remember that God\u2019s _sovereignty_ is the\n sovereignty of _God_\u2014the infinitely wise, holy and loving God, in\n whose hands the destinies of men can be left more safely than in\n the hands of the wisest, most just, and most kind of his\n creatures.\n\n We must believe in the grace of sovereignty as well as in the\n sovereignty of grace. Election and reprobation are not matters of\n arbitrary will. God saves all whom he can wisely save. He will\n show benevolence in the salvation of mankind just so far as he can\n without prejudice to holiness. No man can be saved without God,\n but it is also true that there is no man whom God is not willing\n to save. H. B. Smith, System, 511\u2014\u201cIt may be that many of the\n finally impenitent resist more light than many of the saved.\u201d\n Harris, Moral Evolution, 401 (for substance)\u2014\u201cSovereignty is not\n lost in Fatherhood, but is recovered as the divine law of\n righteous love. Doubtless thou art our Father, though Augustine be\n ignorant of us, and Calvin acknowledge us not.\u201d Hooker, Eccl.\n Polity, 1:2\u2014\u201cThey err who think that of God\u2019s will there is no\n reason except his will.\u201d T. Erskine, The Brazen Serpent,\n 259\u2014Sovereignty is \u201cjust a name for what is _unrevealed_ of God.\u201d\n\n We do not know _all_ of God\u2019s reasons for saving particular men,\n but we do know _some_ of the reasons, for he has revealed them to\n us. These reasons are not men\u2019s merits or works. We have mentioned\n the first of these reasons: (1) Men\u2019s greater sin and need; _1\n Tim. 1:16_\u2014\u201c_that in me as chief might Jesus Christ show forth all\n his longsuffering._\u201d We may add to this: (2) The fact that men\n have not sinned against the Holy Spirit and made themselves\n unreceptive to Christ\u2019s salvation; _1 Tim. 1:13_\u2014\u201c_I obtained\n mercy, because I did it ignorantly in unbelief_\u201d\u2014the fact that\n Paul had not sinned with full knowledge of what he did was a\n reason why God could choose him. (3) Men\u2019s ability by the help of\n Christ to be witnesses and martyrs for their Lord; _Acts 9:15,\n 16_\u2014\u201c_he is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the\n Gentiles and kings, and the children of Israel: for I will show\n him how many things he must suffer for my name\u2019s sake._\u201d As Paul\u2019s\n mission to the Gentiles may have determined God\u2019s choice, so\n Augustine\u2019s mission to the sensual and abandoned may have had the\n same influence. But if Paul\u2019s sins, as foreseen, constituted one\n reason why God chose to save him, why might not his ability to\n serve the kingdom have constituted another reason? We add\n therefore: (4) Men\u2019s foreseen ability to serve Christ\u2019s kingdom in\n bringing others to the knowledge of the truth; _John 15:16_\u2014\u201c_I\n chose you and appointed you, that ye should go and bear fruit._\u201d\n Notice however that this is choice _to_ service, and not simply\n choice _on account of service_. In all these cases the reasons do\n not lie in the men themselves, for what these men are and what\n they possess is due to God\u2019s providence and grace.\n\n\n(_d_) It tends to immorality, by representing men\u2019s salvation as\nindependent of their own obedience.\u2014Answer: The objection ignores the fact\nthat the salvation of believers is ordained only in connection with their\nregeneration and sanctification, as means; and that the certainty of final\ntriumph is the strongest incentive to strenuous conflict with sin.\n\n\n Plutarch: \u201cGod is the brave man\u2019s hope, and not the coward\u2019s\n excuse.\u201d The purposes of God are an anchor to the storm\u2010tossed\n spirit. But a ship needs engine, as well as anchor. God does not\n elect to save any without repentance and faith. Some hold the\n doctrine of election, but the doctrine of election does not hold\n them. Such should ponder _1 Pet. 1:2_, in which Christians are\n said to be elect, \u201c_in sanctification of the Spirit, unto\n obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ_.\u201d\n\n Augustine: \u201cHe loved her [the church] foul, that he might make her\n fair.\u201d Dr. John Watson (Ian McLaren): \u201cThe greatest reinforcement\n religion could have in our time would be a return to the ancient\n belief in the sovereignty of God.\u201d This is because there is lack\n of a strong conviction of sin, guilt, and helplessness, still\n remaining pride and unwillingness to submit to God, imperfect\n faith in God\u2019s trustworthiness and goodness. We must not exclude\n Arminians from our fellowship\u2014there are too many good Methodists\n for that. But we may maintain that they hold but half the truth,\n and that absence of the doctrine of election from their creed\n makes preaching less serious and character less secure.\n\n\n(_e_) It inspires pride in those who think themselves elect.\u2014Answer: This\nis possible only in the case of those who pervert the doctrine. On the\ncontrary, its proper influence is to humble men. Those who exalt\nthemselves above others, upon the ground that they are special favorites\nof God, have reason to question their election.\n\n\n In the novel, there was great effectiveness in the lover\u2019s plea to\n the object of his affection, that he had loved since he had first\n set his eyes upon her in her childhood. But God\u2019s love for us is\n of longer standing than that. It dates back to a time before we\n were born,\u2014aye, even to eternity past. It is a love which was\n fastened upon us, although God knew the worst of us. It is\n unchanging, because founded upon his infinite and eternal love to\n Christ. _Jer. 31:3_\u2014\u201c_Jehovah appeared of old unto me, saying,\n Yea, I have loved thee with an everlasting love: therefore with\n lovingkindness have I drawn thee_\u201d; _Rom. 8:31\u201039_\u2014\u201c_If God is for\n us, who is against us?... Who shall separate us from the love of\n Christ?_\u201d And the answer is, that nothing \u201c_shall be able to\n separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our\n Lord_.\u201d This eternal love subdues and humbles: _Ps. 115:1_\u2014\u201c_Not\n unto us, O Jehovah, not unto us, But unto thy name give glory For\n thy lovingkindness, and for thy truth\u2019s sake._\u201d\n\n Of the effect of the doctrine of election, Calvin, in his\n Institutes, 3:22:1, remarks that \u201cwhen the human mind hears of it,\n its irritation breaks all restraint, and it discovers as serious\n and violent agitation as if alarmed by the sound of a martial\n trumpet.\u201d The cause of this agitation is the apprehension of the\n fact that one is an enemy of God and yet absolutely dependent upon\n his mercy. This apprehension leads normally to submission. But the\n conquered rebel can give no thanks to himself,\u2014all thanks are due\n to God who has chosen and renewed him. The affections elicited are\n not those of pride and self\u2010complacency, but of gratitude and\n love.\n\n Christian hymnology witnesses to these effects. Isaac Watts (\u2020\n 1748): \u201cWhy was I made to hear thy voice And enter while there\u2019s\n room, When thousands make a wretched choice, And rather starve\n than come. \u2019T was the same love that spread the feast That sweetly\n forced me in; Else I had still refused to taste, And perished in\n my sin. Pity the nations, O our God! Constrain the earth to come;\n Send thy victorious word abroad, And bring the wanderers home.\u201d\n Josiah Conder (\u2020 1855): \u201c\u2019Tis not that I did choose thee, For,\n Lord, that could not be; This heart would still refuse thee; But\n thou hast chosen me;\u2014Hast, from the sin that stained me, Washed me\n and set me free, And to this end ordained me That I should live to\n thee. \u2019T was sovereign mercy called me, And taught my opening\n mind; The world had else enthralled me, To heavenly glories blind.\n My heart owns none above thee: For thy rich grace I thirst; This\n knowing,\u2014if I love thee, Thou must have loved me first.\u201d\n\n\n(_f_) It discourages effort for the salvation of the impenitent, whether\non their own part or on the part of others.\u2014Answer: Since it is a secret\ndecree, it cannot hinder or discourage such effort. On the other hand, it\nis a ground of encouragement, and so a stimulus to effort; for, without\nelection, it is certain that all would be lost (_cf._ Acts 18:10). While\nit humbles the sinner, so that he is willing to err for mercy, it\nencourages him also by showing him that some will be saved, and (since\nelection and faith are inseparably connected) that he will be saved, if he\nwill only believe. While it makes the Christian feel entirely dependent on\nGod\u2019s power, in his efforts for the impenitent, it leads him to say with\nPaul that he \u201cendures all things for the elects\u2019 sake, that they also may\nattain the salvation that is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory\u201d (2 Tim.\n2:10).\n\n\n God\u2019s decree that Paul\u2019s ship\u2019s company should be saved (_Acts\n 27:24_) did not obviate the necessity of their abiding in the ship\n (_verse 31_). In marriage, man\u2019s election does not exclude\n woman\u2019s; so God\u2019s election does not exclude man\u2019s. There is just\n as much need of effort as if there were no election. Hence the\n question for the sinner is not, \u201cAm I one of the elect?\u201d but\n rather, \u201cWhat shall I do to be saved?\u201d Milton represents the\n spirits of hell as debating foreknowledge and free will, in\n wandering mazes lost.\n\n No man is saved until he ceases to debate, and begins to act. And\n yet no man will thus begin to act, unless God\u2019s Spirit moves him.\n The Lord encouraged Paul by saying to him: \u201c_I have much people in\n this city_\u201d (_Acts 18:10_)\u2014people whom I will bring in through thy\n word. \u201cOld Adam is too strong for young Melanchthon.\u201d If God does\n not regenerate, there is no hope of success in preaching: \u201cGod\n stands powerless before the majesty of man\u2019s lordly will. Sinners\n have the glory of their own salvation. To pray God to convert a\n man is absurd. God elects the man, because he foresees that the\n man will elect himself\u201d (see S. R. Mason, Truth Unfolded,\n 298\u2010307). The doctrine of election does indeed cut off the hopes\n of those who place confidence in themselves; but it is best that\n such hopes should be destroyed, and that in place of them should\n be put a hope in the sovereign grace of God. The doctrine of\n election does teach man\u2019s absolute dependence upon God, and the\n impossibility of any disappointment or disarrangement of the\n divine plans arising from the disobedience of the sinner, and it\n humbles human pride until it is willing to take the place of a\n suppliant for mercy.\n\n Rowland Hill was criticized for preaching election and yet\n exhorting sinners to repent, and was told that he should preach\n only to the elect. He replied that, if his critic would put a\n chalk\u2010mark on all the elect, he would preach only to them. But\n this is not the whole truth. We are not only ignorant who God\u2019s\n elect are, but we are set to preach to both elect and non\u2010elect\n (_Ez. 2:7_\u2014\u201c_thou shalt speak my words unto them, whether they\n will hear, or whether they will forbear_\u201d), with the certainty\n that to the former our preaching will make a higher heaven, to the\n latter a deeper hell (_2 Cor. 2:15, 16_\u2014\u201c_For we are a sweet savor\n of Christ unto God, in them that are saved, and in them that\n perish; to the one a savor from death unto death; to the other a\n savor from life unto life_\u201d; _cf._ _Luke 2:34_\u2014\u201c_this child is set\n for the falling and the rising of many in Israel_\u201d\u2014for the falling\n of some, and for the rising up of others).\n\n Jesus\u2019 own thanksgiving in _Mat. 11:25, 26_\u2014\u201c_I thank thee, O\n Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that thou didst hide these\n things from the wise and understanding, and didst reveal them unto\n babes: yea, Father, for so it was well\u2010pleasing in thy sight_\u201d\u2014is\n immediately followed by his invitation in _verse 28_\u2014\u201c_Come unto\n me, all ye that labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you\n rest._\u201d There is no contradiction in his mind between sovereign\n grace and the free invitations of the gospel.\n\n G. W. Northrup, in The Standard, Sept. 19, 1889\u2014\u201c1. God will save\n every one of the human race whom he can save and remain God; 2.\n Every member of the race has a full and fair probation, so that\n all might be saved and would be saved were they to use aright the\n light which they already have.\u201d... (Private letter): \u201cLimitations\n of God in the bestowment of salvation: 1. In the power of God in\n relation to free will; 2. In the benevolence of God which requires\n the greatest good of creation, or the greatest aggregate good of\n the greatest number; 3. In the purpose of God to make the most\n perfect self\u2010limitation; 4. In the sovereignty of God, as a\n prerogative absolutely optional in its exercise; 5. In the\n holiness of God, which involves immutable limitations on his part\n in dealing with moral agents. Nothing but some absolute\n impossibility, metaphysical or moral, could have prevented him\n \u2019whose nature and whose name is love\u2019 from decreeing and securing\n the confirmation of all moral agents in holiness and blessedness\n forever.\u201d\n\n\n(_g_) The decree of election implies a decree of reprobation.\u2014Answer: The\ndecree of reprobation is not a positive decree, like that of election, but\na permissive decree to leave the sinner to his self\u2010chosen rebellion and\nits natural consequences of punishment.\n\n\n Election and sovereignty are only sources of good. Election is not\n a decree to destroy,\u2014it is a decree only to save. When we elect a\n President, we do not need to hold a second election to determine\n that the remaining millions shall be non\u2010Presidents. It is\n needless to apply contrivance or force. Sinners, like water, if\n simply let alone, will run down hill to ruin. The decree of\n reprobation is simply a decree to do nothing\u2014a decree to leave the\n sinner to himself. The natural result of this judicial forsaking,\n on the part of God, is the hardening and destruction of the\n sinner. But it must not be forgotten that this hardening and\n destruction are not due to any positive efficiency of God,\u2014they\n are a self\u2010hardening and a self\u2010destruction,\u2014and God\u2019s judicial\n forsaking is only the just penalty of the sinner\u2019s guilty\n rejection of offered mercy.\n\n See _Hosea 11:8_\u2014\u201c_How shall I give thee up, Ephraim?... my heart\n is turned within me, my compassions are kindled together_\u201d;\n _4:17_\u2014\u201c_Ephraim is joined to idols; let him alone_\u201d; _Rom. 9:22,\n 23_\u2014\u201c_What if God, willing to show his wrath, and to make his\n power known, endured with much longsuffering vessels of wrath\n fitted unto destruction: and that he might make known the riches\n of his glory upon vessels of mercy, which he afore prepared unto\n glory_\u201d\u2014here notice that \u201c_which he afore prepared_\u201d declares a\n positive divine efficiency, in the case of the vessels of mercy,\n while \u201c_fitted unto destruction_\u201d intimates no such positive\n agency of God,\u2014the vessels of wrath fitted themselves for\n destruction; _2 Tim. 2:20_\u2014\u201c_vessels ... some unto honor, and some\n unto dishonor_\u201d; _1 Pet. 2:8_\u2014\u201c_they stumble at the word, being\n disobedient: whereunto also they were appointed_\u201d; _Jude 4_\u2014\u201c_who\n were of old set forth_ [\u2018_written of beforehand_\u2019\u2014Am. Rev.] _unto\n this condemnation_\u201d; _Mat. 25:34, 41_\u2014\u201c_the kingdom prepared for\n you ... the eternal fire which is prepared_ [not for you, nor for\n men, but] _for the devil and his angels_\u201d = there is an election\n to life, but no reprobation to death; a \u201c_book of life_\u201d (_Rev.\n 21:27_), but no book of death.\n\n E. G. Robinson, Christian Theology, 313\u2014\u201cReprobation, in the sense\n of absolute predestination to sin and eternal damnation, is\n neither a sequence of the doctrine of election, nor the teaching\n of the Scriptures.\u201d Men are not \u201c_appointed_\u201d to disobedience and\n stumbling in the same way that they are \u201c_appointed_\u201d to\n salvation. God uses positive means to save, but not to destroy.\n Henry Ward Beecher: \u201cThe elect are whosoever will; the non\u2010elect\n are whosoever won\u2019t.\u201d George A. Gordon, New Epoch for Faith,\n 44\u2014\u201cElection understood would have been the saving strength of\n Israel; election misunderstood was its ruin. The nation felt that\n the election of it meant the rejection of other nations.... The\n Christian church has repeated Israel\u2019s mistake.\u201d\n\n The Westminster Confession reads: \u201cBy the decree of God, for the\n manifestation of his glory, some men and angels are predestinated\n unto everlasting life, and others to everlasting death. These\n angels and men, thus predestinated and foreordained, are\n particularly and unchangeably designed; and their number is so\n certain and definite that it cannot be either increased or\n diminished. The rest of mankind God was pleased, according to the\n unsearchable counsel of his own will, whereby he extendeth or\n withholdeth mercy as he pleaseth, for the glory of his sovereign\n power over his creatures, to pass by and to ordain them to\n dishonor and wrath for their sin, to the praise of his glorious\n justice.\u201d This reads as if both the saved and the lost were made\n originally for their respective final estates without respect to\n character. It is supralapsarianism. It is certain that the\n supralapsarians were in the majority in the Westminster Assembly,\n and that they determined the form of the statement, although there\n were many sublapsarians who objected that it was only on account\n of their foreseen wickedness that any were reprobated. In its\n later short statement of doctrine the Presbyterian body in America\n has made it plain that God\u2019s decree of reprobation is a permissive\n decree, and that it places no barrier in the way of any man\u2019s\n salvation.\n\n On the general subject of Election, see Mozley, Predestination;\n Payne, Divine Sovereignty; Ridgeley, Works, 1:261\u2010324, esp. 322;\n Edwards, Works, 2:527 _sq._; Van Oosterzee, Dogmatics, 446\u2010458;\n Martensen, Dogmatics, 362\u2010382; and especially Wardlaw, Systematic\n Theology, 485\u2010549; H. B. Smith, Syst. of Christian Theology,\n 502\u2010514; Maule, Outlines of Christian Doctrine, 36\u201056; Peck, in\n Bapt. Quar. Rev., Oct. 1891:689\u2010706. On objections to election,\n and Spurgeon\u2019s answers to them, see Williams, Reminiscences of\n Spurgeon, 189. On the homiletical uses of the doctrine of\n election, see Bib. Sac., Jan. 1893:79\u201092.\n\n\nII. Calling.\n\n\nCalling is that act of God by which men are invited to accept, by faith,\nthe salvation provided by Christ.\u2014The Scriptures distinguish between:\n\n(_a_) _The general, or external, call_ to all men through God\u2019s\nprovidence, word, and Spirit.\n\n\n _Is. 45:22_\u2014\u201c_Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the\n earth; for I am God, and there is none else_\u201d; _55:6_\u2014\u201c_Seek ye\n Jehovah while he may be found; call ye upon him while he is\n near_\u201d; _65:12_\u2014\u201c_when I called, ye did not answer; when I spake,\n ye did not hear; but ye did that which was evil in mine eyes, and\n chose that wherein I delighted not_\u201d; _Ez. 33:11_\u2014\u201c_As I live,\n saith the Lord Jehovah, I have no pleasure in the death of the\n wicked; but that the wicked turn from his way and live; turn ye,\n turn ye from your evil ways; for why will ye die, O house of\n Israel?_\u201d _Mat. 11:28_\u2014\u201c_Come unto me, all ye that labor and are\n heavy laden, and I will give you rest_\u201d; _22:3_\u2014\u201c_sent forth his\n servants to call them that were bidden to the marriage feast: and\n they would not come_\u201d; _Mark 16:15_\u2014\u201c_Go ye into all the world,\n and preach the gospel to the whole creation_\u201d; _John 12:32_\u2014\u201c_And\n I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto\n myself_\u201d\u2014draw, not drag; _Rev. 3:20_\u2014\u201c_Behold, I stand at the door\n and knock: if any man hear my voice and open the door, I will come\n in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me._\u201d\n\n\n(_b_) _The special, efficacious call_ of the Holy Spirit to the elect.\n\n\n _Luke 14:23_\u2014\u201c_Go out into the highways and hedges, and constrain\n them to come in, that my house may be filled_\u201d; _Rom. 1:7_\u2014\u201c_to\n all that are in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints: Grace\n to you and peace from God our father and the Lord Jesus Christ_\u201d;\n _8:30_\u2014\u201c_whom he foreordained, them he also called: and whom he\n called, them he also justified_\u201d; _11:29_\u2014\u201c_For the gifts and the\n calling of God are not repented of_\u201d; _1 Cor. 1:23, 24_\u2014\u201c_but we\n preach Christ crucified, unto Jews a stumblingblock, and unto\n Gentiles foolishness; but unto them that are called, both Jews and\n Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God_\u201d;\n _26_\u2014\u201c_For behold your calling, brethren, that not many wise after\n the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called_\u201d; _Phil.\n 3:14_\u2014\u201c_I press on toward the goal unto the prize of the high_\n [marg. \u2018_upward_\u2019] _calling of God in Christ Jesus_\u201d; _Eph.\n 1:18_\u2014\u201c_that ye may know what is the hope of his calling, what the\n riches of the glory of his inheritance in the saints_\u201d; _1 Thess.\n 2:12_\u2014\u201c_to the end that ye should walk worthily of God, who\n calleth you into his own kingdom and glory_\u201d; _2 Thess.\n 2:14_\u2014\u201c_whereunto he called you through our gospel, to the\n obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ_\u201d; _2 Tim.\n 1:9_\u2014\u201c_who saved us, and called us with a holy calling, not\n according to our works, but according to his own purpose and\n grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before times eternal_\u201d;\n _Heb. 3:1_\u2014\u201c_holy brethren, partakers of a heavenly calling_\u201d; _2\n Pet. 1:10_\u2014\u201c_Wherefore, brethren, give the more diligence to make\n your calling and election sure._\u201d\n\n\nTwo questions only need special consideration:\n\n\nA. Is God\u2019s general call sincere?\n\n\nThis is denied, upon the ground that such sincerity is incompatible,\nfirst, with the inability of the sinner to obey; and secondly, with the\ndesign of God to bestow only upon the elect the special grace without\nwhich they will not obey.\n\n(_a_) To the first objection we reply that, since this inability is not a\nphysical but a moral inability, consisting simply in the settled\nperversity of an evil will, there can be no insincerity in offering\nsalvation to all, especially when the offer is in itself a proper motive\nto obedience.\n\n\n God\u2019s call to all men to repent and to believe the gospel is no\n more insincere than his command to all men to love him with all\n the heart. There is no obstacle in the way of men\u2019s obedience to\n the gospel, that does not exist to prevent their obedience to the\n law. If it is proper to publish the commands of the law, it is\n proper to publish the invitations of the gospel. A human being may\n be perfectly sincere in giving an invitation which he knows will\n be refused. He may desire to have the invitation accepted, while\n yet he may, for certain reasons of justice or personal dignity, be\n unwilling to put forth special efforts, aside from the invitation\n itself, to secure the acceptance of it on the part of those to\n whom it is offered. So God\u2019s desires that certain men should be\n saved may not be accompanied by his will to exert special\n influences to save them.\n\n These desires were meant by the phrase \u201crevealed will\u201d in the old\n theologians; his purpose to bestow special grace, by the phrase\n \u201csecret will.\u201d It is of the former that Paul speaks, in _1 Tim,\n 2:4_\u2014\u201c_who would have all men to be saved._\u201d Here we have, not the\n active \u03c3\u1ff6\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9, but the passive \u03c3\u03c9\u03b8\u1fc6\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9. The meaning is, not that\n God _purposes_ to save all men, but that he _desires_ all men to\n be saved through repenting and believing the gospel. Hence God\u2019s\n revealed will, or desire, that all men should be saved, is\n perfectly consistent with his secret will, or purpose, to bestow\n special grace only upon a certain number (see, on _1 Tim. 2:4_,\n Fairbairn\u2019s Commentary on the Pastoral Epistles).\n\n The sincerity of God\u2019s call is shown, not only in the fact that\n the only obstacle to compliance, on the sinner\u2019s part, is the\n sinner\u2019s own evil will, but also in the fact that God has, at\n infinite cost, made a complete external provision, upon the ground\n of which \u201c_he that will_\u201d may \u201c_come_\u201d and \u201c_take the water of\n life freely_\u201d (_Rev. 22:17_); so that God can truly say: \u201c_What\n could have been done more to my vineyard, that I have not done in\n it?_\u201d (_Is. 5:4_). Broadus, Com. on _Mat. 6:10_\u2014\u201c_Thy will be\n done_\u201d\u2014distinguishes between God\u2019s will of purpose, of desire, and\n of command. H. B. Smith, Syst. Theol., 521\u2014\u201cCommon grace passes\n over into effectual grace in proportion as the sinner yields to\n the divine influence. Effectual grace is that which effects what\n common grace tends to effect.\u201d See also Studien und Kritiken,\n 1887:7 _sq._\n\n\n(_b_) To the second, we reply that the objection, if true, would equally\nhold against God\u2019s foreknowledge. The sincerity of God\u2019s general call is\nno more inconsistent with his determination that some shall be permitted\nto reject it, than it is with foreknowledge that some will reject it.\n\n\n Hodge, Syst. Theol., 2:643\u2014\u201cPredestination concerns only the\n purpose of God to render effectual, in particular cases, a call\n addressed to all. A general amnesty, on certain conditions, may be\n offered by a sovereign to rebellious subjects, although he knows\n that through pride or malice many will refuse to accept it; and\n even though, for wise reasons, he should determine not to\n constrain their assent, supposing that such influence over their\n minds were within his power. It is evident, from the nature of the\n call, that it has nothing to do with the secret purpose of God to\n grant his effectual grace to some, and not to others.... According\n to the Augustinian scheme, the non\u2010elect have all the advantages\n and opportunities of securing their salvation, which, according to\n any other scheme, are granted to mankind indiscriminately.... God\n designed, in its adoption, to save his own people, but he\n consistently offers its benefits to all who are willing to receive\n them.\u201d See also H. B. Smith, System of Christian Theology,\n 515\u2010521.\n\n\nB. Is God\u2019s special call irresistible?\n\n\nWe prefer to say that this special call is efficacious,\u2014that is, that it\ninfallibly accomplishes its purpose of leading the sinner to the\nacceptance of salvation. This implies two things:\n\n(_a_) That the operation of God is not an outward constraint upon the\nhuman will, but that it accords with the laws of our mental constitution.\nWe reject the term \u201cirresistible,\u201d as implying a coercion and compulsion\nwhich is foreign to the nature of God\u2019s working in the soul.\n\n\n _Ps. 110:3_\u2014\u201c_Thy people are freewill\u2010offerings in the day of thy\n power: in holy array, Out of the womb of the morning Thou hast the\n dew of thy youth_\u201d\u2014_i. e._, youthful recruits to thy standard, as\n numberless and as bright as the drops of morning dew; _Phil. 2:12,\n 13_\u2014\u201c_Work out your own salvation with fear and trembling; for it\n is God who worketh in you both to will and to work, for his good\n pleasure_\u201d\u2014_i. e._, the result of God\u2019s working is our own\n working. The Lutheran Formula of Concord properly condemns the\n view that, before, in, and after conversion, the will only resists\n the Holy Spirit: for this, it declares, is the very nature of\n conversion, that out of non\u2010willing, God makes willing, persons\n (F. C. 60, 581, 582, 673).\n\n _Hos. 4:16_\u2014\u201c_Israel hath behaved himself stubbornly, like a\n stubborn heifer,_\u201d or \u201c_or as a heifer that slideth back_\u201d = when\n the sacrificial offering is brought forward to be slain, it holds\n back, settling on its haunches so that it has to be pushed and\n forced before it can be brought to the altar. These are not \u201c_the\n sacrifices of God_\u201d which are \u201c_a broken spirit, a broken and a\n contrite heart_\u201d (_Ps. 51:17_). E. H. Johnson, Theology, 2d ed.,\n 250\u2014\u201cThe N. T. nowhere declares, or even intimates, ... that the\n general call of the Holy Spirit is insufficient. And furthermore,\n it never states that the efficient call is irresistible.\n Psychologically, to speak of irresistible influence upon the\n faculty of self\u2010determination in man is express contradiction in\n terms. No harm can come from acknowledging that we do not know\n God\u2019s unrevealed reasons for electing one individual rather than\n another to eternal life.\u201d Dr. Johnson goes on to argue that if,\n without disparagement to grace, faith can be a condition of\n justification, faith might also be a condition of election, and\n that inasmuch as salvation is _received_ as a gift only on\n condition of faith exercised, it is in _purpose_ a gift, even if\n only on condition of faith foreseen. This seems to us to ignore\n the abundant Scripture testimony that faith itself is God\u2019s gift,\n and therefore the initiative must be wholly with God.\n\n\n(_b_) That the operation of God is the originating cause of that new\ndisposition of the affections, and that new activity of the will, by which\nthe sinner accepts Christ. The cause is not in the response of the will to\nthe presentation of motives by God, nor in any mere co\u00f6peration of the\nwill of man with the will of God, but is an almighty act of God in the\nwill of man, by which its freedom to choose God as its end is restored and\nrightly exercised (John 1:12, 13). For further discussion of the subject,\nsee, in the next section, the remarks on Regeneration, with which this\nefficacious call is identical.\n\n\n _John 1:12, 13_\u2014\u201c_But as many as received him, to them gave he the\n right to become children of God, even to them that believe on his\n name: who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh,\n nor of the will of man, but of God._\u201d God\u2019s saving grace and\n effectual calling are irresistible, not in the sense that they are\n never resisted, but in the sense that they are never successfully\n resisted. See Andrew Fuller, Works, 2:373, 513, and 3:807; Gill,\n Body of Divinity, 2:121\u2010130; Robert Hall, Works, 3:75.\n\n Matheson, Moments on the Mount, 128, 129\u2014\u201cThy love to Him is to\n his love to thee what the sunlight on the sea is to the sunshine\n in the sky\u2014a reflex, a mirror, a diffusion; thou art giving back\n the glory that has been cast upon the waters. In the attraction of\n thy life to him, in the cleaving of thy heart to him, in the\n soaring of thy spirit to him, thou art told that he is near thee,\n thou hearest the beating of his pulse for thee.\u201d\n\n Upton, Hibbert Lectures, 302\u2014\u201cIn regard to our reason and to the\n essence of our ideals, there is no real dualism between man and\n God; but in the case of the will which constitutes the essence of\n each man\u2019s individuality, there is a real dualism, and therefore a\n possible antagonism between the will of the dependent spirit, man,\n and the will of the absolute and universal spirit, God. Such\n _real_ duality of will, and not the _appearance_ of duality, as F.\n H. Bradley put it, is the essential condition of ethics and\n religion.\u201d\n\n\n\nSection II.\u2014The Application Of Christ\u2019s Redemption In Its Actual\nBeginning.\n\n\nUnder this head we treat of Union with Christ, Regeneration, Conversion\n(embracing Repentance and Faith), and Justification. Much confusion and\nerror have arisen from conceiving these as occurring in chronological\norder. The order is logical, not chronological. As it is only \u201cin Christ\u201d\nthat man is \u201ca new creature\u201d (2 Cor. 5:17) or is \u201cjustified\u201d (Acts 13:39),\nunion with Christ logically precedes both regeneration and justification;\nand yet, chronologically, the moment of our union with Christ is also the\nmoment when we are regenerated and justified. So, too, regeneration and\nconversion are but the divine and human sides or aspects of the same fact,\nalthough regeneration has logical precedence, and man turns only as God\nturns him.\n\n\n Dorner, Glaubenslehre, 3:694 (Syst. Doct., 4:159), gives at this\n point an account of the work of the Holy Spirit in general. The\n Holy Spirit\u2019s work, he says, presupposes the historical work of\n Christ, and prepares the way for Christ\u2019s return. \u201cAs the Holy\n Spirit is the principle of union between the Father and the Son,\n so he is the principle of union between God and man. Only through\n the Holy Spirit does Christ secure for himself those who will love\n him as distinct and free personalities.\u201d Regeneration and\n conversion are not chronologically separate. Which of the spokes\n of a wheel starts first? The ray of light and the ray of heat\n enter at the same moment. Sensation and perception are not\n separated in time, although the former is the cause of the latter.\n\n \u201cSuppose a non\u2010elastic tube extending across the Atlantic. Suppose\n that the tube is completely filled with an incompressible fluid.\n Then there would be no interval of time between the impulse given\n to the fluid at this end of the tube, and the effect upon the\n fluid at the other end.\u201d See Hazard, Causation and Freedom in\n Willing, 33\u201038, who argues that cause and effect are always\n simultaneous; else, in the intervening time, there would be a\n cause that had no effect; that is, a cause that caused nothing;\n that is, a cause that that was not a cause. \u201cA potential cause may\n exist for an unlimited period without producing any effect, and of\n course may precede its effect by any length of time. But actual,\n effective cause being the exercise of a sufficient power, its\n effect cannot be delayed; for, in that case, there would be the\n exercise of a sufficient power to produce the effect, without\n producing it,\u2014involving the absurdity of its being both sufficient\n and insufficient at the same time.\n\n \u201cA difficulty may here be suggested in regard to the flow or\n progress of events in time, if they are all simultaneous with\n their causes. This difficulty cannot arise as to intelligent\n effort; for, in regard to it, periods of non\u2010action may\n continually intervene; but if there are series of events and\n material phenomena, each of which is in turn effect and cause, it\n may be difficult to see how any time could elapse between the\n first and the last of the series.... If, however, as I suppose,\n these series of events, or material changes, are always effected\n through the medium of motion, it need not trouble us, for there is\n precisely the same difficulty in regard to our conception of the\n motion of matter from point to point, there being no space or\n length between any two consecutive points, and yet the body in\n motion gets from one end of a long line to the other, and in this\n case this difficulty just neutralizes the other.... So, even if we\n cannot conceive how motion involves the idea of time, we may\n perceive that, if it does so, it may be a means of conveying\n events, which depend upon it, through time also.\u201d\n\n Martineau, Study, 1:148\u2010150\u2014\u201cSimultaneity does not exclude\n duration,\u201d\u2014since each cause has duration and each effect has\n duration also. Bowne, Metaphysics, 106\u2014\u201cIn the system, the\n complete ground of an event never lies in any one thing, but only\n in a complex of things. If a single thing were the sufficient\n ground of an effect, the effect would co\u00ebxist with the thing, and\n all effects would be instantaneously given. Hence all events in\n the system must be viewed as the result of the interaction of two\n or more things.\u201d\n\n The first manifestation of life in an infant may be in the lungs\n or heart or brain, but that which makes any and all of these\n manifestations possible is the antecedent life. We may not be able\n to tell which comes first, but having the life we have all the\n rest. When the wheel goes, all the spokes will go. The soul that\n is born again will show it in faith and hope and love and holy\n living. Regeneration will involve repentance and faith and\n justification and sanctification. But the one life which makes\n regeneration and all these consequent blessings possible is the\n life of Christ who joins himself to us in order that we may join\n ourselves to him. Anne Reeve Aldrich, The Meaning: \u201cI lost my life\n in losing love. This blurred my spring and killed its dove. Along\n my path the dying roses Fell, and disclosed the thorns thereof. I\n found my life in finding God. In ecstasy I kiss the rod; For who\n that wins the goal, but lightly Thinks of the thorns whereon he\n trod?\u201d\n\n See A. A. Hodge, on the Ordo Salutis, in Princeton Rev., March,\n 1888:304\u2010321. Union with Christ, says Dr. Hodge, \u201cis effected by\n the Holy Ghost in effectual calling. Of this calling the parts are\n two: (_a_) the offering of Christ to the sinner, _externally_ by\n the gospel, and _internally_ by the illumination of the Holy\n Ghost; (_b_) the reception of Christ, which on our part is both\n passive and active. The passive reception is that whereby a\n spiritual principle is ingenerated into the human will, whence\n issues the active reception, which is an act of faith with which\n repentance is always conjoined. The communion of benefits which\n results from this union involves: (_a_) a change of state or\n relation, called justification; and (_b_) a change of subjective\n moral character, commenced in regeneration and completed through\n sanctification.\u201d See also Dr. Hodge\u2019s Popular Lectures on\n Theological Themes, 340, and Outlines of Theology, 333\u2010429.\n\n H. B. Smith, however, in his System of Christian Theology, is more\n clear in the putting of Union with Christ before Regeneration. On\n page 502, he begins his treatment of the Application of Redemption\n with the title: \u201cThe Union between Christ and the individual\n believer as effected by the Holy Spirit. This embraces the\n subjects of Justification, Regeneration, and Sanctification, with\n the underlying topic which comes first to be considered,\n Election.\u201d He therefore treats Union with Christ (531\u2010539) before\n Regeneration (553\u2010569). He says Calvin defines regeneration as\n coming to us by participation in Christ, and apparently agrees\n with this view (559).\n\n \u201cThis union [with Christ] is at the ground of regeneration and\n justification\u201d (534). \u201cThe great difference of theological systems\n comes out here. Since Christianity is redemption through Christ,\n our mode of conceiving that will determine the character of our\n whole theological system\u201d (536). \u201cThe union with Christ is\n mediated by his Spirit, whence we are both renewed and justified.\n The great fact of objective Christianity is incarnation in order\n to atonement; the great fact of subjective Christianity is union\n with Christ, whereby we receive the atonement\u201d (537). We may add\n that this union with Christ, in view of which God elects and to\n which God calls the sinner, is begun in regeneration, completed in\n conversion, declared in justification, and proved in\n sanctification and perseverance.\n\n\nI. Union with Christ.\n\n\nThe Scriptures declare that, through the operation of God, there is\nconstituted a union of the soul with Christ different in kind from God\u2019s\nnatural and providential concursus with all spirits, as well as from all\nunions of mere association or sympathy, moral likeness, or moral\ninfluence,\u2014a union of life, in which the human spirit, while then most\ntruly possessing its own individuality and personal distinctness, is\ninterpenetrated and energized by the Spirit of Christ, is made inscrutably\nbut indissolubly one with him, and so becomes a member and partaker of\nthat regenerated, believing, and justified humanity of which he is the\nhead.\n\n\n Union with Christ is not union with a system of doctrine, nor with\n external religious influences, nor with an organized church, nor\n with an ideal man,\u2014but rather, with a personal, risen, living,\n omnipresent Lord (J. W. A. Stewart). Dr. J. W. Alexander well\n calls this doctrine of the Union of the Believer with Christ \u201cthe\n central truth of all theology and of all religion.\u201d Yet it\n receives little of formal recognition, either in dogmatic\n treatises or in common religious experience. Quenstedt, 886\u2010912,\n has devoted a section to it; A. A. Hodge gives to it a chapter, in\n his Outlines of Theology, 369 sq., to which we are indebted for\n valuable suggestions; H. B. Smith treats of it, not however as a\n separate topic, but under the head of Justification (System,\n 531\u2010539).\n\n The majority of printed systems of doctrine, however, contain no\n chapter or section on Union with Christ, and the majority of\n Christians much more frequently think of Christ as a Savior\n outside of them, than as a Savior who dwells within. This\n comparative neglect of the doctrine is doubtless a reaction from\n the exaggerations of a false mysticism. But there is great need of\n rescuing the doctrine from neglect. For this we rely wholly upon\n Scripture. Doctrines which reason can neither discover nor prove\n need large support from the Bible. It is a mark of divine wisdom\n that the doctrine of the Trinity, for example, is so inwoven with\n the whole fabric of the New Testament, that the rejection of the\n former is the virtual rejection of the latter. The doctrine of\n Union with Christ, in like manner, is taught so variously and\n abundantly, that to deny it is to deny inspiration itself. See\n Kahnis, Luth. Dogmatik, 3:447\u2010450.\n\n\n1. Scripture Representations of this Union.\n\n\nA. Figurative teaching. It is illustrated:\n\n(_a_) From the union of a building and its foundation.\n\n\n _Eph. 2:20\u201022_\u2014\u201c_being built upon the foundation of the apostles\n and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the chief corner stone;\n in whom each several building, fitly framed together, groweth into\n a holy temple in the Lord; in whom ye also are builded together\n for a habitation of God in the Spirit_\u201d; _Col. 2:7_\u2014\u201c_builded up\n in him_\u201d\u2014grounded in Christ as our foundation; _1 Pet. 2:4,\n 5_\u2014\u201c_unto whom coming, a living stone, rejected indeed of men, but\n with God elect, precious, ye also, as living stones, are built up\n a spiritual house_\u201d\u2014each living stone in the Christian temple is\n kept in proper relation to every other, and is made to do its part\n in furnishing a habitation for God, only by being built upon and\n permanently connected with Christ, the chief corner\u2010stone. _Cf._\n _Ps. 118:22_\u2014\u201c_The stone which the builders rejected Is become the\n head of the corner_\u201d; _Is. 28:16_\u2014\u201c_Behold, I lay in Zion for a\n foundation a stone, a tried stone, a precious corner\u2010stone of sure\n foundation: he that believeth shall not be in haste._\u201d\n\n\n(_b_) From the union between husband and wife.\n\n\n _Rom. 7:4_\u2014\u201c_ye also were made dead to the law through the body of\n Christ; that ye should be joined to another, even to him who was\n raised from the dead, that we might bring forth fruit unto\n God_\u201d\u2014here union with Christ is illustrated by the indissoluble\n bond that connects husband and wife, and makes them legally and\n organically one; _2 Cor. 11:2_\u2014\u201c_I am jealous over you with a\n godly jealousy: for I espoused you to one husband, that I might\n present you as a pure virgin to Christ_\u201d; _Eph. 5:31, 32_\u2014\u201c_For\n this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall\n cleave to his wife; and the two shall become one flesh. This\n mystery is great: but I speak in regard of Christ and of the\n church_\u201d\u2014Meyer refers _verse 31_ wholly to Christ, and says that\n Christ leaves father and mother (the right hand of God) and is\n joined to the church as his wife, the two constituting thenceforth\n one moral person. He makes the union future, however,\u2014\u201c_For this\n cause shall a man leave his father and mother_\u201d\u2014the consummation\n is at Christ\u2019s second coming. But the Fathers, as Chrysostom,\n Theodoret, and Jerome, referred it more properly to the\n incarnation.\n\n _Rev. 19:7_\u2014\u201c_the marriage of the Lamb is come, and his wife hath\n made herself ready_\u201d; _22:17_\u2014\u201c_And the Spirit and the bride say,\n Come_\u201d; _cf._ _Is. 54:5_\u2014\u201c_For thy Maker is thine husband_\u201d; _Jer.\n 3:20_\u2014\u201c_Surely as a wife treacherously departeth from her husband,\n so have ye dealt treacherously with me, O house of Israel, saith\n Jehovah_\u201d; _Hos. 2:2\u20105_\u2014\u201c_for their mother hath played the\n harlot_\u201d\u2014departure from God is adultery; the _Song of Solomon_, as\n Jewish interpreters have always maintained, is an allegorical poem\n describing, under the figure of marriage, the union between\n Jehovah and his people: Paul only adopts the Old Testament figure,\n and applies it more precisely to the union of God with the church\n in Jesus Christ.\n\n\n(_c_) From the union between the vine and its branches.\n\n\n _John 15:1\u201010_\u2014\u201c_I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that\n abideth in me, and I in him, the same beareth much fruit: for\n apart from me ye can do nothing_\u201d\u2014as God\u2019s natural life is in the\n vine, that it may give life to its natural branches, so God\u2019s\n spiritual life is in the vine, Christ, that he may give life to\n his spiritual branches. The roots of this new vine are planted in\n heaven, not on earth; and into it the half\u2010withered branches of\n the old humanity are to be grafted, that they may have life\n divine. Yet our Lord does not say \u201cI am the root.\u201d The branch is\n not something _outside_, which has to get nourishment _out of_ the\n root,\u2014it is rather a _part_ of the vine. _Rom. 6:5_\u2014\u201c_if we have\n become united with him_ [\u03c3\u03cd\u03bc\u03c6\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u2014\u2018grown together\u2019\u2014used of the man\n and horse in the Centaur, Xen., Cyrop., 4:3:18], _in the likeness\n of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his\n resurrection_\u201d; _11:24_\u2014\u201c_thou wast cut out of that which is by\n nature a wild olive tree, and wast grafted contrary to nature into\n a good olive tree_\u201d; _Col. 2:6, 7_\u2014\u201c_As therefore ye received\n Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk in him, rooted and builded up in\n him_\u201d\u2014not only grounded in Christ as our foundation, but thrusting\n down roots into him as the deep, rich, all\u2010sustaining soil. This\n union with Christ is consistent with individuality: for the graft\n brings forth fruit after its kind, though modified by the tree\n into which it is grafted.\n\n Bishop H. W. Warren, in S. S. Times, Oct. 17, 1891\u2014\u201cThe lessons of\n the vine are intimacy, likeness of nature, continuous impartation\n of life, fruit. Between friends there is intimacy by means of\n media, such as food, presents, care, words, soul looking from the\n eyes. The mother gives her liquid flesh to the babe, but such\n intimacy soon ceases. The mother is not rich enough in life\n continuously to feed the ever\u2010enlarging nature of the growing man.\n Not so with the vine. It continuously feeds. Its rivers crowd all\n the banks. They burst out in leaf, blossom, clinging tendrils, and\n fruit, everywhere. In nature a thorn grafted on a pear tree bears\n only thorn. There is not pear\u2010life enough to compel change of its\n nature. But a wild olive, typical of depraved nature, grafted on a\n good olive tree finds, contrary to nature, that there is force\n enough in the growing stock to change the nature of the wild\n scion.\u201d\n\n\n(_d_) From the union between the members and the head of the body.\n\n\n _1 Cor. 6:15, 19_\u2014\u201c_Know ye not that your bodies are members of\n Christ?... know ye not that your body is a temple of the Holy\n Spirit which is in you, which ye have from God?_\u201d _12:12_\u2014\u201c_For as\n the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of the\n body, being many, are one body; so also is Christ_\u201d\u2014here Christ is\n identified with the church of which he is the head; _Eph. 1:22,\n 23_\u2014\u201c_he put all things in subjection under his feet, and gave him\n to be head over all things to the church, which is his body, the\n fulness of him that filleth all in all_\u201d\u2014as the members of the\n human body are united to the head, the source of their activity\n and the power that controls their movements, so all believers are\n members of an invisible body whose head is Christ. Shall we tie a\n string round the finger to keep for it its own blood? No, for all\n the blood of the body is needed to nourish one finger. So Christ\n is \u201c_head over all things to_ [for the benefit of] _the church_\u201d\n (Tyler, Theol. Greek Poets, preface, ii). \u201cThe church is the\n fulness (\u03c0\u03bb\u03ae\u03c1\u03c9\u03bc\u03b1) of Christ; as it was not good for the first man,\n Adam, to be alone, no more was it good for the second man, Christ\u201d\n (C. H. M.). _Eph. 4:15, 16_\u2014\u201c_grow up in all things into him, who\n is the head, even Christ; from whom all the body ... maketh the\n increase of the body unto the building up of itself in love_\u201d;\n _5:29, 30_\u2014\u201c_for no man ever hated his own flesh; but nourisheth\n and cherisheth it, even as Christ also the church; because we are\n members of his body._\u201d\n\n\n(_e_) From the union of the race with the source of its life in Adam.\n\n\n _Rom. 5:12, 21_\u2014\u201c_as through one man sin entered into the world,\n and death through sin.... that, as sin reigned in death, even so\n might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life through\n Jesus Christ our Lord_\u201d; _1 Cor. 15:22, 45, 49_\u2014\u201c_as in Adam all\n die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive.... The first man\n Adam became a living soul. The last Adam became a life\u2010giving\n Spirit.... as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also\n bear the image of the heavenly_\u201d\u2014as the whole race is one with the\n first man Adam, in whom it fell and from whom it has derived a\n corrupted and guilty nature, so the whole race of believers\n constitutes a new and restored humanity, whose justified and\n purified nature is derived from Christ, the second Adam. _Cf._\n _Gen. 2:23_\u2014\u201c_This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh:\n she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man_\u201d\u2014here\n C. H. M. remarks that, as man is first created and then woman is\n viewed in and formed out of him, so it is with Christ and the\n church. \u201cWe are members of Christ\u2019s body, because in Christ we\n have the principle of our origin; from him our life arose, just as\n the life of Eve was derived from Adam.... The church is Christ\u2019s\n helpmeet, formed out of Christ in his deep sleep of death, as Eve\n out of Adam.... The church will be nearest to Christ, as Eve was\n to Adam.\u201d Because Christ is the source of all spiritual life for\n his people, he is called, in _Is. 9:6_, \u201c_Everlasting Father,_\u201d\n and it is said, in _Is. 53:10_, that \u201c_he shall see his seed_\u201d\n (see page 680).\n\n\nB. Direct statements.\n\n(_a_) The believer is said to be in Christ.\n\n\n Lest we should regard the figures mentioned above as merely\n Oriental metaphors, the fact of the believer\u2019s union with Christ\n is asserted in the most direct and prosaic manner. _John\n 14:20_\u2014\u201c_ye in me_\u201d; _Rom. 6:11_\u2014\u201c_alive unto God in Christ\n Jesus_\u201d; _8:1_\u2014\u201c_no condemnation to them that are in Christ\n Jesus_\u201d; _2 Cor. 5:17_\u2014\u201c_if any man is in Christ, he is a new\n creature_\u201d; _Eph. 1:4_\u2014\u201c_chose us in him before the foundation of\n the world_\u201d; _2:13_\u2014\u201c_now in Christ Jesus ye that once were far\n off are made nigh in the blood of Christ._\u201d Thus the believer is\n said to be \u201c_in Christ_,\u201d as the element or atmosphere which\n surrounds him with its perpetual presence and which constitutes\n his vital breath; in fact, this phrase \u201c_in Christ_,\u201d always\n meaning \u201cin union with Christ,\u201d is the very key to Paul\u2019s\n epistles, and to the whole New Testament. The fact that the\n believer is in Christ is symbolized in baptism: we are \u201c_baptized\n into Christ_\u201d (_Gal. 3:27_).\n\n\n(_b_) Christ is said to be in the believer.\n\n\n _John 14:20_\u2014\u201c_I in you_\u201d; _Rom. 8:9_\u2014\u201c_ye are not in the flesh\n but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwelleth in\n you. But if any man hath not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of\n his_\u201d\u2014that this Spirit of Christ is Christ himself, is shown from\n _verse 10_\u2014\u201c_And if Christ is in you, the body is dead because of\n sin; but the spirit is life because of righteousness_\u201d; _Gal.\n 2:20_\u2014\u201c_I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I\n that live, but Christ liveth in me_\u201d\u2014here Christ is said to be in\n the believer, and so to live his life within the believer, that\n the latter can point to this as the dominating fact of his\n experience,\u2014it is not so much he that lives, as it is Christ that\n lives in him. The fact that Christ is in the believer is\n symbolized in the Lord\u2019s supper: \u201c_The bread which we break, is it\n not a participation in the body of Christ?_\u201d (_1 Cor. 10:16_).\n\n\n(_c_) The Father and the Son dwell in the believer.\n\n\n _John 14:23_\u2014\u201c_If a man love me, he will keep my word: and my\n Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our\n abode with him_\u201d; _cf._ _10_\u2014\u201c_Believest thou not that I am in the\n Father, and the Father in me? the words that I say unto you I\n speak not from myself: but the Father abiding in me doeth his\n works_\u201d\u2014the Father and the Son dwell in the believer; for where\n the Son is, there always the Father must be also. If the union\n between the believer and Christ in _John 14:23_ is to be\n interpreted as one of mere moral influence, then the union of\n Christ and the Father in _John 14:10_ must also be interpreted as\n a union of mere moral influence. _Eph. 3:17_\u2014\u201c_that Christ may\n dwell in your hearts through faith_\u201d; _1 John 4:16_\u2014\u201c_he that\n abideth in love abideth in God, and God abideth in him._\u201d\n\n\n(_d_) The believer has life by partaking of Christ, as Christ has life by\npartaking of the Father.\n\n\n _John 6:53, 56, 57_\u2014\u201c_Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man\n and drink his blood, ye have not life in yourselves .... He that\n eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood abideth in me, and I in him.\n As the living Father sent me and I live because of the Father, so\n he that eateth me, he also shall live because of me_\u201d\u2014the believer\n has life by partaking of Christ in a way that may not\n inappropriately be compared with Christ\u2019s having life by partaking\n of the Father. _1 Cor. 10:16, 17_\u2014\u201c_the cup of blessing which we\n bless, is it not a communion of the blood of Christ? The bread\n which we break, is it not a communion of the body of\n Christ?_\u201d\u2014here it is intimated that the Lord\u2019s Supper sets forth,\n in the language of symbol, the soul\u2019s actual participation in the\n life of Christ; and the margin properly translates the word\n \u03ba\u03bf\u03b9\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd\u03af\u03b1, not \u201ccommunion,\u201d but \u201c_participation_.\u201d _Cf._ _1 John\n 1:3_\u2014\u201c_our fellowship (\u03ba\u03bf\u03b9\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd\u03af\u03b1) is with the Father, and with his\n Son Jesus Christ._\u201d Foster, Christian Life and Theology, 216\u2014\u201cIn\n _John 6_, the phrases call to mind the ancient form of sacrifice,\n and the participation therein by the offerer at the sacrificial\n meal,\u2014as at the Passover.\u201d\n\n\n(_e_) All believers are one in Christ.\n\n\n _John 17:21\u201023_\u2014\u201c_that they may all be one; even as thou, Father,\n art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be in us: that the\n world may believe that thou didst send me. And the glory which\n thou hast given me I have given unto them; that they may be one,\n even as we are one; I in them, and thou in me, that they may be\n perfected into one_\u201d\u2014all believers are one in Christ, to whom they\n are severally and collectively united, as Christ himself is one\n with God.\n\n\n(_f_) The believer is made partaker of the divine nature.\n\n\n _2 Pet. 1:4_\u2014\u201c_that through these_ [promises] _ye may become\n partakers of the divine nature_\u201d\u2014not by having the essence of your\n humanity changed into the essence of divinity, but by having\n Christ the divine Savior continually dwelling within, and\n indissolubly joined to, your human souls.\n\n\n(_g_) The believer is made one spirit with the Lord.\n\n\n _1 Cor. 6:17_\u2014\u201c_he that is joined unto the Lord is one\n spirit_\u201d\u2014human nature is so interpenetrated and energized by the\n divine, that the two move and act as one; _cf._ _19_\u2014\u201c_know ye not\n that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit which is in you,\n which ye have from God?_\u201d _Rom. 8:26_\u2014\u201c_the Spirit also helpeth\n our infirmity: for we know not how to pray as we ought; but the\n Spirit himself maketh intercession for us with groanings which\n cannot be uttered_\u201d\u2014the Spirit is so near to us, and so one with\n us, that our prayer is called his, or rather, his prayer becomes\n ours. Weiss, in his Life of Jesus, says that, in the view of\n Scripture, human greatness does not consist in a man\u2019s producing\n everything in a natural way out of himself, but in possessing\n perfect receptivity for God\u2019s greatest gift. Therefore God\u2019s Son\n receives the Spirit without measure; and we may add that the\n believer in like manner receives Christ.\n\n\n2. Nature of this Union.\n\n\nWe have here to do not only with a fact of life, but with a unique\nrelation between the finite and the infinite. Our descriptions must\ntherefore be inadequate. Yet in many respects we know what this union is\nnot; in certain respects we can positively characterize it.\n\n\n It should not surprise us if we find it far more difficult to give\n a scientific definition of this union, than to determine the fact\n of its existence. It is a fact of life with which we have to deal;\n and the secret of life, even in its lowest forms, no philosopher\n has ever yet discovered. The tiniest flower witnesses to two\n facts: first, that of its own relative independence, as an\n individual organism; and secondly, that of its ultimate dependence\n upon a life and power not its own. So every human soul has its\n proper powers of intellect, affection, and will; yet it lives,\n moves, and has its being in God (_Acts 17:28_).\n\n Starting out from the truth of God\u2019s omnipresence, it might seem\n as if God\u2019s indwelling in the granite boulder was the last limit\n of his union with the finite. But we see the divine intelligence\n and goodness drawing nearer to us, by successive stages, in\n vegetable life, in the animal creation, and in the moral nature of\n man. And yet there are two stages beyond all these: first, in\n Christ\u2019s union with the believer; and secondly, in God\u2019s union\n with Christ. If this union of God with the believer be only one of\n several approximations of God to his finite creation, the fact\n that it is, equally with the others, not wholly comprehensible to\n reason, should not blind us either to its truth or to its\n importance.\n\n It is easier to\u2010day than at any other previous period of history\n to believe in the union of the believer with Christ. That God is\n immanent in the universe, and that there is a divine element in\n man, is familiar to our generation. All men are naturally one with\n Christ, the immanent God, and this natural union prepares the way\n for that spiritual union in which Christ joins himself to our\n faith. Campbell, The Indwelling Christ, 131\u2014\u201cIn the immanence of\n Christ in nature we find the ground of his immanence in human\n nature.... A man may be out of Christ, but Christ is never out of\n him. Those who banish him he does not abandon.\u201d John Caird, Fund.\n Ideas of Christianity, 2:233\u2010256\u2014\u201cGod is united with nature, in\n the atoms, in the trees, in the planets. Science is seeing nature\n full of the life of God. God is united to man in body and soul.\n The beating of his heart and the voice of conscience witness to\n God within. God sleeps in the stone, dreams in the animal, wakes\n in man.\u201d\n\n\nA. Negatively.\u2014It is not:\n\n(_a_) A merely natural union, like that of God with all human spirits,\u2014as\nheld by rationalists.\n\n\n In our physical life we are conscious of another life within us\n which is not subject to our wills: the heart beats involuntarily,\n whether we sleep or wake. But in our spiritual life we are still\n more conscious of a life within our life. Even the heathen said:\n \u201cEst Deus in nobis; agitante calescimus illo,\u201d and the Egyptians\n held to the identification of the departed with Osiris (Renouf,\n Hibbert Lectures, 185). But Paul urges us to work out our\n salvation, upon the very ground that \u201c_it is God that worketh_\u201d in\n us, \u201c_both to will and to work, for his good pleasure_\u201d (_Phil.\n 2:12, 13_). This life of God in the soul is the life of Christ.\n\n The movement of the electric car cannot be explained simply from\n the working of its own motor apparatus. The electric current\n throbbing through the wire, and the dynamo from which that energy\n proceeds, are needed to explain the result. In like manner we need\n a spiritual Christ to explain the spiritual activity of the\n Christian. A. H. Strong, Sermon before the Baptist World Congress\n in London, 1905\u2014\u201cWe had in America some years ago a steam engine\n all whose working parts were made of glass. The steam came from\n without, but, being hot enough to move machinery, this steam was\n itself invisible, and there was presented the curious spectacle of\n an engine, transparent, moving, and doing important work, while\n yet no cause for this activity was perceptible. So the church,\n humanity, the universe, are all in constant and progressive\n movement, but the Christ who moves them is invisible. Faith comes\n to believe where it cannot see. It joins itself to this invisible\n Christ, and knows him as its very life.\u201d\n\n\n(_b_) A merely moral union, or union of love and sympathy, like that\nbetween teacher and scholar, friend and friend,\u2014as held by Socinians and\nArminians.\n\n\n There is a moral union between different souls: _1 Sam.\n 18:1_\u2014\u201c_the soul of Jonathan was knit with the soul of David, and\n Jonathan loved him as his own soul_\u201d\u2014here the Vulgate has: \u201cAnima\n Jonath\u00e6 agglutinata Davidi.\u201d Aristotle calls friends \u201cone soul.\u201d\n So in a higher sense, in _Acts 4:32_, the early believers are said\n to have been \u201c_of one heart and soul_.\u201d But in _John 17:21, 26_,\n Christ\u2019s union with his people is distinguished from any mere\n union of love and sympathy: \u201c_that they may all be one; even as\n thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be in\n us;... that the love wherewith thou lovedst me may be in them, and\n I in them_.\u201d Jesus\u2019 aim, in the whole of his last discourse, is to\n show that no mere union of love and sympathy will be sufficient:\n \u201c_apart from me_,\u201d he says, \u201c_ye can do nothing_\u201d (_John 15:5_).\n That his disciples may be vitally joined to himself, is therefore\n the subject of his last prayer.\n\n Dorner says well, that Arminianism (and with this doctrine Roman\n Catholics and the advocates of New School views substantially\n agree) makes man a mere tangent to the circle of the divine\n nature. It has no idea of the interpenetration of the one by the\n other. But the Lutheran Formula of Concord says much more\n correctly: \u201cDamnamus sententiam quod non Deus ipse, sed dona Dei\n duntaxat, in credentibus habitent.\u201d\n\n Ritschl presents to us a historical Christ, and Pfleiderer\n presents to us an ideal Christ, but neither one gives us the\n living Christ who is the present spiritual life of the believer.\n Wendt, in his Teaching of Jesus, 2:310, comes equally far short of\n a serious interpretation of our Lord\u2019s promise, when he says:\n \u201cThis union to his person, as to its contents, is nothing else\n than adherence to the message of the kingdom of God brought by\n him.\u201d It is not enough for me to be merely _in touch_ with Christ.\n He must come to be \u201cnot so far as even to be near.\u201d Tennyson, The\n Higher Pantheism: \u201cCloser is he than breathing, and nearer than\n hands or feet.\u201d William Watson, The Unknown God: \u201cYea, in my flesh\n his Spirit doth flow, Too near, too far, for me to know.\u201d\n\n\n(_c_) A union of essence, which destroys the distinct personality and\nsubsistence of either Christ or the human spirit,\u2014as held by many of the\nmystics.\n\n\n Many of the mystics, as Schwenkfeld, Weigel, Sebastian Frank, held\n to an _essential_ union between Christ and the believer. One of\n Weigel\u2019s followers, therefore, could say to another: \u201cI am Christ\n Jesus, the living Word of God; I have redeemed thee by my sinless\n sufferings.\u201d We are ever to remember that the indwelling of Christ\n only puts the believer more completely in possession of himself,\n and makes him more conscious of his own personality and power.\n Union with Christ must be taken in connection with the other truth\n of the personality and activity of the Christian; otherwise it\n tends to pantheism. Martineau, Study, 2:190\u2014\u201cIn nature it is God\u2019s\n immanent life, in morals it is God\u2019s transcendent life, with which\n we commune.\u201d\n\n Angelus Silesius, a German philosophical poet (1624\u20101677),\n audaciously wrote: \u201cI know God cannot live an instant without me;\n He must give up the ghost, if I should cease to be.\u201d Lowde, a\n disciple of Malebranche, used the phrase \u201cGodded with God, and\n Christed with Christ,\u201d and Jonathan Edwards, in his Religious\n Affections, quotes it with disapprobation, saying that \u201cthe saints\n do not become actually partakers of the divine essence, as would\n be inferred from this abominable and blasphemous language of\n heretics\u201d (Allen, Jonathan Edwards, 224). \u201cSelf is not a mode of\n the divine: it is a principle of isolation. In order to religion,\n I must have a will to surrender.... \u2018Our wills are ours, to make\n them thine.\u2019... Though the self is, in _knowledge_, a principle of\n unification; in _existence_, or metaphysically, it is a principle\n of isolation\u201d (Seth).\n\n Inge, Christian Mysticism, 30\u2014\u201cSome of the mystics went astray by\n teaching a real _substitution_ of the divine for human nature,\n thus depersonalizing man\u2014a fatal mistake, for without human\n personality we cannot conceive of divine personality.\u201d Lyman\n Abbott: \u201cIn Christ, God and man are united, not as the river is\n united with the sea, losing its personality therein, but as the\n child is united with the father, or the wife with the husband,\n whose personality and individuality are strengthened and increased\n by the union.\u201d Here Dr. Abbott\u2019s view comes as far short of the\n truth as that of the mystics goes beyond the truth. As we shall\n see, the union of the believer with Christ is a vital union,\n surpassing in its intimacy any union of souls that we know. The\n union of child with father, or of wife with husband, is only a\n pointer which hints very imperfectly at the interpenetrating and\n energizing of the human spirit by the divine.\n\n\n(_d_) A union mediated and conditioned by participation of the sacraments\nof the church,\u2014as held by Romanists, Lutherans, and High\u2010Church\nEpiscopalians.\n\n\n Perhaps the most pernicious misinterpretation of the nature of\n this union is that which conceives of it as a physical and\n material one, and which rears upon this basis the fabric of a\n sacramental and external Christianity. It is sufficient here to\n say that this union cannot be mediated by sacraments, since\n sacraments presuppose it as already existing; both Baptism and the\n Lord\u2019s Supper are designed only for believers. Only faith receives\n and retains Christ; and faith is the act of the soul grasping what\n is purely invisible and supersensible: not the act of the body,\n submitting to Baptism or partaking of the Supper.\n\n William Lincoln: \u201cThe only way for the believer, if he wants to go\n rightly, is to remember that truth is always two\u2010sided. If there\n is any truth that the Holy Spirit has specially pressed upon your\n heart, if you do not want to push it to the extreme, ask what is\n the counter\u2010truth, and lean a little of your weight upon that;\n otherwise, if you bear so very much on one side of the truth,\n there is a danger of pushing it into a heresy. Heresy means\n selected truth; it does not mean error; heresy and error are very\n different things. Heresy is truth, but truth pushed into undue\n importance, to the disparagement of the truth upon the other\n side.\u201d Heresy (\u03b1\u1f35\u03c1\u03b5\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2) = an act of choice, the picking and\n choosing of a part, instead of comprehensively embracing the whole\n of truth. Sacramentarians substitute the symbol for the thing\n symbolized.\n\n\nB. Positively.\u2014It is:\n\n(_a_) An organic union,\u2014in which we become members of Christ and partakers\nof his humanity.\n\n\n Kant defines an organism, as that whose parts are reciprocally\n means and end. The body is an organism; since the limbs exist for\n the heart, and the heart for the limbs. So each member of Christ\u2019s\n body lives for him who is the head; and Christ the head equally\n lives for his members: _Eph. 5:29, 30_\u2014\u201c_no man ever hated his own\n flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, __ even as Christ also\n the church; because we are members of his body_.\u201d The train\u2010\n despatcher is a symbol of the concentration of energy; the\n switchmen and conductors who receive his orders are symbols of the\n localization of force; but it is all one organic system.\n\n\n(_b_) A vital union,\u2014in which Christ\u2019s life becomes the dominating\nprinciple within us.\n\n\n This union is a vital one, in distinction from any union of mere\n juxtaposition or external influence. Christ does not work upon us\n from without, as one separated from us, but from within, as the\n very heart from which the life\u2010blood of our spirits flows. See\n _Gal. 2:20_\u2014\u201c_it is no longer I that live, but Christ liveth in\n me: and that life which I now live in the flesh I live in faith,\n the faith which is in the Son of God, who loved me, and gave\n himself up for me;_\u201d _Col 3:3, 4_\u2014\u201c_For ye died, and your life is\n hid with Christ in God. When Christ, who is our life, shall be\n manifested, then shall ye also with him be manifested in glory._\u201d\n Christ\u2019s life is not corrupted by the corruption of his members,\n any more than the ray of light is defiled by the filth with which\n it comes in contact. We may be unconscious of this union with\n Christ, as we often are of the circulation of the blood, yet it\n may be the very source and condition of our life.\n\n\n(_c_) A spiritual union,\u2014that is, a union whose source and author is the\nHoly Spirit.\n\n\n By a spiritual union we mean a union not of body but of spirit,\u2014a\n union, therefore, which only the Holy Spirit originates and\n maintains. _Rom. 8:9, 10_\u2014\u201c_ye are not in the flesh but in the\n Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you. But if\n any man hath not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his. And if\n Christ is in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the spirit\n is life because of righteousness._\u201d The indwelling of Christ\n involves a continual exercise of efficient power. In _Eph. 3:16,\n 17_, \u201c_strengthened with power through his Spirit in the inward\n man_\u201d is immediately followed by \u201c_that Christ may dwell in your\n hearts through faith_.\u201d\n\n\n(_d_) An indissoluble union,\u2014that is, a union which, consistently with\nChrist\u2019s promise and grace, can never be dissolved.\n\n\n _Mat. 28:20_\u2014\u201c_lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the\n world_\u201d; _John 10:28_\u2014\u201c_they shall never perish, and no one shall\n snatch them out of my hand_\u201d; _Rom. 8:35, 39_\u2014\u201c_Who shall separate\n us from the love of Christ?... nor height, nor depth, nor any\n other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God,\n which is in Christ Jesus our Lord_\u201d; _1 Thess. 4:14, 17_\u2014\u201c_them\n also that are fallen asleep in Jesus will God bring with him ...\n then we that are alive, that are left, shall together with them be\n caught up in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall\n we ever be with the Lord._\u201d\n\n Christ\u2019s omnipresence makes it possible for him to be united to,\n and to be present in, each believer, as perfectly and fully as if\n that believer were the only one to receive Christ\u2019s fulness. As\n Christ\u2019s omnipresence makes the whole Christ present in every\n place, each believer has the whole Christ with him, as his source\n of strength, purity, life; so that each may say: Christ gives all\n his time and wisdom and care to me. Such a union as this lacks\n every element of instability. Once formed, the union is\n indissoluble. Many of the ties of earth are rudely broken,\u2014not so\n with our union with Christ,\u2014that endures forever.\n\n Since there is now an unchangeable and divine element in us, our\n salvation depends no longer upon our unstable wills, but upon\n Christ\u2019s purpose and power. By temporary declension from duty, or\n by our causeless unbelief, we may banish Christ to the barest and\n most remote room of the soul\u2019s house; but he does not suffer us\n wholly to exclude him; and when we are willing to unbar the doors,\n he is still there, ready to fill the whole mansion with his light\n and love.\n\n\n(_e_) An inscrutable union,\u2014mystical, however, only in the sense of\nsurpassing in its intimacy and value any other union of souls which we\nknow.\n\n\n This union is inscrutable, indeed; but it is not mystical, in the\n sense of being unintelligible to the Christian or beyond the reach\n of his experience. If we call it mystical at all, it should be\n only because, in the intimacy of its communion and in the\n transforming power of its influence, it surpasses any other union\n of souls that we know, and so cannot be fully described or\n understood by earthly analogies. _Eph. 5:32_\u2014\u201c_This mystery is\n great: but I speak in regard of Christ and of the church_\u201d; _Col.\n 1:27_\u2014\u201c_the riches of the glory of this mystery among the\n Gentiles, which is Christ in you, the hope of glory._\u201d\n\n See Diman, Theistic Argument, 380\u2014\u201cAs physical science has brought\n us to the conclusion that back of all the phenomena of the\n material universe there lies an invisible universe of forces, and\n that these forces may ultimately be reduced to one all\u2010pervading\n force in which the unity of the physical universe consists; and as\n philosophy has advanced the rational conjecture that this ultimate\n all\u2010pervading force is simply will\u2010force; so the great Teacher\n holds up to us the spiritual universe as pervaded by one\n omnipotent life\u2014a life which was revealed in him as its highest\n manifestation, but which is shared by all who by faith become\n partakers of his nature. He was Son of God: they too had power to\n become sons of God. The incarnation is wholly within the natural\n course and tendency of things. It was prepared for, it came, in\n the fulness of times. Christ\u2019s life is not something sporadic and\n individual, having its source in the personal conviction of each\n disciple; it implies a real connection with Christ, the head.\n Behind all nature there is one force; behind all varieties of\n Christian life and character there is one spiritual power. All\n nature is not inert matter,\u2014it is pervaded by a living presence.\n So all the body of believers live by virtue of the all\u2010working\n Spirit of Christ, the Holy Ghost.\u201d An epitaph at Silton, in\n Dorsetshire, reads: \u201cHere lies a piece of Christ\u2014a star in dust, A\n vein of gold, a china dish, that must Be used in heaven when God\n shall feed the just.\u201d\n\n A. H. Strong, in Examiner, 1880: \u201cSuch is the nature of union with\n Christ,\u2014such I mean, is the nature of every believer\u2019s union with\n Christ. For, whether he knows it or not, every Christian has\n entered into just such a partnership as this. It is this and this\n only which constitutes him a Christian, and which makes possible a\n Christian church. We may, indeed, be thus united to Christ,\n without being fully conscious of the real nature of our relation\n to him. We may actually possess the kernel, while as yet we have\n regard only to the shell; we may seem to ourselves to be united to\n Christ only by an external bond, while after all it is an inward\n and spiritual bond that makes us his. God often reveals to the\n Christian the mystery of the gospel, which is Christ _in_ him the\n hope of glory, at the very time that he is seeking only some\n nearer access to a Redeemer outside of him. Trying to find a union\n of co\u00f6peration or of sympathy, he is amazed to learn that there is\n already established a union with Christ more glorious and blessed,\n namely, a union of life; and so, like the miners in the Rocky\n Mountains, while he is looking only for silver, he finds gold.\n Christ and the believer have the same life. They are not separate\n persons linked together by some temporary bond of friendship,\u2014they\n are united by a tie as close and indissoluble as if the same blood\n ran in their veins. Yet the Christian may never have suspected how\n intimate a union he has with his Savior; and the first\n understanding of this truth may be the gateway through which he\n passes into a holier and happier stage of the Christian life.\u201d\n\n So the Way leads, through the Truth, to the Life (_John 14:6_).\n Apprehension of an external Savior prepares for the reception and\n experience of the internal Savior. Christ is first the Door of the\n sheep, but in him, after they have once entered in, they find\n pasture (_John 10:7\u20109_). On the nature of this union, see H. B.\n Smith, System of Christian Theology, 531\u2010539; Baird, Elohim\n Revealed, 601; Wilberforce, Incarnation, 208\u2010272, and New Birth of\n Man\u2019s Nature, 1\u201030. _Per contra_, see Park, Discourses, 117\u2010136.\n\n\n3. Consequences of this Union as respects the Believer.\n\n\nWe have seen that Christ\u2019s union with humanity, at the incarnation,\ninvolved him in all the legal liabilities of the race to which he united\nhimself, and enabled him so to assume the penalty of its sin as to make\nfor all men a full satisfaction to the divine justice, and to remove all\nexternal obstacles to man\u2019s return to God. An internal obstacle, however,\nstill remains\u2014the evil affections and will, and the consequent guilt, of\nthe individual soul. This last obstacle also Christ removes, in the case\nof all his people, by uniting himself to them in a closer and more perfect\nmanner than that in which he is united to humanity at large. As Christ\u2019s\nunion with the race secures the objective reconciliation of the race to\nGod, so Christ\u2019s union with believers secures the subjective\nreconciliation of believers to God.\n\n\n In Baird, Elohim Revealed, 607\u2010610, in Owen, on Justification,\n chap. 8, in Boston, Covenant of Grace, chap. 2, and in Dale,\n Atonement, 265\u2010440, the union of the believer with Christ is made\n to explain the bearing of our sins by Christ. As we have seen in\n our discussion of the Atonement, however (page 759), this explains\n the cause by the effect, and implies that Christ died only for the\n elect (see review of Dale, in Brit. Quar. Rev., Apr.\n 1876:221\u2010225). It is not the union of Christ with the believer,\n but the union of Christ with humanity at large, that explains his\n taking upon him human guilt and penalty.\n\n Amnesty offered to a rebellious city may be complete, yet it may\n avail only for those who surrender. Pardon secured from a\n Governor, upon the ground of the services of an Advocate, may be\n effectual only when the convict accepts it,\u2014there is no hope for\n him when he tears up the pardon. Dr. H. E. Robins: \u201cThe judicial\n declaration of acquittal on the ground of the death of Christ,\n which comes to all men (_Rom. 5:18_), and into the benefits of\n which they are introduced by natural birth, is inchoate\n justification, and will become perfected justification through the\n new birth of the Holy Spirit, unless the working of this divine\n agent is resisted by the personal moral action of those who are\n lost.\u201d What Dr. Robins calls \u201cinchoate justification\u201d we prefer to\n call \u201cideal justification\u201d or \u201cattainable justification.\u201d Humanity\n in Christ is justified, and every member of the race who joins\n himself to Christ by faith participates in Christ\u2019s justification.\n H. E. Dudley: \u201cAdam\u2019s sin holds us all down just as gravity holds\n all, while Christ\u2019s righteousness, though secured for all and\n accessible to all, involves an effort of will in climbing and\n grasping which not all will make.\u201d Justification in Christ is the\n birthright of humanity; but, in order to possess and enjoy it,\n each of us must claim and appropriate it by faith.\n\n R. W. Dale, Fellowship with Christ, 7\u2014\u201cWhen we were created in\n Christ, the fortunes of the human race for good or evil became\n his. The Incarnation revealed and fulfilled the relations which\n already existed between the Son of God and mankind. From the\n beginning Christ had entered into fellowship with us. When we\n sinned, he remained in fellowship with us still. Our miseries\u201d [we\n would add: our guilt] \u201cwere his, by his own choice.... His\n fellowship with us is the foundation of our fellowship with\n him.... When I have discovered that by the very constitution of my\n nature I am to achieve perfection in the power of the life of\n Another\u2014who is yet not Another, but the very ground of my being\u2014it\n ceases to be incredible to me that Another\u2014who is yet not\n Another\u2014should be the Atonement for my sin, and that his relation\n to God should determine mine.\u201d\n\n A tract entitled \u201cThe Seven Togethers\u201d sums up the Scripture\n testimony with regard to the Consequences of the believer\u2019s Union\n with Christ: 1. Crucified together with Christ\u2014_Gal.\n 2:20_\u2014\u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b5\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03cd\u03c1\u03c9\u03bc\u03b1\u03b9. 2. Died together with Christ\u2014_Col.\n 2:20_\u2014\u1f00\u03c0\u03b5\u03b8\u03ac\u03bd\u03b5\u03c4\u03b5. 3. Buried together with Christ\u2014_Rom.\n 6:4_\u2014\u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b5\u03c4\u03ac\u03c6\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd. 4. Quickened together with Christ\u2014_Eph.\n 2:5_\u2014\u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b5\u03b6\u03c9\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03af\u03b7\u03c3\u03b5\u03bd. 5. Raised together with Christ\u2014_Col.\n 3:1_\u2014\u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b7\u03b3\u03ad\u03c1\u03b8\u03b7\u03c4\u03b5. 6. Sufferers together with Christ\u2014_Rom.\n 8:17_\u2014\u03c3\u03c5\u03bc\u03c0\u03ac\u03c3\u03c7\u03bf\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd. 7. Glorified together with Christ\u2014_Rom.\n 8:17_\u2014\u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b4\u03bf\u03be\u03b1\u03c3\u03b8\u1ff6\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd. Union with Christ results in common sonship,\n relation to God, character, influence, and destiny.\n\n Imperfect apprehension of the believer\u2019s union with Christ works\n to the great injury of Christian doctrine. An experience of union\n with Christ first enables us to understand the death of sin and\n separation from God which has befallen the race sprung from the\n first Adam. The life and liberty of the children of God in Christ\n Jesus shows us by contrast how far astray we had gone. The vital\n and organic unity of the new race sprung from the second Adam\n reveals the depravity and disintegration which we had inherited\n from our first father. We see that as there is one source of\n spiritual life in Christ, so there was one source of corrupt life\n in Adam; and that as we are justified by reason of our oneness\n with the justified Christ, so we are condemned by reason of our\n oneness with the condemned Adam.\n\n A. H. Strong, Christ in Creation, 175\u2014\u201cIf it is consistent with\n evolution that the physical and natural life of the race should be\n derived from a single source, then it is equally consistent with\n evolution that the moral and spiritual life of the race should be\n derived from a single source. Scripture is stating only scientific\n fact when it sets the second Adam, the head of redeemed humanity,\n over against the first Adam, the head of fallen humanity. We are\n told that evolution should give us many Christs. We reply that\n evolution has not given us many Adams. Evolution, as it assigns to\n the natural head of the race a supreme and unique position, must\n be consistent with itself, and must assign a supreme and unique\n position to Jesus Christ, the spiritual head of the race. As there\n was but one Adam from whom all the natural life of the race was\n derived, so that there can be but one Christ from whom all the\n spiritual life of the race is derived.\u201d\n\n\nThe consequences of union with Christ may be summarily stated as follows:\n\n(_a_) Union with Christ involves a change in the dominant affection of the\nsoul. Christ\u2019s entrance into the soul makes it a new creature, in the\nsense that the ruling disposition, which before was sinful, now becomes\nholy. This change we call _Regeneration_.\n\n\n _Rom. 8:2_\u2014\u201c_For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus\n made me free from the law of sin and of death_\u201d; _2 Cor.\n 5:17_\u2014\u201c_if any man is in Christ, he is a new creature_\u201d\n (marg.\u2014\u201c_there is a new creation_\u201d); _Gal. 1:15, 16_\u2014\u201c_it was the\n good pleasure of God ... to reveal his Son in me_\u201d; _Eph.\n 2:10_\u2014\u201c_For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for\n good works._\u201d As we derive our old nature from the first man Adam,\n by birth, so we derive a new nature from the second man Christ, by\n the new birth. Union with Christ is the true \u201ctransfusion of\n blood.\u201d \u201cThe death\u2010struck sinner, like the wan, an\u00e6mic, dying\n invalid, is saved by having poured into his veins the healthier\n blood of Christ\u201d (Drummond, Nat. Law in the Spir. World). God\n regenerates the soul by uniting it to Jesus Christ.\n\n In the Johnston Harvester Works at Batavia, when they paint their\n machinery, they do it by immersing part after part in a great tank\n of paint,\u2014so the painting is instantaneous and complete. Our\n baptism into Christ is the outward picture of an inward immersion\n of the soul not only into his love and fellowship, but into his\n very life, so that in him we become new creatures (_2 Cor. 5:17_).\n As Miss Sullivan surrounded Helen Keller with the influence of her\n strong personality, by intelligence and sympathy and determination\n striving to awaken the blind and dumb soul and give it light and\n love, so Jesus envelops us. But his Spirit is more encompassing\n and more penetrating than any human influence however powerful,\n because his life is the very ground and principle of our being.\n\n Tennyson: \u201cO for a man to arise in me, That the man that I am may\n cease to be!\u201d Emerson: \u201cHimself from God he could not free; He\n builded better than he knew.\u201d Religion is not the adding of a new\n department of activity as an adjunct to our own life or the\n grafting of a new method of manifestation upon the old. It is\n rather the grafting of our souls into Christ, so that his life\n dominates and manifests itself in all our activities. The magnet\n which left to itself can lift only a three pound weight, will lift\n three hundred when it is attached to the electric dynamo.\n Expositor\u2019s Greek Testament on _1 Cor. 15:45, 46_\u2014\u201cThe action of\n Jesus in \u2018_breathing_\u2019 upon his disciples while he said, \u2018_Receive\n the Holy Spirit_\u2019 (_John 20:22_ _sq._) symbolized the vitalizing\n relationship which at this epoch he assumed towards mankind; this\n act raised to a higher potency the original \u2018_breathing_\u2019 of God\n by which \u2018_man became a living soul_\u2019 (_Gen. 2:7_).\u201d\n\n\n(_b_) Union with Christ involves a new exercise of the soul\u2019s powers in\nrepentance and faith; faith, indeed, is the act of the soul by which,\nunder the operation of God, Christ is received. This new exercise of the\nsoul\u2019s powers we call _Conversion_ (Repentance and Faith). It is the\nobverse or human side of Regeneration.\n\n\n _Eph. 3:17_\u2014\u201c_that Christ may dwell in your hearts through\n faith_\u201d; _2 Tim. 3:15_\u2014\u201c_the sacred writings which are able to\n make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ\n Jesus._\u201d Faith is the soul\u2019s laying hold of Christ as its only\n source of life, pardon, and salvation. And so we see what true\n religion is. It is not a moral life; it is not a determination to\n be religious; it is not faith, if by faith we mean an external\n trust that somehow Christ will save us; it is nothing less than\n the life of the soul in God, through Christ his Son. To Christ\n then we are to look for the origin, continuance and increase of\n our faith (_Luke 17:5_\u2014\u201c_said unto the Lord, Increase our\n faith_\u201d). Our faith is but a part of \u201c_his fulness_\u201d of which \u201c_we\n all received, and grace for grace_\u201d (_John 1:16_).\n\n A. H. Strong, Sermon before the Baptist World Congress, London,\n 1905\u2014\u201cChristianity is summed up in the two facts: Christ _for_ us,\n and Christ _in_ us\u2014Christ _for_ us upon the Cross, revealing the\n eternal opposition of holiness to sin, and yet, through God\u2019s\n eternal suffering for sin making objective atonement for us; and\n Christ _in_ us by his Spirit, renewing in us the lost image of\n God, and abiding in us as the all\u2010sufficient source of purity and\n power. Here are the two foci of the Christian ellipse: Christ\n _for_ us, who redeemed us from the curse of the law by being made\n a curse for us, and Christ _in_ us, the hope of glory, whom the\n apostle calls the mystery of the gospel.\n\n \u201cWe need Christ _in_ us as well as Christ _for_ us. How shall I,\n how shall society, find healing and purification within? Let me\n answer by reminding you of what they did at Chicago. In all the\n world there was no river more stagnant and fetid than was Chicago\n River. Its sluggish stream received the sweepings of the\n watercraft and the offal of the city, and there was no current to\n carry the detritus away. There it settled, and bred miasma and\n fever. At last it was suggested that, by cutting through the low\n ridge between the city and the Desplaines River, the current could\n be set running in the opposite direction, and drainage could be\n secured into the Illinois River and the great Mississippi. At a\n cost of fifteen millions of dollars the cut was made, and now all\n the water of Lake Michigan can be relied upon to cleanse that\n turbid stream. What Chicago River could never do for itself, the\n great lake now does for it. So no human soul can purge itself of\n its sin; and what the individual cannot do, humanity at large is\n powerless to accomplish. Sin has dominion over us, and we are foul\n to the very depths of our being, until with the help of God we\n break through the barrier of our self\u2010will, and let the floods of\n Christ\u2019s purifying life flow into us. Then, in an hour, more is\n done to renew, than all our efforts for years had effected. Thus\n humanity is saved, individual by individual, not by philosophy, or\n philanthropy, or self\u2010development, or self\u2010reformation, but simply\n by joining itself to Jesus Christ, and by being filled in Him with\n all the fulness of God.\u201d\n\n\n(_c_) Union with Christ gives to the believer the legal standing and\nrights of Christ. As Christ\u2019s union with the race involves atonement, so\nthe believer\u2019s union with Christ involves _Justification_. The believer is\nentitled to take for his own all that Christ is, and all that Christ has\ndone; and this because he has within him that new life of humanity which\nsuffered in Christ\u2019s death and rose from the grave in Christ\u2019s\nresurrection,\u2014in other words, because he is virtually one person with the\nRedeemer. In Christ the believer is prophet, priest, and king.\n\n\n _Acts 13:39_\u2014\u201c_by him_ [lit.: \u2018_in him_\u2019 = in union with him]\n _every one that believeth is justified_\u201d; _Rom. 6:7, 8_\u2014\u201c_he that\n hath died is justified from sin ... we died with Christ_\u201d;\n _7:4_\u2014\u201c_dead to the law through the body of Christ_\u201d; _8:1_\u2014\u201c_no\n condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus_\u201d; _17_\u2014\u201c_heirs of\n God, and joint\u2010heirs with Christ_\u201d; _1 Cor. 1:30_\u2014\u201c_But of him ye\n are in Christ Jesus, who was made unto us wisdom from God, and\n righteousness_ [justification]\u201d; _3:21, 23_\u2014\u201c_all things are yours\n ... and ye are Christ\u2019s_\u201d; _6:11_\u2014\u201c_ye were justified in the name\n of the Lord Jesus Christ, and in the Spirit of our God_\u201d; _2 Cor.\n 5:14_\u2014\u201c_we thus judge, that one died for all, therefore all\n died_\u201d; _21_\u2014\u201c_Him who knew no sin he made to be sin on our\n behalf; that we might become the righteousness_ [justification]\n _of God in him_\u201d = God\u2019s justified persons, in union with Christ\n (see pages 760, 761).\n\n _Gal. 2:20_\u2014\u201c_I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no\n longer I that live, but Christ liveth in me_\u201d; _Eph. 1:4,\n 6_\u2014\u201c_chose us in him ... to the praise of the glory of his grace,\n which he freely bestowed on us in the Beloved_\u201d; _2:5, 6_\u2014\u201c_even\n when we were dead through our trespasses, made us alive together\n with Christ ... made us to sit with him in the heavenly places, in\n Christ Jesus_\u201d; _Phil. 3:8, 9_\u2014\u201c_that I may gain Christ, and be\n found in him, not having a righteousness of mine own, even that\n which is of the law, but that which is through faith in Christ,\n the righteousness which is from God by faith_\u201d; _2 Tim.\n 2:11_\u2014\u201c_Faithful is the saying: For if we died with him, we shall\n also live with him._\u201d Prophet: _Luke 12:12_\u2014\u201c_the Holy Spirit\n shall teach you in that very hour what ye ought to say_\u201d; _1 John\n 2:20_\u2014\u201c_ye have an anointing from the Holy One, and ye know all\n things._\u201d Priest: _1 Pet. 2:5_\u2014\u201c_a holy priesthood, to offer up\n spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God through Jesus Christ_\u201d;\n _Rev. 20:6_\u2014\u201c_they shall be priests of God and of Christ_\u201d; _1\n Pet. 2:9_\u2014\u201c_a royal priesthood._\u201d King: _Rev. 3:21_\u2014\u201c_He that\n overcometh, I will give to him to sit down with me in my throne_\u201d;\n _5:10_\u2014\u201c_madest them to be unto our God a kingdom and priests._\u201d\n The connection of justification and union with Christ delivers the\n former from the charge of being a mechanical and arbitrary\n procedure. As Jonathan Edwards has said: \u201cThe justification of the\n believer is no other than his being admitted to communion in, or\n participation of, this head and surety of all believers.\u201d\n\n\n(_d_) Union with Christ secures to the believer the continuously\ntransforming, assimilating power of Christ\u2019s life,\u2014first, for the soul;\nsecondly, for the body,\u2014consecrating it in the present, and in the future\nraising it up in the likeness of Christ\u2019s glorified body. This continuous\ninfluence, so far as it is exerted in the present life, we call\n_Sanctification_, the human side or aspect of which is _Perseverance_.\n\n\n For the soul: _John 1:16_\u2014\u201c_of his fulness we all received, and\n grace for grace_\u201d\u2014successive and increasing measures of grace,\n corresponding to the soul\u2019s successive and increasing needs; _Rom.\n 8:10_\u2014\u201c_if Christ is in you, the body is dead because of sin; but\n the spirit is life because of righteousness_\u201d; _1 Cor.\n 15:45_\u2014\u201c_The last Adam became a life\u2010giving spirit_\u201d; _Phil.\n 2:5_\u2014\u201c_Have this mind in you, which was also in Christ Jesus_\u201d; _1\n John 3:2_\u2014\u201c_if he shall be manifested, we shall be like him._\u201d\n \u201cCan Christ let the believer fall out of his hands? No, for the\n believer is his hands.\u201d\n\n For the body: _1 Cor. 6:17\u201020_\u2014\u201c_he that is joined unto the Lord\n is one spirit ... know ye not that your body is a temple of the\n Holy Spirit which is in you ... glorify God therefore in your\n body_\u201d; _Thess. 5:23_\u2014\u201c_And the God of peace himself sanctify you\n wholly; and may your spirit and soul and body be preserved entire,\n without blame at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ_\u201d; _Rom.\n 8:11_\u2014\u201c_shall give life also to your mortal bodies through his\n Spirit that dwelleth in you_\u201d; _1 Cor. 15:49_\u2014\u201c_as we have borne\n the image of the earthy_ [man], _we shall also bear the image of\n the heavenly_ [man]\u201d; _Phil. 3:20, 21_\u2014\u201c_For our citizenship is in\n heaven; from whence also we wait for a Savior, the Lord Jesus\n Christ: who shall fashion anew the body of our humiliation, that\n it may be conformed to the body of his glory, according to the\n working whereby he is able even to subject all things unto\n himself._\u201d\n\n Is there a physical miracle wrought for the drunkard in his\n regeneration? Mr. Moody says, Yes; Mr. Gough says, No. We prefer\n to say that the change is a spiritual one; but that the \u201cexpulsive\n power of a new affection\u201d indirectly affects the body, so that old\n appetites sometimes disappear in a moment; and that often, in the\n course of years, great changes take place even in the believer\u2019s\n body. Tennyson, Idylls: \u201cHave ye looked at Edyrn? Have ye seen how\n nobly changed? This work of his is great and wonderful; His very\n face with change of heart is changed.\u201d \u201cChrist in the soul\n fashions the germinal man into his own likeness,\u2014this is the\n embryology of the new life. The cardinal error in religious life\n is the attempt to live without proper environment\u201d (see Drummond,\n Natural Law in Spiritual World, 253\u2010284). Human life from Adam\n does not stand the test,\u2014only divine\u2010human life in Christ can\n secure us from falling. This is the work of Christ, now that he\n has ascended and taken to himself his power, namely, to give his\n life more and more fully to the church, until it shall grow up in\n all things into him, the Head, and shall fitly express his glory\n to the world.\n\n As the accomplished organist discloses unsuspected capabilities of\n his instrument, so Christ brings into activity all the latent\n powers of the human soul. \u201cI was five years in the ministry,\u201d said\n an American preacher, \u201cbefore I realized that my Savior is alive.\u201d\n Dr. R. W. Dale has left on record the almost unutterable feelings\n that stirred his soul when he first realized this truth; see\n Walker, The Spirit and the Incarnation, preface, v. Many have\n struggled in vain against sin until they have admitted Christ to\n their hearts,\u2014then they could say: \u201c_this is the victory that hath\n overcome the world, even our faith_\u201d (_1 John 5:4_). \u201cGo out, God\n will go in; Die thou, and let him live; Be not, and he will be;\n Wait, and he\u2019ll all things give.\u201d The best way to get air out of a\n vessel is to pour water in. Only in Christ can we find our pardon,\n peace, purity, and power. He is \u201c_made unto us wisdom from God,\n and justification and sanctification, and redemption_\u201d (_1 Cor.\n 1:30_). A medical man says: \u201cThe only radical remedy for\n dipsomania is religiomania\u201d (quoted in William James, Varieties of\n Religious Experience, 268). It is easy to break into an empty\n house; the spirit cast out returns, finds the house empty, brings\n seven others, and \u201c_the last state of that man becometh worse than\n the first_\u201d (_Mat. 12:45_). There is no safety in simply expelling\n sin; we need also to bring in Christ; in fact only he can enable\n us to expel not only actual sin but the love of it.\n\n Alexander McLaren: \u201cIf we are \u2018_in Christ_,\u2019 we are like a diver\n in his crystal bell, and have a solid though invisible wall around\n us, which keeps all sea\u2010monsters off us, and communicates with the\n upper air, whence we draw the breath of calm life and can work in\n security though in the ocean depths.\u201d John Caird, Fund. Ideas,\n 2:98\u2014\u201cHow do we know that the life of God has not departed from\n nature? Because every spring we witness the annual miracle of\n nature\u2019s revival, every summer and autumn the waving corn. How do\n we know that Christ has not departed from the world? Because he\n imparts to the soul that trusts him a power, a purity, a peace,\n which are beyond all that nature can give.\u201d\n\n\n(_e_) Union with Christ brings about a fellowship of Christ with the\nbeliever,\u2014Christ takes part in all the labors, temptations, and sufferings\nof his people; a fellowship of the believer with Christ,\u2014so that Christ\u2019s\nwhole experience on earth is in some measure reproduced in him; a\nfellowship of all believers with one another,\u2014furnishing a basis for the\nspiritual unity of Christ\u2019s people on earth, and for the eternal communion\nof heaven. The doctrine of Union with Christ is therefore the\nindispensable preparation for _Ecclesiology_, and for _Eschatology_.\n\n\n Fellowship of Christ with the believer: _Phil. 4:13_\u2014\u201c_I can do\n all things in him that strengtheneth me_\u201d; _Heb. 4:15_\u2014\u201c_For we\n have not a high priest that cannot be touched with the feeling of\n our infirmities_\u201d; _cf._ _Is. 63:9_\u2014\u201c_In all their affliction he\n was afflicted._\u201d _Heb. 2:18_\u2014\u201c_in that he himself hath suffered\n being tempted, he is able to succor them that are tempted_\u201d = are\n being tempted, are under temptation. Bp. Wordsworth: \u201cBy his\n _passion_ he acquired _compassion_.\u201d _2 Cor. 2:14_\u2014\u201c_thanks be\n unto God, who always leadeth us in triumph in Christ_\u201d = Christ\n leads us in triumph, but his triumph is ours, even if it be a\n triumph over us. One with him, we participate in his joy and in\n his sovereignty. _Rev. 3:21_\u2014\u201c_He that overcometh, I will give to\n him to sit down with me in my throne._\u201d W. F. Taylor on _Rom.\n 8:9_\u2014\u201c_The Spirit of God dwelleth in you.... if any man hath not\n the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his_\u201d\u2014\u201cChrist dwells in us,\n says the apostle. But do we accept him as a resident, or as a\n ruler? England was first represented at King Thebau\u2019s court by her\n resident. This official could rebuke, and even threaten, but no\n more,\u2014Thebau was sovereign. Burma knew no peace, till England\n ruled. So Christ does not consent to be represented by a mere\n resident. He must himself dwell within the soul, and he must\n reign.\u201d Christina Rossetti, Thee Only: \u201cLord, we are rivers\n running to thy sea, Our waves and ripples all derived from thee; A\n nothing we should have, a nothing be, Except for thee. Sweet are\n the waters of thy shoreless sea; Make sweet our waters that make\n haste to thee; Pour in thy sweetness, that ourselves may be\n Sweetness to thee!\u201d\n\n Of the believer with Christ: _Phil. 3:10_\u2014\u201c_that I may know him,\n and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his\n sufferings, becoming conformed unto his death_\u201d; _Col.\n 1:24_\u2014\u201c_fill up on my part that which is lacking of the\n afflictions of Christ in my flesh for his body\u2019s sake, which is\n the church_\u201d; _1 Pet. 4:13_\u2014\u201c_partakers of Christ\u2019s sufferings._\u201d\n The Christian reproduces Christ\u2019s life in miniature, and, in a\n true sense, lives it over again. Only upon the principle of union\n with Christ can we explain how the Christian instinctively applies\n to himself the prophecies and promises which originally and\n primarily were uttered with reference to Christ: \u201c_thou wilt not\n leave my soul to Sheol; Neither wilt thou suffer thy holy one to\n see corruption_\u201d (_Ps. 16:10, 11_). This fellowship is the ground\n of the promises made to believing prayer: _John\n 14:13_\u2014\u201c_whatsoever ye shall ask is my name, that will I do_\u201d;\n Westcott, Bib. Com., _in loco_: \u201cThe meaning of the phrase [\u2018_in\n my name_\u2019] is \u2018as being one with me even as I am revealed to you.\u2019\n Its two correlatives are \u2018_in me_\u2019 and the Pauline \u2018_in Christ_\u2019.\u201d\n \u201c_All things are yours_\u201d (_1 Cor. 3:21_), because Christ is\n universal King, and all believers are exalted to fellowship with\n him. After the battle of Sedan, King William asked a wounded\n Prussian officer whether it were well with him. \u201cAll is well where\n your majesty leads!\u201d was the reply. _Phil. 1:21_\u2014\u201c_For to me to\n live is Christ, and to die is gain._\u201d Paul indeed uses the words\n \u201cChrist\u201d and \u201cchurch\u201d as interchangeable terms: _1 Cor.\n 12:12_\u2014\u201c_as the body is one, and hath many members, ... so also is\n Christ._\u201d Denney, Studies in Theology, 171\u2014\u201cThere is not in the N.\n T. from beginning to end, in the record of the original and\n genuine Christian life, a single word of despondency or gloom. It\n is the most buoyant, exhilarating and joyful book in the world.\u201d\n This is due to the fact that the writers believe in a living and\n exalted Christ, and know themselves to be one with him. They\n descend crowned into the arena. In the Soudan, every morning for\n half an hour before General Gordon\u2019s tent there lay a white\n handkerchief. The most pressing message, even on matters of life\n and death, waited till that handkerchief was withdrawn. It was the\n signal that Christ and Gordon were in communion with each other.\n\n Of all believers with one another: _John 17:21_\u2014\u201c_that they may\n all be one_\u201d; _1 Cor. 10:17_\u2014\u201c_we, who are many, are one bread,\n one body: for we all partake of the one bread_\u201d; _Eph.\n 2:15_\u2014\u201c_create in himself of the two one new man, so making\n peace_\u201d; _1 John 1:3_\u2014\u201c_that ye also may have fellowship with us:\n yea, and our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus\n Christ_\u201d\u2014here the word \u03ba\u03bf\u03b9\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd\u03af\u03b1 is used. Fellowship with each\n other is the effect and result of the fellowship of each with God\n in Christ. Compare _John 10:16_\u2014\u201c_they shall become one flock, one\n shepherd_\u201d; Westcott, Bib. Com., _in loco_: \u201cThe bond of\n fellowship is shown to lie in the common relation to one Lord....\n Nothing is said of one \u2018fold\u2019 under the new dispensation.\u201d Here is\n a unity, not of external organization, but of common life. Of this\n the visible church is the consequence and expression. But this\n communion is not limited to earth,\u2014it is perpetuated beyond death:\n _1 Thess. 4:17_\u2014\u201c_so shall we ever be with the Lord_\u201d; _Heb.\n 12:23_\u2014\u201c_to the general assembly and church of the firstborn who\n are enrolled in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the\n spirits of just men made perfect_\u201d; _Rev. 21_ and _22_\u2014the city of\n God, the new Jerusalem, is the image of perfect society, as well\n as of intensity and fulness of life in Christ. The ordinances\n express the essence of Ecclesiology\u2014union with Christ\u2014for Baptism\n symbolizes the incorporation of the believer in Christ, while the\n Lord\u2019s Supper symbolizes the incorporation of Christ in the\n believer. Christianity is a social matter, and the true Christian\n feels the need of being with and among his brethren. The Romans\n could not understand why \u201cthis new sect\u201d must be holding meetings\n all the time\u2014even daily meetings. Why could they not go singly, or\n in families, to the temples, and make offerings to their God, and\n then come away, as the pagans did? It was this meeting together\n which exposed them to persecution and martyrdom. It was the\n natural and inevitable expression of their union with Christ and\n so of their union with one another.\n\n The consciousness of union with Christ gives assurance of\n salvation. It is a great stimulus to believing prayer and to\n patient labor. It is a duty to \u201c_know what is the hope of his\n calling, what the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the\n saints, and what the exceeding greatness of his power to us\u2010ward\n who believe_\u201d (_Eph. 1:18, 19_). Christ\u2019s command, \u201c_Abide in me,\n and I in you_\u201d (_John 15:4_), implies that we are both to realize\n and to confirm this union, by active exertion of our own wills. We\n are to abide in him by an entire consecration, and to let him\n abide in us by an appropriating faith. We are to give ourselves to\n Christ, and to take in return the Christ who gives himself to\n us,\u2014in other words, we are to believe Christ\u2019s promises and to act\n upon them. All sin consists in the sundering of man\u2019s life from\n God, and most systems of falsehood in religion are attempts to\n save man without merging his life in God\u2019s once more. The only\n religion that can save mankind is the religion that fills the\n whole heart and the whole life with God, and that aims to\n interpenetrate universal humanity with that same living Christ who\n has already made himself one with the believer. This consciousness\n of union with Christ gives \u201c_boldness_\u201d (\u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03c1\u03b7\u03c3\u03af\u03b1\u2014_Acts 4:13_; _1\n John 5:14_) toward men and toward God. The word belongs to the\n Greek democracies. Freemen are bold. Demosthenes boasts of his\n frankness. Christ frees us from the hidebound, introspective,\n self\u2010conscious spirit. In him we become free, demonstrative,\n outspoken. So we find, in John\u2019s epistles, that boldness in prayer\n is spoken of as a virtue, and the author of the Epistle to the\n Hebrews urges us to \u201c_draw near with boldness unto the throne of\n grace_\u201d (_Heb. 4:16_). An engagement of marriage is not the same\n as marriage. The parties may be still distant from each other.\n Many Christians get just near enough to Christ to be engaged to\n him. This seems to be the experience of Christian in the Pilgrim\u2019s\n Progress. But our privilege is to have a present Christ, and to do\n our work not only _for_ him, but _in_ him. \u201cSince Christ and we\n are one, Why should we doubt or fear?\u201d \u201cWe two are so joined,\n He\u2019ll not be in heaven, And leave me behind.\u201d\n\n We append a few statements with regard to this union and its\n consequences, from noted names in theology and the church. Luther:\n \u201cBy faith thou art so glued to Christ that of thee and him there\n becomes as it were one person, so that with confidence thou canst\n say: \u2018I am Christ,\u2014that is, Christ\u2019s righteousness, victory,\n _etc._, are mine\u2019; and Christ in turn can say: \u2018I am that\n sinner,\u2014that is, his sins, his death, _etc._, are mine, because he\n clings to me and I to him, for we have been joined through faith\n into one flesh and bone.\u2019 \u201d Calvin: \u201cI attribute the highest\n importance to the connection between the head and the members; to\n the inhabitation of Christ in our hearts; in a word, to the\n mystical union by which we enjoy him, so that, being made ours, he\n makes us partakers of the blessings with which he is furnished.\u201d\n John Bunyan: \u201cThe Lord led me into the knowledge of the mystery of\n union with Christ, that I was joined to him, that I was bone of\n his bone and flesh of his flesh. By this also my faith in him as\n my righteousness was the more confirmed; for if he and I were one,\n then his righteousness was mine, his merits mine, his victory also\n mine. Now could I see myself in heaven and on earth at once\u2014in\n heaven by my Christ, my risen head, my righteousness and life,\n though on earth by my body or person.\u201d Edwards: \u201cFaith is the\n soul\u2019s active uniting with Christ. God sees fit that, in order to\n a union\u2019s being established between two intelligent active beings,\n there should be the mutual act of both, that each should receive\n the other, as entirely joining themselves to one another.\u201d Andrew\n Fuller: \u201cI have no doubt that the imputation of Christ\u2019s\n righteousness presupposes a union with him; since there is no\n perceivable fitness in bestowing benefits on one for another\u2019s\n sake, where there is no union or relation between.\u201d\n\n See Luther, quoted, with other references, in Thomasius, Christi\n Person und Werk, 3:325. See also Calvin, Institutes, 1:660;\n Edwards, Works, 4:66, 69, 70; Andrew Fuller, Works, 2:685; Pascal,\n Thoughts, Eng. trans., 429; Hooker, Eccl. Polity, book 5, ch. 56;\n Tillotson, Sermons, 3:307; Trench, Studies in Gospels, 284, and\n Christ the True Vine, in Hulsean Lectures; Sch\u00f6berlein, in Studien\n und Kritiken, 1847:7\u201069; Caird, on Union with God, in Scotch\n Sermons, sermon 2; Godet, on the Ultimate Design of Man, in\n Princeton Rev., Nov. 1880\u2014the design is \u201cGod in man, and man in\n God\u201d; Baird, Elohim Revealed, 590\u2010617; Upham, Divine Union,\n Interior Life, Life of Madame Guyon and F\u00e9nelon; A. J. Gordon, In\n Christ; McDuff, In Christo; J. Denham Smith, Life\u2010truths, 25\u201098;\n A. H. Strong, Philosophy and Religion, 220\u2010225; Bishop Hall\u2019s\n Treatise on The Church Mystical; Andrew Murray, Abide in Christ;\n Stearns, Evidence of Christian Experience, 145, 174, 179; F. B.\n Meyer, Christian Living\u2014essay on Appropriation of Christ, _vs._\n mere imitation of Christ; Sanday, Epistle to the Romans,\n supplementary essay on the Mystic Union; H. B. Smith, System of\n Theology, 531; J. M. Campbell, The Indwelling Christ.\n\n\nII. Regeneration.\n\n\nRegeneration is that act of God by which the governing disposition of the\nsoul is made holy, and by which, through the truth as a means, the first\nholy exercise of this disposition is secured.\n\nRegeneration, or the new birth, is the divine side of that change of heart\nwhich, viewed from the human side, we call conversion. It is God\u2019s turning\nthe soul to himself,\u2014conversion being the soul\u2019s turning itself to God, of\nwhich God\u2019s turning it is both the accompaniment and cause. It will be\nobserved from the above definition, that there are two aspects of\nregeneration, in the first of which the soul is passive, in the second of\nwhich the soul is active. God changes the governing disposition,\u2014in this\nchange the soul is simply acted upon. God secures the initial exercise of\nthis disposition in view of the truth,\u2014in this change the soul itself\nacts. Yet these two parts of God\u2019s operation are simultaneous. At the same\nmoment that he makes the soul sensitive, he pours in the light of his\ntruth and induces the exercise of the holy disposition he has imparted.\n\n\n This distinction between the passive and the active aspects of\n regeneration is necessitated, as we shall see, by the twofold\n method of representing the change in Scripture. In many passages\n the change is ascribed wholly to the power of God; the change is a\n change in the fundamental disposition of the soul; there is no use\n of means. In other passages we find truth referred to as an agency\n employed by the Holy Spirit, and the mind acts in view of this\n truth. The distinction between these two aspects of regeneration\n seems to be intimated in _Eph. 2:5, 6_\u2014\u201c_made us alive together\n with Christ,_\u201d and \u201c_raised us up with him_.\u201d Lazarus must first\n be made alive, and in this he could _not_ co\u00f6perate; but he must\n also come forth from the tomb, and in this he _could_ be active.\n In the old photography, the plate was first made sensitive, and in\n this the plate was passive; then it was exposed to the object, and\n now the plate actively seized upon the rays of light which the\n object emitted.\n\n Availing ourselves of the illustration from photography, we may\n compare God\u2019s initial work in the soul to the sensitizing of the\n plate, his next work to the pouring in of the light and the\n production of the picture. The soul is first made receptive to the\n truth; then it is enabled actually to receive the truth. But the\n illustration fails in one respect,\u2014it represents the two aspects\n of regeneration as successive. In regeneration there is no\n chronological succession. At the same instant that God makes the\n soul sensitive, he also draws out its new sensibility in view of\n the truth. Let us notice also that, as in photography the picture\n however perfect needs to be developed, and this development takes\n time, so regeneration is only the beginning of God\u2019s work; not all\n the dispositions, but only the governing disposition, is made\n holy; there is still need that sanctification should follow\n regeneration; and sanctification is a work of God which lasts for\n a whole lifetime. We may add that \u201cheredity affects regeneration\n as the quality of the film affects photography, and environment\n affects regeneration as the focus affects photography\u201d (W. T.\n Thayer).\n\n Sacramentarianism has so obscured the doctrine of Scripture that\n many persons who gave no evidence of being regenerate are quite\n convinced that they are Christians. Uncle John Vassar therefore\n never asked: \u201cAre you a Christian?\u201d but always: \u201cHave you ever\n been born again?\u201d E. G. Robinson: \u201cThe doctrine of regeneration,\n aside from sacramentarianism, was not apprehended by Luther or the\n Reformers, was not indeed wrought out till Wesley taught that God\n instantaneously renewed the affections and the will.\u201d We get the\n doctrine of regeneration mainly from the apostle John, as we get\n the doctrine of justification mainly from the apostle Paul.\n Stevens, Johannine Theology, 366\u2014\u201cPaul\u2019s great words are,\n justification, and righteousness; John\u2019s are, birth from God, and\n life. But, for both Paul and John, faith is life\u2010union with\n Christ.\u201d\n\n Stearns, Evidence of Christian Experience, 134\u2014\u201cThe sinful nature\n is not gone, but its power is broken; sin no longer dominates the\n life; it has been thrust from the centre to the circumference; it\n has the sentence of death in itself; the man is freed, at least in\n potency and promise. 218\u2014An activity may be immediate, yet not\n unmediated. God\u2019s action on the soul may be through the sense, yet\n still be immediate, as when finite spirits communicate with each\n other.\u201d Dubois, in Century Magazine, Dec. 1894:233\u2014\u201cMan has made\n his way up from physical conditions to the consciousness of\n spiritual needs. Heredity and environment fetter him. He needs\n spiritual help. God provides a spiritual environment in\n regeneration. As science is the verification of the ideal in\n nature, so religion is the verification of the spiritual in human\n life.\u201d Last sermon of Seth K. Mitchell on _Rev. 21:5_\u2014\u201c_Behold, I\n make all things new_\u201d\u2014\u201cGod first makes a new man, then gives him a\n new heart, then a new commandment. He also gives a new body, a new\n name, a new robe, a new song, and a new home.\u201d\n\n\n1. Scripture Representations.\n\n\n(_a_) Regeneration is a change indispensable to the salvation of the\nsinner.\n\n\n _John 3:7_\u2014\u201c_Ye must be born anew_\u201d; _Gal. 6:15_\u2014\u201c_neither is\n circumcision anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature_\u201d\n (marg.\u2014\u201c_creation_\u201d); _cf._ _Heb. 12:14_\u2014\u201c_the sanctification\n without which no man shall see the Lord_\u201d\u2014regeneration, therefore,\n is yet more necessary to salvation; _Eph. 2:3_\u2014\u201c_by nature\n children of wrath, even as the rest_\u201d; _Rom. 3:11_\u2014\u201c_There is none\n that understandeth, There is none that seeketh after God_\u201d; _John\n 6:44, 65_\u2014\u201c_No man can come to me, except the Father that sent me\n draw him ... no man can come unto me, except it be given unto him\n of the Father_\u201d; _Jer. 13:23_\u2014\u201c_Can the Ethiopian change his skin,\n or the leopard his spots? then may ye also do good, that are\n accustomed to do evil._\u201d\n\n\n(_b_) It is a change in the inmost principle of life.\n\n\n _John 3:3_\u2014\u201c_Except one be born anew, he cannot see the kingdom of\n God_\u201d; _5:21_\u2014\u201c_as the Father raiseth the dead and giveth them\n life, even so the Son also giveth life to whom he will_\u201d; _Rom.\n 6:13_\u2014\u201c_present yourselves unto God, as alive from the dead_\u201d;\n _Eph. 2:1_\u2014\u201c_And you did he make alive, when ye were dead through\n your trespasses and sins_\u201d; _5:14_\u2014\u201c_Awake, thou that sleepest,\n and arise from the dead, and Christ shall shine upon thee._\u201d In\n _John 3:3_\u2014\u201c_born anew_\u201d = not, \u201caltered,\u201d \u201cinfluenced,\u201d\n \u201creinvigorated,\u201d \u201creformed\u201d; but a new beginning, a new stamp or\n character, a new family likeness to God and to his children. \u201c_So\n is every one that is born of the Spirit_\u201d (_John 3:8_) = 1.\n secrecy of process; 2. independence of the will of man; 3.\n evidence given in results of conduct and life. It is a good thing\n to remove the means of gratifying an evil appetite; but how much\n better it is to remove the appetite itself! It is a good thing to\n save men from frequenting dangerous resorts by furnishing safe\n places of recreation and entertainment; but far better is it to\n implant within the man such a love for all that is pure and good,\n that he will instinctively shun the impure and evil. Christianity\n aims to purify the springs of action.\n\n\n(_c_) It is a change in the heart, or governing disposition.\n\n\n _Mat. 12:33, 35_\u2014\u201c_Either make the tree good, and its fruit good;\n or make the tree corrupt, and its fruit corrupt: for the tree is\n known by its fruit.... The good man out of his good treasure\n bringeth forth good things: and the evil man out of his evil\n treasure bringeth forth evil things_\u201d; _15:19_\u2014\u201c_For out of the\n heart come forth evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications,\n thefts, false witness, railings_\u201d; _Acts 16:14_\u2014\u201c_And a certain\n woman named Lydia ... heard us: whose heart the Lord opened to\n give heed unto the things which were spoken by Paul_\u201d; _Rom.\n 6:17_\u2014\u201c_But thanks be to God, that, whereas ye were servants of\n sin, ye became obedient from the heart to that form of teaching\n whereunto ye were delivered_\u201d; _10:10_\u2014\u201c_with the heart man\n believeth unto righteousness_\u201d; _cf._ _Ps. 51:10_\u2014\u201c_Create in me a\n clean heart, O God; And renew a right spirit within me_\u201d; _Jer.\n 31:33_\u2014\u201c_I will put my law in their inward parts, and in their\n hearts will I write it_\u201d; _Ez. 11:19_\u2014\u201c_And I will give them one\n heart, and I will put a new spirit within you; and I will take the\n stony heart out of their flesh, and will give them a heart of\n flesh._\u201d\n\n Horace Mann: \u201cOne former is worth a hundred reformers.\u201d It is\n often said that the redemption of society is as important as the\n regeneration of the individual. Yes, we reply; but the\n regeneration of society can never be accomplished except through\n the regeneration of the individual. Reformers try in vain to\n construct a stable and happy community from persons who are\n selfish, weak, and miserable. The first cry of such reformers is:\n \u201cGet your circumstances changed!\u201d Christ\u2019s first call is: \u201cGet\n yourselves changed, and then the things around you will be\n changed.\u201d Many college settlements, and temperance societies, and\n self\u2010reformations begin at the wrong end. They are like kindling a\n coal\u2010fire by lighting kindlings at the top. The fire soon goes\n out. We need God\u2019s work at the very basis of character and not on\n the outer edge, at the very beginning, and not simply at the end.\n _Mat. 6:33_\u2014\u201c_seek ye first his kingdom, and his righteousness;\n and all these things shall be added unto you._\u201d\n\n\n(_d_) It is a change in the moral relations of the soul.\n\n\n _Eph. 2:5_\u2014\u201c_when we were dead through our trespasses, made us\n alive together with Christ_\u201d; _4:23, 24_\u2014\u201c_that ye be renewed in\n the spirit of your mind, and put on the new man, that after God\n hath been created in righteousness and holiness of truth_\u201d; _Col.\n 1:13_\u2014\u201c_who delivered us out of the power of darkness, and\n translated us into the kingdom of the Son of his love._\u201d William\n James, Varieties of Religious Experience, 508, finds the features\n belonging to all religions: 1. an uneasiness; and 2. its solution.\n 1. The uneasiness, reduced to its simplest terms, is a sense that\n there is _something wrong about us_, as we naturally stand. 2. The\n solution is a sense that we are saved _from the wrongness_ by\n making proper connection with the higher powers.\n\n\n(e) It is a change wrought in connection with the use of truth as a means.\n\n\n _James 1:18_\u2014\u201c_Of his own will he brought us forth by the word of\n truth_\u201d\u2014here in connection with the special agency of God (not of\n mere natural law) the truth is spoken of as a means; _1 Pet.\n 1:23_\u2014\u201c_having been begotten again, not of corruptible seed, but\n of incorruptible, through the word of God, which liveth and\n abideth_\u201d; _2 Pet. 1:4_\u2014\u201c_his precious and exceeding great\n promises; that through these ye may become partakers of the divine\n nature_\u201d; _cf._ _Jer. 23:29_\u2014\u201c_Is not my word like fire? saith\n Jehovah; and like a hammer that breaketh the rock in pieces?_\u201d\n _John 15:3_\u2014\u201c_Already ye are clean because of the word which I\n have spoken unto you_\u201d; _Eph. 6:17_\u2014\u201c_the sword of the Spirit,\n which is the word of God_\u201d; _Heb. 4:12_\u2014\u201c_For the word of God is\n living, and active, and sharper than any two\u2010edged sword, and\n piercing even to the dividing of soul and spirit, of both joints\n and marrow, and quick to discern the thoughts and intents of the\n heart_\u201d; _1 Pet. 2:9_\u2014\u201c_called you out of darkness into his\n marvellous light._\u201d An advertising sign reads: \u201cFor spaces and\n ideas, apply to Johnson and Smith.\u201d In regeneration, we need both\n the open mind and the truth to instruct it, and we may apply to\n God for both.\n\n\n(_f_) It is a change instantaneous, secretly wrought, and known only in\nits results.\n\n\n _John 5:24_\u2014\u201c_He that heareth my word, and believeth him that sent\n me, hath eternal life, and cometh not into judgment, but hath\n passed out of death into life_\u201d; _cf._ _Mat. 6:24_\u2014\u201c_No man can\n serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the\n other; or else he will hold to one, and despise the other._\u201d _John\n 3:8_\u2014\u201c_The wind bloweth where it will, and thou hearest the voice\n thereof, but knowest not whence it cometh, and whither it goeth:\n so is every one that is born of the Spirit_\u201d; _cf._ _Phil. 2:12,\n 13_\u2014\u201c_work out your own salvation with fear and trembling; for it\n is God who worketh in you both to will and to work, for his good\n pleasure_\u201d; _2 Pet. 1:10_\u2014\u201c_Wherefore, brethren, give the more\n diligence to make your calling and election sure._\u201d\n\n\n(_g_) It is a change wrought by God.\n\n\n _John 1:13_\u2014\u201c_who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the\n flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God_\u201d; _3:5_\u2014\u201c_Except one be\n born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of\n God_\u201d; _3:8_, marg.\u2014\u201c_The Spirit breatheth where it will_\u201d; _Eph.\n 1:19, 20_\u2014\u201c_the exceeding greatness of his power to us\u2010ward who\n believe, according to that working of the strength of his might\n which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and\n made him to sit at his right hand in the heavenly places_\u201d;\n _2:10_\u2014\u201c_For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for\n good works, which God afore prepared that we should walk in\n them_\u201d; _1 Pet. 1:3_\u2014\u201c_Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord\n Jesus Christ, who according to his great mercy begat us again unto\n a living hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead_\u201d;\n _cf._ _1 Cor. 3:6, 7_\u2014\u201c_I planted, Apollos watered; but God gave\n the increase. So then neither is he that planteth anything,\n neither he that watereth; but God that giveth the increase._\u201d\n\n We have seen that we are \u201c_begotten again ... through the word_\u201d\n (_1 Pet. 1:23_). In the revealed truth with regard to the person\n and work of Christ there is a divine adaptation to the work of\n renewing our hearts. But truth in itself is powerless to\n regenerate and sanctify, unless the Holy Spirit uses it\u2014\u201c_the\n sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God_\u201d (_Eph. 6:17_).\n Hence regeneration is ascribed pre\u00ebminently to the Holy Spirit,\n and men are said to be \u201c_born of the Spirit_\u201d (_John 3:8_). When\n Robert Morrison started for China, an incredulous American said to\n him: \u201cMr. Morrison, do you think you can make any impression on\n the Chinese?\u201d \u201cNo,\u201d was the reply; \u201cbut I think the Lord can.\u201d\n\n\n(_h_) It is a change accomplished through the union of the soul with\nChrist.\n\n\n _Rom. 8:2_\u2014\u201c_For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus\n made me free from the law of sin and death_\u201d; _2 Cor. 5:17_\u2014\u201c_if\n any man is in Christ, he is a new creature_\u201d (marg.\u2014\u201c_there is a\n new creation_\u201d); _Gal. 1:15, 16_\u2014\u201c_it was the good pleasure of God\n ... to reveal his Son in me_\u201d; _Eph. 2:10_\u2014\u201c_For we are his\n workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works._\u201d On the\n Scriptural representations, see E. D. Griffin, Divine Efficiency,\n 117\u2010164; H. B. Smith, System of Theology, 553\u2010569\u2014\u201cRegeneration\n involves union with Christ, and not a change of heart without\n relation to him.\u201d\n\n _Eph. 3:14, 15_\u2014\u201c_the Father, from whom every fatherhood in heaven\n and on earth is named._\u201d But even here God works through Christ,\n and Christ himself is called \u201c_Everlasting Father_\u201d (_Is. 9:6_).\n The real basis of our sonship and unity is in Christ, our Creator,\n and Upholder. Sin is repudiation of this filial relationship.\n Regeneration by the Spirit restores our sonship by joining us once\n more, ethically and spiritually, to Christ the Son, and so\n adopting us again into God\u2019s family. Hence the Holy Spirit does\n not reveal himself, but Christ. The Spirit is light, and light\n does not reveal itself, but all other things. I may know that the\n Holy Spirit is working within me whenever I more clearly perceive\n Christ. Sonship in Christ makes us not only individually children\n of God, but also members of a commonwealth. _Ps. 87:4_\u2014\u201c_Yea, of\n Zion it shall be said, This one and that one was born in her_\u201d =\n \u201cthe most glorious thing to be said about them is not something\n pertaining to their separate history, but that they have become\n members, by adoption, of the city of God\u201d (Perowne). The Psalm\n speaks of the adoption of nations, but it is equally true of\n individuals.\n\n\n2. Necessity of Regeneration.\n\n\nThat all men without exception need to be changed in moral character, is\nmanifest, not only from Scripture passages already cited, but from the\nfollowing rational considerations:\n\n(_a_) Holiness, or conformity to the fundamental moral attribute of God,\nis the indispensable condition of securing the divine favor, of attaining\npeace of conscience, and of preparing the soul for the associations and\nemployments of the blest.\n\n\n Phillips Brooks seems to have taught that regeneration is merely a\n natural forward step in man\u2019s development. See his Life,\n 2:353\u2014\u201cThe entrance into this deeper consciousness of sonship to\n God and into the motive power which it exercises is Regeneration,\n the new birth, not merely with reference to time, but with\n reference also to profoundness. Because man has something sinful\n to cast away in order to enter this higher life, therefore\n regeneration must begin with repentance. But that is an incident.\n It is not essential to the idea. A man simply imperfect and not\n sinful would still have to be born again. The presentation of sin\n as guilt, of release as forgiveness, of consequence as punishment,\n have their true meaning as the most personal expressions of man\u2019s\n moral condition as always measured by, and man\u2019s moral changes as\n always dependent upon, God.\u201d Here imperfection seems to mean\n depraved condition as distinguished from conscious transgression;\n it is not regarded as sinful; it needs not to be repented of. Yet\n it does require regeneration. In Phillips Brooks\u2019s creed there is\n no article devoted to sin. Baptism he calls \u201cthe declaration of\n the universal fact of the sonship of man to God. The Lord\u2019s Supper\n is the declaration of the universal fact of man\u2019s dependence upon\n God for supply of life. It is associated with the death of Jesus,\n because in that the truth of God giving himself to man found its\n completest manifestation.\u201d\n\n Others seem to teach regeneration by education. Here too there is\n no recognition of inborn sin or guilt. Man\u2019s imperfection of\n nature is innocent. He needs training in order to fit him for\n association with higher intelligences and with God. In the\n evolution of his powers there comes a natural crisis, like that of\n graduation of the scholar, and this crisis may be called\n conversion. This educational theory of regeneration is represented\n by Starbuck, Psychology of Religion, and by Coe, The Spiritual\n Life. What human nature needs however is not evolution, but\n involution and revolution\u2014involution, the communication of a new\n life, and revolution, change of direction resulting from that\n life. Human nature, as we have seen in our treatment of sin, is\n not a green apple to be perfected by mere growth, but an apple\n with a worm at the core, which left to itself will surely rot and\n perish.\n\n President G. Stanley Hall, in his essay on The Religious\n Affirmations of Psychology, says that the total depravity of man\n is an ascertained fact apart from the teachings of the Bible.\n There had come into his hands for inspection several thousands of\n letters written to a medical man who advertised that he would give\n confidential advice and treatment to all, secretly. On the\n strength of these letters Dr. Hall was prepared to say that John\n Calvin had not told the half of what is true. He declared that the\n necessity of regeneration in order to the development of character\n was clearly established from psychological investigation.\n\n A. H. Strong, Cleveland Sermon, 1904\u2014\u201cHere is the danger of some\n modern theories of Christian education. They give us statistics,\n to show that the age of puberty is the age of strongest religious\n impressions; and the inference is drawn that conversion is nothing\n but a natural phenomenon, a regular stage of development. The free\n will, and the evil bent of that will, are forgotten, and the\n absolute dependence of perverse human nature upon the regenerating\n spirit of God. The age of puberty is the age of the strongest\n religious impressions? Yes, but it is also the age of the\n strongest artistic and social and sensuous impressions, and only a\n new birth from above can lead the soul to seek first the kingdom\n of God.\u201d\n\n\n(_b_) The condition of universal humanity as by nature depraved, and, when\narrived at moral consciousness, as guilty of actual transgression, is\nprecisely the opposite of that holiness without which the soul cannot\nexist in normal relation to God, to self, or to holy beings.\n\n\n Plutarch has a parable of a man who tried to make a dead body\n stand upright, but who finished his labors saying: \u201cDeest aliquid\n intus\u201d\u2014\u201cThere\u2019s something lacking inside.\u201d Ribot, Diseases of the\n Will, 53\u2014\u201cIn the vicious man the moral elements are lacking. If\n the idea of amendment arises, it is involuntary.... But if a first\n element is not given by nature, and with it a potential energy,\n nothing results. The theological dogma of grace as a free gift\n appears to us therefore founded upon a much more exact psychology\n than the contrary opinion.\u201d \u201cThou art chained to the wheel of the\n foe By links which a world cannot sever: With thy tyrant through\n storm and through calm thou shall go, And thy sentence is bondage\n forever.\u201d\n\n Martensen, Christian Ethics: \u201cWhen Kant treats of the radical evil\n of human nature, he makes the remarkable statement that, if a good\n will is to appear in us, this cannot happen through a partial\n improvement, nor through any reform, but only through a\n revolution, a total overturn within us, that is to be compared to\n a new creation.\u201d Those who hold that man may attain perfection by\n mere natural growth deny this radical evil of human nature, and\n assume that our nature is a good seed which needs only favorable\n external influences of moisture and sunshine to bring forth good\n fruit. But human nature is a damaged seed, and what comes of it\n will be aborted and stunted like itself. The doctrine of mere\n development denies God\u2019s holiness, man\u2019s sin, the need of Christ,\n the necessity of atonement, the work of the Holy Spirit, the\n justice of penalty. Kant\u2019s doctrine of the radical evil of human\n nature, like Aristotle\u2019s doctrine that man is born on an inclined\n plane and subject to a downward gravitation, is not matched by a\n corresponding doctrine of regeneration. Only the apostle Paul can\n tell us how we came to be in this dreadful predicament, and where\n is the power that can deliver us; see Stearns, Evidence of\n Christian Experience, 274.\n\n Dean Swift\u2019s worthy sought many years for a method of extracting\n sunbeams from cucumbers. We cannot cure the barren tree by giving\n it new bark or new branches,\u2014it must have new sap. Healing\n snakebites is not killing the snake. Poetry and music, the\n uplifting power of culture, the inherent nobility of man, the\n general mercy of God\u2014no one of these will save the soul. Horace\n Bushnell: \u201cThe soul of all improvement is the improvement of the\n soul.\u201d Frost cannot be removed from a window pane simply by\n scratching it away,\u2014you must raise the temperature of the room. It\n is as impossible to get regeneration out of reformation as to get\n a harvest out of a field by mere plowing. Reformation is plucking\n bitter apples from a tree, and in their place tying good apples on\n with a string (Dr. Pentecost). It is regeneration or\n degradation\u2014the beginning of an upward movement by a power not\n man\u2019s own, or the continuance and increase of a downward movement\n that can end only in ruin.\n\n Kidd, Social Evolution, shows that in humanity itself there\n resides no power of progress. The ocean steamship that has burned\n its last pound of coal may proceed on its course by virtue of its\n momentum, but it is only a question of the clock how soon it will\n cease to move, except as tossed about by the wind and the waves.\n Not only is there power lacking for the good, but apart from God\u2019s\n grace the evil tendencies constantly became more aggravated. The\n settled states of the affections and will practically dominate the\n life. Charles H. Spurgeon: \u201cIf a thief should get into heaven\n unchanged, he would begin by picking the angels\u2019 pockets.\u201d The\n land is full of examples of the descent of man, not _from_ the\n brute, but _to_ the brute. The tares are not degenerate wheat,\n which by cultivation will become good wheat,\u2014they are not only\n useless but noxious, and they must be rooted out and burned.\n \u201cSociety never will be better than the individuals who compose it.\n A sound ship can never be made of rotten timber. Individual\n reformation must precede social reconstruction.\u201d Socialism will\n always be a failure until it becomes Christian. We must be born\n from above, as truly as we have been begotten by our fathers upon\n earth, or we cannot see the kingdom of God.\n\n\n(_c_) A radical internal change is therefore requisite in every human\nsoul\u2014a change in that which constitutes its character. Holiness cannot be\nattained, as the pantheist claims, by a merely natural growth or\ndevelopment, since man\u2019s natural tendencies are wholly in the direction of\nselfishness. There must be a reversal of his inmost dispositions and\nprinciples of action, if he is to see the kingdom of God.\n\n\n Men\u2019s good deeds and reformation may be illustrated by eddies in a\n stream whose general current is downward; by walking westward in a\n railway\u2010car while the train is going east; by Capt. Parry\u2019s\n traveling north, while the ice\u2010floe on which he walked was moving\n southward at a rate much more rapid than his walking. It is\n possible to be \u201c_ever learning, and never able to come to the\n knowledge of the truth_\u201d (_2 Tim. 3:7_). Better never have been\n born, than not be born again. But the necessity of regeneration\n implies its possibility: _John 3:7_\u2014\u201c_Ye must be born anew_\u201d = ye\n may be born anew,\u2014the text is not merely a warning and a\n command,\u2014it is also a promise. Every sinner has the chance of\n making a new start and of beginning a new life.\n\n J. D. Robertson, The Holy Spirit and Christian Service,\n 57\u2014\u201cEmerson says that the gate of gifts closes at birth. After a\n man emerges from his mother\u2019s womb he can have no new endowments,\n no fresh increments of strength and wisdom, joy and grace within.\n The only grace is the grace of creation. But this view is deistic\n and not Christian.\u201d Emerson\u2019s saying is true of natural gifts, but\n not of spiritual gifts. He forgot Pentecost. He forgot the all\u2010\n encompassing atmosphere of the divine personality and love, and\n its readiness to enter in at every chink and crevice of our\n voluntary being. The longing men have to turn over a new leaf in\n life\u2019s book, to break with the past, to assert their better\n selves, is a preliminary impulse of God\u2019s Spirit and an evidence\n of prevenient grace preparing the way for regeneration. Thus\n interpreted and yielded to, these impulses warrant unbounded hope\n for the future. \u201cNo star is ever lost we once have seen; We always\n may be what we might have been; The hopes that lost in some far\n distance seem May be the truer life, and this the dream.\u201d\n\n The greatest minds feel, at least at times, their need of help\n from above. Although Cicero uses the term \u201cregeneration\u201d to\n signify what we should call naturalization, yet he recognizes\n man\u2019s dependence upon God: \u201cNemo vir magnus, sine aliquo divino\n afflatu, unquam fuit.\u201d Seneca: \u201cBonus vir sine illo nemo est.\u201d\n Aristotle: \u201cWickedness perverts the judgment and makes men err\n with respect to practical principles, so that no man can be wise\n and judicious who is not good.\u201d Goethe: \u201cWho ne\u2019er his bread in\n sorrow ate, Who ne\u2019er the mournful midnight hours Weeping upon his\n bed has sate, He knows you not, ye heavenly Powers.\u201d Shakespeare,\n King Lear: \u201cIs there a reason in nature for these hard hearts?\u201d\n Robert Browning, in Halbert and Hob, replies: \u201cO Lear, That a\n reason out of nature must turn them soft, seems clear.\u201d\n\n John Stuart Mill (see Autobiography, 132\u2010142) knew that the\n feeling of interest in others\u2019 welfare would make him happy,\u2014but\n the knowledge of this fact did not give him the feeling. The\n \u201centhusiasm of humanity\u201d\u2014unselfish love, of which we read in \u201cEcce\n Homo\u201d\u2014is easy to talk about; but how to produce it,\u2014that is the\n question. Drummond, Natural Law in the Spiritual World,\n 61\u201094\u2014\u201cThere is no abiogenesis in the spiritual, more than in the\n natural, world. Can the stone grow more and more living until it\n enters the organic world? No, Christianity is a new life,\u2014it is\n Christ in you.\u201d As natural life comes to us mediately, through\n Adam, so spiritual life comes to us mediately, through Christ. See\n Bushnell, Nature and the Supernatural, 220\u2010249; Anderson,\n Regeneration, 51\u201088; Bennet Tyler, Memoir and Lectures, 340\u2010354.\n\n\n3. The Efficient Cause of Regeneration.\n\n\nThree views only need be considered,\u2014all others are modifications of\nthese. The first view puts the efficient cause of regeneration in the\nhuman will; the second, in the truth considered as a system of motives;\nthe third, in the immediate agency of the Holy Spirit.\n\n\n John Stuart Mill regarded cause as embracing all the antecedents\n to an event. Hazard, Man a Creative First Cause, 12\u201015, shows\n that, as at any given instant the whole past is everywhere the\n same, the effects must, upon this view, at each instant be\n everywhere one and the same. \u201cThe theory that, of every successive\n event, the real cause is the whole of the antecedents, does not\n distinguish between the passive conditions acted upon and changed,\n and the active agencies which act upon and change them; does not\n distinguish what _produces_, from what merely _precedes_, change.\u201d\n\n We prefer the definition given by Porter, Human Intellect,\n 592\u2014Cause is \u201cthe most conspicuous and prominent of the agencies,\n or conditions, that produce a result\u201d; or that of Dr. Mark\n Hopkins: \u201cAny exertion or manifestation of energy that produces a\n change is a cause, and nothing else is. We must distinguish cause\n from occasion, or material. Cause is not to be defined as\n \u2018everything without which the effect could not be realized.\u2019 \u201d\n Better still, perhaps, may we say, that efficient cause is the\n competent producing power by which the effect is secured. James\n Martineau, Types, 1: preface, xiii\u2014\u201cA cause is that which\n determines the indeterminate.\u201d Not the light, but the\n photographer, is the cause of the picture; light is but the\n photographer\u2019s servant. So the \u201c_word of God_\u201d is the \u201c_sword of\n the Spirit_\u201d (_Eph. 6:17_); the Spirit uses the word as his\n instrument; but the Spirit himself is the cause of regeneration.\n\n\nA. The human will, as the efficient cause of regeneration.\n\nThis view takes two forms, according as the will is regarded as acting\napart from, or in conjunction with, special influences of the truth\napplied by God. Pelagians hold the former; Arminians the latter.\n\n(_a_) To the Pelagian view, that regeneration is solely the act of man,\nand is identical with self\u2010reformation, we object that the sinner\u2019s\ndepravity, since it consists in a fixed state of the affections which\ndetermines the settled character of the volitions, amounts to a moral\ninability. Without a renewal of the affections from which all moral action\nsprings, man will not choose holiness nor accept salvation.\n\n\n Man\u2019s volitions are practically the shadow of his affections. It\n is as useless to think of a man\u2019s volitions separating themselves\n from his affections, and drawing him towards God, as it is to\n think of a man\u2019s shadow separating itself from him, and leading\n him in the opposite direction to that in which he is going. Man\u2019s\n affections, to use Calvin\u2019s words, are like horses that have\n thrown off the charioteer and are running wildly,\u2014they need a new\n hand to direct them. In disease, we must be helped by a physician.\n We do not stop a locomotive engine by applying force to the\n wheels, but by reversing the lever. So the change in man must be,\n not in the transient volitions, but in the deeper springs of\n action\u2014the fundamental bent of the affections and will. See\n Henslow, Evolution, 134. Shakespeare, All\u2019s Well that Ends Well,\n 2:1:149\u2014\u201cIt is not so with Him that all things knows, As \u2019tis with\n us that square our guess with shows; But most it is presumption in\n us when The help of heaven we count the act of men.\u201d\n\n Henry Clay said that he did not know for himself personally what\n the change of heart spoken of by Christians meant; but he had seen\n Kentucky family feuds of long standing healed by religious\n revivals, and that whatever could heal a Kentucky family feud was\n more than human.\u2014Mr. Peter Harvey was a lifelong friend of Daniel\n Webster. He wrote a most interesting volume of reminiscenses of\n the great man. He tells how one John Colby married the oldest\n sister of Mr. Webster. Said Mr. Webster of John Colby: \u201cFinally he\n went up to Andover, New Hampshire, and bought a farm, and the only\n recollection I have about him is that he was called the wickedest\n man in the neighborhood, so far as swearing and impiety went. I\n used to wonder how my sister could marry so profane a man as John\n Colby.\u201d Years afterwards news comes to Mr. Webster that a\n wonderful change has passed upon John Colby. Mr. Harvey and Mr.\n Webster take a journey together to visit John Colby. As Mr.\n Webster enters John Colby\u2019s house, he sees open before him a\n large\u2010print Bible, which he has just been reading. When greetings\n have been interchanged, the first question John Colby asks of Mr.\n Webster is, \u201cAre you a Christian?\u201d And then, at John Colby\u2019s\n suggestion, the two men kneel and pray together. When the visit is\n done, this is what Mr. Webster says to Mr. Harvey as they ride\n away: \u201cI should like to know what the enemies of religion would\n say to John Colby\u2019s conversion. There was a man as unlikely,\n humanly speaking, to become a Christian as any man I ever saw. He\n was reckless, heedless, impious, never attended church, never\n experienced the good influence of associating with religious\n people. And here he has been living on in that reckless way until\n he has got to be an old man, until a period of life when you\n naturally would not expect his habits to change. And yet he has\n been brought into the condition in which we have seen him to\u2010\n day,\u2014a penitent, trusting, humble believer.\u201d \u201cWhatever people may\n say,\u201d added Mr. Webster, \u201cnothing can convince me that anything\n short of the grace of Almighty God could make such a change as I,\n with my own eyes, have witnessed in the life of John Colby.\u201d When\n they got back to Franklin, New Hampshire, in the evening, they met\n another lifelong friend of Mr. Webster\u2019s, John Taylor, standing at\n his door. Mr. Webster called out: \u201cWell, John Taylor, miracles\n happen in these latter days as well as in the days of old.\u201d \u201cWhat\n now, Squire?\u201d asked John Taylor. \u201cWhy,\u201d replied Mr. Webster, \u201cJohn\n Colby has become a Christian. If that is not a miracle, what is?\u201d\n\n\n(_b_) To the Arminian view, that regeneration is the act of man,\nco\u00f6perating with divine influences applied through the truth (synergistic\ntheory), we object that no beginning of holiness is in this way\nconceivable. For, so long as man\u2019s selfish and perverse affections are\nunchanged, no choosing God is possible but such as proceeds from supreme\ndesire for one\u2019s own interest and happiness. But the man thus supremely\nbent on self\u2010gratification cannot see in God, or his service, anything\nproductive of happiness; or, if he could see in them anything of\nadvantage, his choice of God and his service from such a motive would not\nbe a holy choice, and therefore could not be a beginning of holiness.\n\n\n Although Melanchthon (1497\u20101560) preceded Arminius (1560\u20101609),\n his view was substantially the same with that of the Dutch\n theologian. Melanchthon never experienced the throes and travails\n of a new spiritual life, as Luther did. His external and internal\n development was peculiarly placid and serene. This Pr\u00e6ceptor\n Germani\u00e6 had the modesty of the genuine scholar. He was not a\n dogmatist, and he never entered the ranks of the ministry. He\n never could be persuaded to accept the degree of Doctor of\n Theology, though he lectured on theological subjects to audiences\n of thousands. Dorner says of Melanchthon: \u201cHe held at first that\n the Spirit of God is the primary, and the word of God the\n secondary, or instrumental, agency in conversion, while the human\n will allows their action and freely yields to it.\u201d Later, he held\n that \u201cconversion is the result of the combined action\n (_copulatio_) of three causes, the truth of God, the Holy Spirit,\n and the will of man.\u201d This synergistic view in his last years\n involved the theologian of the German Reformation in serious\n trouble. Luthardt: \u201cHe made a _facultas_ out of a mere\n _capacitas_.\u201d Dorner says again: \u201cMan\u2019s causality is not to be\n co\u00f6rdinated with that of God, however small the influence ascribed\n to it. It is a purely _receptive_, not a productive, agency. The\n opposite is the fundamental Romanist error.\u201d Self\u2010love will never\n induce a man to give up self\u2010love. Selfishness will not throttle\n and cast out selfishness. \u201cSuch a choice from a selfish motive\n would be unholy, when judged by God\u2019s standard. It is absurd to\n make salvation depend upon the exercises of a wholly unspiritual\n power\u201d; see Dorner, Glaubenslehre, 2:716\u2010720 (Syst. Doct.,\n 4:179\u2010183). Shedd, Dogm. Theol., 2:505\u2014\u201cSin does not first stop,\n and then holiness come in place of sin; but holiness positively\n expels sin. Darkness does not first cease, and then light enter;\n but light drives out darkness.\u201d On the Arminian view, see Bib.\n Sac., 19:265, 266.\n\n John Wesley\u2019s theology was a modified Arminianism, yet it was John\n Wesley who did most to establish the doctrine of regeneration. He\n asserted that the Holy Spirit acts through the truth, in\n distinction from the doctrine that the Holy Spirit works solely\n through the ministers and sacraments of the church. But in\n asserting the work of the Holy Spirit in the individual soul, he\n went too far to the opposite extreme of emphasizing the ability of\n man to choose God\u2019s service, when without love to God there was\n nothing in God\u2019s service to attract. A. H. Bradford, Age of Faith:\n \u201cIt is as if Jesus had said: If a sailor will properly set his\n rudder the wind will fill his sails. The will is the rudder of the\n character; if it is turned in the right direction, all the winds\n of heaven will favor; if it is turned in the wrong direction, they\n will oppose.\u201d The question returns: What shall move the man to set\n his rudder aright, if he has no desire to reach the proper haven?\n Here is the need of divine power, not merely to co\u00f6perate with\n man, after man\u2019s will is set in the right direction, but to set it\n in the right direction in the first place. _Phil. 2:13_\u2014\u201c_it is\n God who worketh in you both to will and to work, for his good\n pleasure._\u201d\n\n Still another modification of Arminian doctrine is found in the\n Revealed Theology of N. W. Taylor of New Haven, who maintained\n that, antecedently to regeneration, the _selfish_ principle is\n suspended in the sinner\u2019s heart, and that then, prompted by _self\u2010\n love_, he uses the means of regeneration from motives that are\n neither sinful nor holy. He held that all men, saints and sinners,\n have their own happiness for their ultimate end. Regeneration\n involves no change in this principle or motive, but only a change\n in the governing purpose to seek this happiness in God rather than\n in the world. Dr. Taylor said that man could turn to God, whatever\n the Spirit did or did not do. He could turn to God if he would;\n but he could also turn to God if he wouldn\u2019t. In other words, he\n maintained the power of contrary choice, while yet affirming the\n certainty that, without the Holy Spirit\u2019s influences, man would\n always choose wrongly. These doctrines caused a division in the\n Congregational body. Those who opposed Taylor withdrew their\n support from New Haven, and founded the East Windsor Seminary in\n 1834. For Taylor\u2019s view, see N. W. Taylor, Revealed Theology,\n 369\u2010406, and in The Christian Spectator for 1829.\n\n The chief opponent of Dr. Taylor was Dr. Bennet Tyler. He replied\n to Dr. Taylor that moral character has its seat, not in the\n purpose, but in the affections back of the purpose. Otherwise\n every Christian must be in a state of sinless perfection, for his\n governing purpose is to serve God. But we know that there are\n affections and desires not under control of this\n purpose\u2014dispositions not in conformity with the predominant\n disposition. How, Dr. Tyler asked, can a sinner, completely\n selfish, from a selfish motive, resolve not to be selfish, and so\n suspend his selfishness? \u201cAntecedently to regeneration, there can\n be no suspension of the selfish principle. It is said that, in\n suspending it, the sinner is actuated by self\u2010love. But is it\n possible that the sinner, while destitute of love to God and every\n particle of genuine benevolence, should love himself at all and\n not love himself supremely? He loves nothing more than self. He\n does not regard God or the universe, except as they tend to\n promote his ultimate end, his own happiness. No sinner ever\n suspended this selfishness until subdued by divine grace. We can\n not become regenerate by preferring God to the world merely from\n regard to our own interest. There is no necessity of the Holy\n Spirit to renew the heart, if self\u2010love prompts men to turn from\n the world to God. On the view thus combated, depravity consists\n simply in ignorance. All men need is enlightenment as to the best\n means of securing their own happiness. Regeneration by the Holy\n Spirit is, therefore, not necessary.\u201d See Bennet Tyler, Memoir and\n Lectures, 316\u2010381, esp. 334, 370, 371; Letters on the New Haven\n Theology, 21\u201072, 143\u2010163; review of Taylor and Fitch, by E. D.\n Griffin, Divine Efficiency, 13\u201054; Martineau, Study, 2:9\u2014\u201cBy\n making it a man\u2019s interest to be disinterested, do you cause him\n to forget himself and put any love into his heart? or do you only\n break him in and cause him to turn this way and that by the bit\n and lash of a driving necessity?\u201d The sinner, apart from the grace\n of God, cannot see the truth. Wilberforce took Pitt to hear Cecil\n preach, but Pitt declared that he did not understand a word that\n Cecil said. Apart from the grace of God, the sinner, even when\n made to see the truth, resists it the more, the more clearly he\n sees it. Then the Holy Spirit overcomes his opposition and makes\n him willing in the day of God\u2019s power (_Psalm 110:3_).\n\n\nB. The truth, as the efficient cause of regeneration.\n\nAccording to this view, the truth as a system of motives is the direct and\nimmediate cause of the change from unholiness to holiness. This view is\nobjectionable for two reasons:\n\n(_a_) It erroneously regards motives as wholly external to the mind that\nis influenced by them. This is to conceive of them as mechanically\nconstraining the will, and is indistinguishable from necessitarianism. On\nthe contrary, motives are compounded of external presentations and\ninternal dispositions. It is the soul\u2019s affections which render certain\nsuggestions attractive and others repugnant to us. In brief, the heart\nmakes the motive.\n\n(_b_) Only as truth is loved, therefore, can it be a motive to holiness.\nBut we have seen that the aversion of the sinner to God is such that the\ntruth is hated instead of loved, and a thing that is hated, is hated more\nintensely, the more distinctly it is seen. Hence no mere power of the\ntruth can be regarded as the efficient cause of regeneration. The contrary\nview implies that it is not the truth which the sinner hates, but rather\nsome element of error which is mingled with it.\n\n\n Lyman Beecher and Charles G. Finney held this view. The influence\n of the Holy Spirit differs from that of the preacher only in\n degree,\u2014both use only moral suasion; both do nothing more than to\n present the truth; both work upon the soul from without. \u201cWere I\n as eloquent as the Holy Ghost, I could convert sinners as well as\n he,\u201d said a popular preacher of this school (see Bennet Tyler,\n Letters on New Haven Theology, 164\u2010171). On this view, it would be\n absurd to pray to God to regenerate, for that is more than he can\n do,\u2014regeneration is simply the effect of truth.\n\n Miley, in Meth. Quar., July, 1881:434\u2010462, holds that \u201cthe will\n cannot rationally act without motive, but that it has always power\n to suspend action, or defer it, for the purpose of rational\n examination of the motive or end, and to consider the opposite\n motive or end. Putting the old end or motive out of view will\n temporarily break its power, and the new truth considered will\n furnish motive for right action. Thus, by using our faculty of\n suspending choice, and of fixing attention, we can realize the\n permanent eligibility of the good and choose it against the evil.\n This is, however, not the realization of a new spiritual life in\n regeneration, but the election of its attainment. Power to do this\n suspending is of grace [grace, however, given equally to all].\n Without this power, life would be a spontaneous and irresponsible\n development of evil.\u201d\n\n The view of Miley, thus substantially given, resembles that of Dr.\n Taylor, upon which we have already commented; but, unlike that, it\n makes truth itself, apart from the affections, a determining\n agency in the change from sin to holiness. Our one reply is that,\n without a change in the affections, the truth can neither be known\n nor obeyed. Seeing cannot be the means of being born again, for\n one must first be born again in order to see the kingdom of God\n (_John 3:3_). The mind will not choose God, until God appears to\n be the greatest good.\n\n Edwards, quoted by Griffin, Divine Efficiency, 64\u2014\u201cLet the sinner\n apply his rational powers to the contemplation of divine things,\n and let his belief be speculatively correct; still he is in such a\n state that those objects of contemplation will excite in him no\n holy affections.\u201d The Scriptures declare (_Rom. 8:7_) that \u201c_the\n mind of the flesh is enmity_\u201d\u2014not against some error or mistaken\n notion of God\u2014but \u201c_is enmity against God_.\u201d It is God\u2019s holiness,\n mandatory and punitive, that is hated. A clearer view of that\n holiness will only increase the hatred. A woman\u2019s hatred of\n spiders will never be changed to love by bringing them close to\n her. Magnifying them with a compound oxy\u2010hydrogen microscope will\n not help the matter. Tyler: \u201cAll the light of the last day will\n not subdue the sinner\u2019s heart.\u201d The mere presence of God, and\n seeing God face to face, will be hell to him, if his hatred be not\n first changed to love. See E. D. Griffin, Divine Efficiency,\n 105\u2010116, 203\u2010221; and review of Griffin, by S. R. Mason, Truth\n Unfolded, 383\u2010407.\n\n Bradford, Heredity and Christian Problems, 239\u2014\u201cChristianity puts\n three motives before men: love, self\u2010love, and fear.\u201d True, but\n the last two are only preliminary motives, not essentially\n Christian. The soul that is moved only by self\u2010love or by fear has\n not yet entered into the Christian life at all. And any attention\n to the truth of God which originates in these motives has no\n absolute moral value, and cannot be regarded as even a beginning\n of salvation. Nothing but holiness and love are entitled to be\n called Christianity, and these the truth of itself cannot summon\n up. The Spirit of God must go with the truth to impart right\n desires and to make the truth effective. E. G. Robinson: \u201cThe\n glory of our salvation can no more be attributed to the word of\n God only, than the glory of a Praxiteles or a Canova can be\n ascribed to the chisel or the mallet with which he wrought into\n beauty his immortal creations.\u201d\n\n\nC. The immediate agency of the Holy Spirit, as the efficient cause of\nregeneration.\n\nIn ascribing to the Holy Spirit the authorship of regeneration, we do not\naffirm that the divine Spirit accomplishes his work without any\naccompanying instrumentality. We simply assert that the power which\nregenerates is the power of God, and that although conjoined with the use\nof means, there is a direct operation of this power upon the sinner\u2019s\nheart which changes its moral character. We add two remarks by way of\nfurther explanation:\n\n(_a_) The Scriptural assertions of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit and\nof his mighty power in the soul forbid us to regard the divine Spirit in\nregeneration as coming in contact, not with the soul, but only with the\ntruth. The phrases, \u201cto energize the truth,\u201d \u201cto intensify the truth,\u201d \u201cto\nilluminate the truth,\u201d have no proper meaning; since even God cannot make\nthe truth more true. If any change is wrought, it must be wrought, not in\nthe truth, but in the soul.\n\n\n The maxim, \u201cTruth is mighty and will prevail,\u201d is very untrue, if\n God be left out of the account. Truth without God is an\n abstraction, and not a power. It is a mere instrument, useless\n without an agent. \u201c_The sword of the Spirit, which is the word of\n God_\u201d (_Eph. 6:17_), must be wielded by the Holy Spirit himself.\n And the Holy Spirit comes in contact, not simply with the\n instrument, but with the soul. To all moral, and especially to all\n religious truth, there is an inward unsusceptibility, arising from\n the perversity of the affections and the will. This blindness and\n hardness of heart must be removed, before the soul can perceive or\n be moved by the truth. Hence the Spirit must deal directly with\n the soul. Denovan: \u201cOur natural hearts are hearts of stone. The\n word of God is good seed sown on the hard, trodden, macadamized\n highway, which the horses of passion, the asses of self\u2010will, the\n wagons of imaginary treasure, have made impenetrable. Only the\n Holy Spirit can soften and pulverize this soil.\u201d\n\n The Psalmist prays: \u201c_Incline my heart unto thy testimonies_\u201d\n (_Ps. 119:36_), while of Lydia it is said: \u201c_whose heart the Lord\n opened to give heed unto the things which were spoken by Paul_\u201d\n (_Acts 16:14_). We may say of the Holy Spirit: \u201cHe freezes and\n then melts the soil, He breaks the hard, cold stone, Kills out the\n rooted weeds so vile,\u2014All this he does alone; And every virtue we\n possess, And every victory won, And every thought of holiness, Are\n his, and his alone.\u201d Hence, in _Ps. 90:16, 17_, the Psalmist says,\n first: \u201c_Let thy work appear unto thy servants_\u201d; then \u201c_establish\n thou the work of our hands upon us_\u201d\u2014God\u2019s work is first to\n appear,\u2014then man\u2019s work, which is God\u2019s work carried out by human\n instruments. At Jericho, the force was not applied to the rams\u2019\n horns, but to the walls. When Jesus healed the blind man, his\n power was applied, not to the spittle, but to the eyes. The\n impression is prepared, not by heating the seal, but by softening\n the wax. So God\u2019s power acts, not upon the truth, but upon the\n sinner.\n\n _Ps. 59:10_\u2014\u201c_My God with his lovingkindness will meet me_\u201d; A.\n V.\u2014\u201c_The God of my mercy shall prevent me_,\u201d _i. e._, go before\n me. Augustine urges this text as proof that the grace of God\n precedes all merit of man: \u201cWhat didst thou find in me but only\n sins? Before I do anything good, his mercy will go before me. What\n will unhappy Pelagius answer here?\u201d Calvin however says this may\n be a pious, but it is not a fair, use of the passage. The passage\n does teach dependence upon God; but God\u2019s anticipation of our\n action, or in other words, the doctrine of prevenient grace, must\n be derived from other portions of Scripture, such as _John 1:13_,\n and _Eph. 2:10_. \u201cThe enthusiasm of humanity\u201d to which J. R.\n Seeley, the author of Ecce Homo, exhorts us, is doubtless the\n secret of happiness and usefulness,\u2014unfortunately he does not tell\n us whence it may come. John Stuart Mill felt the need of it, but\n he did not get it. Arthur Hugh Clough, Clergyman\u2019s First Tale:\n \u201cWould I could wish my wishes all to rest, And know to wish the\n wish that were the best.\u201d Bradford, Heredity, 228\u2014\u201cGod is the\n environment of the soul, yet man has free will. Light fills the\n spaces, yet a man from ignorance may remain in a cave, or from\n choice may dwell in darkness.\u201d Man needs therefore a divine\n influence which will beget in him a disposition to use his\n opportunities aright.\n\n We may illustrate the philosophy of revivals by the canal boat\n which lies before the gate of a lock. No power on earth can open\n the lock. But soon the lock begins to fill, and when the water has\n reached the proper level, the gate can be opened almost at a\n touch. Or, a steamer runs into a sandbar. Tugs fail to pull the\n vessel off. Her own engines cannot accomplish it. But when the\n tide comes in, she swings free without effort. So what we need in\n religion is an influx of spiritual influence which will make easy\n what before is difficult if not impossible. The Superintendent of\n a New York State Prison tells us that the common schools furnish\n 83 per cent., and the colleges and academies over 4 per cent., of\n the inmates of Auburn and Sing Sing. Truth without the Holy Spirit\n to apply it is like sunshine without the actinic ray which alone\n can give it vitalizing energy.\n\n\n(_b_) Even if truth could be energized, intensified, illuminated, there\nwould still be needed a change in the moral disposition, before the soul\ncould recognize its beauty or be affected by it. No mere increase of light\ncan enable a blind man to see; the disease of the eye must first be cured\nbefore external objects are visible. So God\u2019s work in regeneration must be\nperformed within the soul itself. Over and above all influence of the\ntruth, there must be a direct influence of the Holy Spirit upon the heart.\nAlthough wrought in conjunction with the presentation of truth to the\nintellect, regeneration differs from moral suasion in being an immediate\nact of God.\n\n\n Before regeneration, man\u2019s knowledge of God is the blind man\u2019s\n knowledge of color. The Scriptures call such knowledge\n \u201c_ignorance_\u201d (_Eph. 4:18_). The heart does not appreciate God\u2019s\n mercy. Regeneration gives an experimental or heart knowledge; see\n Shedd, Dogm. Theol., 2:495. _Is. 50:4_\u2014God \u201c_wakeneth mine ear to\n hear_.\u201d It is false to say that soul can come in contact with soul\n only through the influence of truth. In the intercourse of dear\n friends, or in the discourse of the orator, there is a personal\n influence, distinct from the word spoken, which persuades the\n heart and conquers the will. We sometimes call it \u201cmagnetism,\u201d\u2014but\n we mean simply that soul reaches soul, in ways apart from the use\n of physical intermediaries. Compare the facts, imperfectly known\n as yet, of second sight, mind\u2010reading, clairvoyance. But whether\n these be accepted or not, it still is true that God has not made\n the human soul so that it is inaccessible to himself. The\n omnipresent Spirit penetrates and pervades all spirits that have\n been made by him. See Lotze, Outlines of Psychology (Ladd), 142,\n 143.\n\n In the primary change of disposition, which is the most essential\n feature of regeneration, the Spirit of God acts directly upon the\n spirit of man. In the securing of the initial exercise of this new\n disposition\u2014which constitutes the secondary feature of God\u2019s work\n of regeneration\u2014the truth is used as a means. Hence, perhaps, in\n _James 1:18_, we read: \u201c_Of his own will he brought us forth by\n the word of truth_\u201d instead of \u201che begat us by the word of\n truth,\u201d\u2014the reference being to the secondary, not to the primary,\n feature of regeneration. The advocates of the opposite view\u2014the\n view that God works _only_ through the truth as a means, and that\n his _only_ influence upon the soul is a moral influence\u2014very\n naturally deny the mystical union of the soul with Christ. Squier,\n for example, in his Autobiog., 343\u2010378, esp. 360, on the Spirit\u2019s\n influences, quotes _John 16:8_\u2014he \u201c_will convict the world in\n respect of sin_\u201d\u2014to show that God regenerates by applying truth to\n men\u2019s minds, so far as to convince them, by fair and sufficient\n arguments, that they are sinners.\n\n Christ, opening blind eyes and unstopping deaf ears, illustrates\n the nature of God\u2019s operation in regeneration,\u2014in the case of the\n blind, there is plenty of _light_,\u2014what is wanted is _sight_. The\n negro convert said that his conversion was due to himself and God:\n he fought against God with all his might, and God did the rest. So\n our moral successes are due to ourselves and God,\u2014we have done\n only the fighting against God, and God has done the rest. The sand\n of Sahara would not bring forth flowers and fruit, even if you\n turned into it a hundred rivers like the Nile. Man may hear\n sermons for a lifetime, and still be barren of all spiritual\n growths. The soil of the heart needs to be changed, and the good\n seed of the kingdom needs to be planted there.\n\n For the view that truth is \u201cenergized\u201d or \u201cintensified\u201d by the\n Holy Spirit, see Phelps, New Birth, 61, 121; Walker, Philosophy of\n Plan of Salvation, chap. 18. _Per contra_, see Wardlaw, Syst.\n Theol., 3:24, 25; E. D. Griffin, Divine Efficiency, 73\u2010116;\n Anderson, Regeneration, 123\u2010168; Edwards, Works, 2:547\u2010597;\n Chalmers, Lectures on Romans, chap. 1; Payne, Divine Sovereignty,\n lect. 23:363\u2010367; Hodge, Syst. Theol., 3:3\u201037, 466\u2010485. On the\n whole subject of the Efficient Cause of Regeneration, see Hopkins,\n Works, 1:454; Dwight, Theology, 2:418\u2010429; John Owen, Works,\n 3:282\u2010297, 366\u2010538; Robert Hall, Sermon on the Cause, Agent, and\n Purpose of Regeneration.\n\n\n4. The Instrumentality used in Regeneration.\n\n\nA. The Roman, English and Lutheran churches hold that regeneration is\naccomplished through the instrumentality of baptism. The Disciples, or\nfollowers of Alexander Campbell, make regeneration include baptism, as\nwell as repentance and faith. To the view that baptism is a means of\nregeneration we urge the following objections:\n\n(_a_) The Scriptures represent baptism to be not the means but only the\nsign of regeneration, and therefore to presuppose and follow regeneration.\nFor this reason only believers\u2014that is, persons giving credible evidence\nof being regenerated\u2014were baptized (Acts 8:12). Not external baptism, but\nthe conscientious turning of the soul to God which baptism symbolizes,\nsaves us (1 Pet. 3:21\u2014\u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9\u03b4\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 \u1f00\u03b3\u03b1\u03b8\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03ce\u03c4\u03b7\u03bc\u03b1). Texts like John 3:5,\nActs 2:38, Col. 2:12, Tit. 3:5, are to be explained upon the principle\nthat regeneration, the inward change, and baptism, the outward sign of\nthat change, were regarded as only different sides or aspects of the same\nfact, and either side or aspect might therefore be described in terms\nderived from the other.\n\n(_b_) Upon this view, there is a striking incongruity between the nature\nof the change to be wrought and the means employed to produce it. The\nchange is a spiritual one, but the means are physical. It is far more\nrational to suppose that, in changing the character of intelligent beings,\nGod uses means which have relation to their intelligence. The view we are\nconsidering is part and parcel of a general scheme of mechanical rather\nthan moral salvation, and is more consistent with a materialistic than\nwith a spiritual philosophy.\n\n\n _Acts 8:12_\u2014\u201c_when they believed Philip preaching good tidings\n concerning the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, they\n were baptized_\u201d; _1 Pet. 3:21_\u2014\u201c_which also after a true likeness\n doth now save you, even baptism, not the putting away of the filth\n of the flesh, but the interrogation_ [marg.\u2014\u2018_inquiry_\u2019,\n \u2018_appeal_\u2019] _of a good conscience toward God_\u201d = the inquiry of\n the soul after God, the conscientious turning of the soul to God.\n\n Plumptre, however, makes \u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03ce\u03c4\u03b7\u03bc\u03b1 a forensic term equivalent to\n \u201cexamination,\u201d and including both question and answer. It means,\n then, the open answer of allegiance to Christ, given by the new\n convert to the constituted officers of the church. \u201cThat which is\n of the essence of the saving power of baptism is the confession\n and the profession which precede it. If this comes from a\n conscience that really renounces sin and believes on Christ, then\n baptism, as the channel through which the grace of the new birth\n is conveyed and the convert admitted into the church of Christ,\n \u2018saves us,\u2019 but not otherwise.\u201d We may adopt this statement from\n Plumptre\u2019s Commentary, with the alteration of the word \u201cconveyed\u201d\n into \u201csymbolized\u201d or \u201cmanifested.\u201d Plumptre\u2019s interpretation is,\n as he seems to admit, in its obvious meaning inconsistent with\n infant baptism; to us it seems equally inconsistent with any\n doctrine of baptismal regeneration.\n\n Scriptural regeneration is God\u2019s (1) changing man\u2019s disposition,\n and (2) securing its first exercise. Regeneration, according to\n the Disciples, is man\u2019s (1) repentance and faith, and (2)\n submission to baptism. Alexander Campbell, Christianity Restored:\n \u201cWe plead that all the converting power of the Holy Spirit is\n exhibited in the divine Record.\u201d Address of Disciples to Ohio\n Baptist State Convention, 1871: \u201cWith us regeneration includes all\n that is comprehended in faith, repentance, and baptism, and so far\n as it is expressive of birth, it belongs more properly to the last\n of these than to either of the former.\u201d But if baptism be the\n instrument of regeneration, it is difficult to see how the\n patriarchs, or the penitent thief, could have been regenerated.\n _Luke 23:43_\u2014\u201c_This day shalt thou be with me in Paradise._\u201d\n Bossuet: \u201c_This day_\u201d\u2014what promptitude! \u201c_With me_\u201d\u2014what\n companionship! \u201c_In Paradise_\u201d\u2014what rest! Bersier: \u201c \u2018_This\n day_\u2019\u2014what then? no flames of Purgatory? no long period of\n mournful expiation? \u2018_This day_\u2019\u2014pardon and heaven!\u201d\n\n Baptism is a condition of being outwardly in the kingdom; it is\n not a condition of being inwardly in the kingdom. The confounding\n of these two led many in the early church to dread dying\n unbaptized, rather than dying unsaved. Even Pascal, in later\n times, held that participation in outward ceremonies might lead to\n real conversion. He probably meant that an initial act of holy\n will would tend to draw others in its train. Similarly we urge\n unconverted people to take some step that will manifest religious\n interest. We hope that in taking this step a new decision of the\n will, inwrought by the Spirit of God, may reveal itself. But a\n religion which consists only in such outward performances is\n justly denominated a cutaneous religion, for it is only skin\u2010deep.\n On _John 3:5_\u2014\u201c_Except one be born of water and the Spirit, he\n cannot enter into the kingdom of God_\u201d; _Acts 2:38_\u2014\u201c_Repent ye,\n and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ unto\n the remission of your sins_\u201d; _Col. 2:12_\u2014\u201c_buried with him in\n baptism, wherein ye were also raised with him through faith_\u201d;\n _Tit. 3:5_\u2014\u201c_saved us, through the washing of regeneration and\n renewing of the Holy Spirit_\u201d\u2014see further discussion and\n exposition in our chapter on the Ordinances. Adkins, Disciples and\n Baptists, a booklet published by the Am. Bap. Pub. Society, is the\n best statement of the Baptist position, as distinguished from that\n of the Disciples. It claims that Disciples overrate the externals\n of Christianity and underrate the work of the Holy Spirit. _Per\n contra_, see Gates, Disciples and Baptists.\n\n\nB. The Scriptural view is that regeneration, so far as it secures an\nactivity of man, is accomplished through the instrumentality of the truth.\nAlthough the Holy Spirit does not in any way illuminate the truth, he does\nilluminate the mind, so that it can perceive the truth. In conjunction\nwith the change of man\u2019s inner disposition, there is an appeal to man\u2019s\nrational nature through the truth. Two inferences may be drawn:\n\n(_a_) Man is not wholly passive at the time of his regeneration. He is\npassive only with respect to the change of his ruling disposition. With\nrespect to the exercise of this disposition, he is active. Although the\nefficient power which secures this exercise of the new disposition is the\npower of God, yet man is not therefore unconscious, nor is he a mere\nmachine worked by God\u2019s fingers. On the other hand, his whole moral nature\nunder God\u2019s working is alive and active. We reject the \u201cexercise\u2010system,\u201d\nwhich regards God as the direct author of all man\u2019s thoughts, feelings,\nand volitions, not only in its general tenor, but in its special\napplication to regeneration.\n\n\n Shedd, Dogm. Theol., 2:503\u2014\u201cA dead man cannot assist in his own\n resurrection.\u201d This is true so far as the giving of life is\n concerned. But once made alive, man can, like Lazarus, obey\n Christ\u2019s command and \u201c_come forth_\u201d (_John 11:43_). In fact, if he\n does not obey, there is no evidence that there is spiritual life.\n \u201cIn us is God; we burn but as he moves\u201d\u2014\u201cEst deus in nobis;\n agitante calescimus illo.\u201d Wireless telegraphy requires an attuned\n receiver; regeneration attunes the soul so that it vibrates\n responsively to God and receives the communications of his truth.\n When a convert came to Rowland Hill and claimed that she had been\n converted in a dream, he replied: \u201cWe will see how you walk, now\n that you are awake.\u201d\n\n Lord Bacon said he would open every one of Argus\u2019s hundred eyes,\n before he opened one of Briareus\u2019s hundred hands. If God did not\n renew men\u2019s hearts in connection with our preaching of the truth,\n we might well give up our ministry. E. G. Robinson: \u201cThe\n conversion of a soul is just as much according to law as the\n raising of a crop of turnips.\u201d Simon, Reconciliation, 377\u2014\u201cThough\n the mere preaching of the gospel is not the _cause_ of the\n conversion and revivification of men, it is a necessary\n _condition_\u2014as necessary as the action of light and heat, or other\n physical agencies, are on a germ, if it is to develop, grow, and\n bear its proper fruit.\u201d\n\n\n(_b_) The activity of man\u2019s mind in regeneration is activity in view of\nthe truth. God secures the initial exercise of the new disposition which\nhe has wrought in man\u2019s heart in connection with the use of truth as a\nmeans. Here we perceive the link between the efficiency of God and the\nactivity of man. Only as the sinner\u2019s mind is brought into contact with\nthe truth, does God complete his regenerating work. And as the change of\ninward disposition and the initial exercise of it are never, so far as we\nknow, separated by any interval of time, we can say, in general, that\nChristian work is successful only as it commends the truth to every man\u2019s\nconscience in the sight of God (2 Cor. 4:2).\n\n\n In _Eph. 1:17, 18_, there is recognized the divine illumination of\n the mind to behold the truth\u2014\u201c_may give unto you a spirit of\n wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him; having the eyes of\n your heart enlightened, that ye may know what is the hope of his\n calling_\u201d On truth as a means of regeneration, see Hovey,\n Outlines, 192, who quotes Cunningham, Historical Theology,\n 1:617\u2014\u201cRegeneration may be taken in a limited sense as including\n only the first impartation of spiritual life ... or it may be\n taken in a wider sense as comprehending the whole of that process\n by which he is renewed or made over again in the whole man after\n the image of God,\u2014_i. e._, as including the production of saving\n faith and union to Christ. Only in the first sense did the\n Reformers maintain that man in the process was wholly passive and\n not active; for they did not dispute that, before the process in\n the second and more enlarged sense was completed, man was\n spiritually alive and active, and continued so ever after during\n the whole process of his sanctification.\u201d\n\n Dr. Hovey suggests an apt illustration of these two parts of the\n Holy Spirit\u2019s work and their union in regeneration: At the same\n time that God makes the photographic plate sensitive, he pours in\n the light of truth whereby the image of Christ is formed in the\n soul. Without the \u201csensitizing\u201d of the plate, it would never fix\n the rays of light so as to retain the image. In the process of\n \u201csensitizing,\u201d the plate is passive; under the influence of light,\n it is active. In both the \u201csensitizing\u201d and the taking of the\n picture, the real agent is not the plate nor the light, but the\n photographer. The photographer cannot perform both operations at\n the same moment. God can. He gives the new affection, and at the\n same instant he secures its exercise in view of the truth.\n\n For denial of the instrumentality of truth in regeneration, see\n Pierce, in Bap. Quar., Jan. 1872:52. _Per contra_, see Anderson,\n Regeneration, 89\u2010122. H. B. Smith holds middle ground. He says:\n \u201cIn adults it [regeneration] is wrought most frequently by the\n word of God as the instrument. Believing that infants may be\n regenerated, we cannot assert that it is tied to the word of God\n absolutely.\u201d We prefer to say that, if infants are regenerated,\n they also are regenerated in conjunction with some influence of\n truth upon the mind, dim as the recognition of it may be.\n Otherwise we break the Scriptural connection between regeneration\n and conversion, and open the way for faith in a physical, magical,\n sacramental salvation. Squier, Autobiog., 368, says well, of the\n theory of regeneration which makes man purely passive, that it has\n a benumbing effect upon preaching: \u201cThe lack of expectation\n unnerves the efforts of the preacher; an impression of the\n fortuitous presence neutralizes his engagedness. This antinomian\n dependence on the Spirit extracts all vitality from the pulpit and\n sense of responsibility from the hearer, and makes preaching an\n _opus operatum_, like the baptismal regeneration of the\n formalist.\u201d Only of the first element in regeneration are Shedd\u2019s\n words true: \u201cA dead man cannot assist in his own resurrection\u201d\n (Dogm. Theol., 2:503).\n\n Squier goes to the opposite extreme of regarding the truth alone\n as the cause of regeneration. His words are none the less a\n valuable protest against the view that regeneration is so entirely\n due to God that in no part of it is man active. It was with a\n better view that Luther cried: \u201cO that we might multiply living\n books, that is, preachers!\u201d And the preacher is successful only as\n he possesses and unfolds the truth. John took the little book from\n the Covenant\u2010angel\u2019s hand and ate it (_Rev. 10:8\u201011_). So he who\n is to preach God\u2019s truth must feed upon it, until it has become\n his own. For the Exercise\u2010system, see Emmons, Works, 4:339\u2010411;\n Hagenbach, Hist. Doct., 2:439.\n\n\n5. The Nature of the Change wrought in Regeneration.\n\n\nA. It is a change in which the governing disposition is made holy. This\nimplies that:\n\n(_a_) It is not a change in the substance of either body or soul.\nRegeneration is not a physical change. There is no physical seed or germ\nimplanted in man\u2019s nature. Regeneration does not add to, or subtract from,\nthe number of man\u2019s intellectual, emotional or voluntary faculties. But\nregeneration is the giving of a new direction or tendency to powers of\naffection which man possessed before. Man had the faculty of love before,\nbut his love was supremely set on self. In regeneration the direction of\nthat faculty is changed, and his love is now set supremely upon God.\n\n\n _Eph. 2:10_\u2014\u201c_created in Christ Jesus for good works_\u201d\u2014does not\n imply that the old soul is annihilated, and a new soul created.\n The \u201c_old man_\u201d which is \u201c_crucified_\u201d\u2014(_Rom. 6:6_) and \u201c_put\n away_\u201d (_Eph. 4:22_) is simply the sinful bent of the affections\n and will. When this direction of the dispositions is changed, and\n becomes holy, we can call the change a new birth of the old\n nature, because the same _faculties_ that acted before are acting\n now, the only difference being that now these faculties are set\n toward God and purity. Or, regarding the change from another point\n of view, we may speak of man as having a \u201cnew nature,\u201d as\n \u201crecreated,\u201d as being a \u201cnew creature,\u201d because this _direction_\n of the affection and will, which ensures a different life from\n what was led before, is something totally new, and due wholly to\n the regenerating act of God. In _1 Pet. 1:23_\u2014\u201c_begotten again,\n not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible_\u201d\u2014all materialistic\n inferences from the word \u201c_seed_,\u201d as if it implied the\n implantation of a physical germ, are prevented by the following\n explanatory words: \u201c_through the word of God, which liveth and\n abideth_.\u201d\n\n So, too, when we describe regeneration as the communication of a\n new life to the soul, we should not conceive of this new life as a\n _substance_ imparted or infused into us. The new life is rather a\n new direction and activity of our own affections and will. There\n is, indeed a union of the soul with Christ; Christ dwells in the\n renewed heart; Christ\u2019s entrance into the soul is the _cause_ and\n _accompaniment_ of its regeneration. But this entrance of Christ\n into the soul is not _itself_ regeneration. We must distinguish\n the effect from the cause; otherwise we shall be in danger of a\n pantheistic confounding of our own personality and life with the\n personality and life of Christ. Christ is indeed our life, in the\n sense of being the cause and supporter of our life, but he is not\n our life in the sense that, after our union with him, our\n individuality ceases. The effect of union with Christ is rather\n that our individuality is enlarged and exalted (_John 10:10_\u2014\u201c_I\n came that they may have life, and may have it abundantly._\u201d See\n page 799, (_c_)).\n\n We must therefore take with a grain of allowance the generally\n excellent words of A. J. Gordon, Twofold Life, 22\u2014\u201cRegeneration is\n the communication of the divine nature to man by the operation of\n the Holy Spirit through the word (_2 Pet. 1:4_).... As Christ was\n made partaker of human nature by incarnation, that so he might\n enter into truest fellowship with us, we are made partakers of the\n divine nature, by regeneration, that we may enter into truest\n fellowship with God. Regeneration is not a change of nature, _i.\n e._, a natural heart bettered. Eternal life is not natural life\n prolonged into endless duration. It is the divine life imparted to\n us, the very life of God communicated to the human soul, and\n bringing forth there its proper fruit.\u201d Dr. Gordon\u2019s view that\n regeneration adds a new substance or faculty to the soul is the\n result of literalizing the Scripture metaphors of creation and\n life. This turning of symbol into fact accounts for his tendency\n toward annihilation doctrine in the case of the unregenerate,\n toward faith cure and the belief that all physical evils can be\n removed by prayer. E. H. Johnson, The Holy Spirit: \u201cRegeneration\n is a change, not in the quantity, but in the quality, of the\n soul.\u201d E. G. Robinson, Christian Theology, 320\u2014\u201cRegeneration\n consists in a divinely wrought change in the moral affections.\u201d\n\n So, too, we would criticize the doctrine of Drummond, Nat. Law in\n the Spir. World: \u201cPeople forget the persistence of force. Instead\n of transforming energy, they try to create it. We must either\n depend on environment, or be self\u2010sufficient. The \u2018cannot _bear\n fruit of itself_\u2019 (_John 15:4_) is the \u2018_cannot_\u2019 of natural law.\n Natural fruit flourishes with air and sunshine. The difference\n between the Christian and the non\u2010Christian is the difference\n between the organic and the inorganic. The Christian has all the\n characteristics of life: assimilation, waste, reproduction,\n spontaneous action.\u201d See criticism of Drummond, by Murphy, in\n Brit. Quar., 1884:118\u2010125\u2014\u201cAs in resurrection there is a physical\n connection with the old body, so in regeneration there is a\n natural connection with the old soul.\u201d Also, Brit. Quar., July,\n 1880, art.: Evolution Viewed in Relation to Theology\u2014\u201cThe\n regenerating agency of the Spirit of God is symbolized, not by the\n vitalization of dead matter, but by the agency of the organizing\n intelligence which guides the evolution of living beings.\u201d\n Murphy\u2019s answer to Drummond is republished. Murphy\u2019s Natural\n Selection and Spiritual Freedom, 1\u201033\u2014\u201cThe will can no more create\n force, either muscular or mental, than it can create matter. And\n it is equally true that for our spiritual nourishment and\n spiritual force we are altogether dependent on our spiritual\n environment, which is God.\u201d In \u201cdead matter\u201d there is no sin.\n\n Drummond would imply that, as matter has no promise or potency of\n life and is not responsible for being without life (or \u201cdead,\u201d to\n use his misleading word), and if it ever is to live must wait for\n the life\u2010giving influence to come unsought, so the human soul is\n not responsible for being spiritually dead, cannot seek for life,\n must passively wait for the Spirit. Plymouth Brethren generally\n hold the same view with Drummond, that regeneration _adds_\n something\u2014as _vitality_\u2014to the substance of the soul. Christ is\n transsubstantiated into the soul\u2019s substance; or, the \u03c0\u03bd\u03b5\u1fe6\u03bc\u03b1 is\n added. But we have given over talking of vitality, as if it were a\n substance or faculty. We regard it as merely a mode of action.\n Evolution, moreover, uses what already exists, so far as it will\n go, instead of creating new; as in the miracle of the loaves, and\n as in the original creation of man, so in his recreation or\n regeneration. Dr. Charles Hodge also makes the same mistake in\n calling regeneration an \u201corigination of the principle of the\n spirit of life, just as literal and real a creation as the\n origination of the principle of natural life.\u201d This, too,\n literalizes Scripture metaphor, and ignores the fact that the\n change accomplished in regeneration is an exclusively moral one.\n There is indeed a new entrance of Christ into the soul, or a new\n exercise of his spiritual power within the soul. But the effect of\n Christ\u2019s working is not to add any new faculty or substance, but\n only to give new direction to already existing powers.\n\n\n(_b_) Regeneration involves an enlightenment of the understanding and a\nrectification of the volitions. But it seems most consonant with Scripture\nand with a correct psychology to regard these changes as immediate and\nnecessary consequences of the change of disposition already mentioned,\nrather than as the primary and central facts in regeneration. The taste\nfor truth logically precedes perception of the truth, and love for God\nlogically precedes obedience to God; indeed, without love no obedience is\npossible. Reverse the lever of affection, and this moral locomotive,\nwithout further change, will move away from sin, and toward truth and God.\n\n\n Texts which seem to imply that a right taste, disposition,\n affection, logically precedes both knowledge of God and obedience\n to God, are the following: _Ps. 34:8_\u2014\u201c_Oh taste and see that\n Jehovah is good_\u201d; _119:36_\u2014\u201c_Incline my heart unto thy\n testimonies_\u201d; _Jer. 24:7_\u2014\u201c_I will give them a heart to know\n me_\u201d; _Mat. 5:8_\u2014\u201c_Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall\n see God_\u201d; _John 7:17_\u2014\u201c_If any man willeth to do his will, he\n shall know of the teaching, whether it is of God_\u201d; _Acts\n 16:14_\u2014of Lydia it is said: \u201c_whose heart the Lord opened to give\n heed unto the things which were spoken by Paul_\u201d; _Eph.\n 1:18_\u2014\u201c_having the eyes of your heart enlightened._\u201d \u201cChange the\n centre of a circle and you change the place and direction of all\n its radii.\u201d\n\n The text _John 1:12, 13_\u2014\u201c_But as many as received him, to them\n gave him the right to become children of God, even to them that\n believe on his name: who were born, not of blood, nor of the will\n of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God_\u201d\u2014seems at first\n sight to imply that faith is the condition of regeneration, and\n therefore prior to it. \u201cBut if \u1f10\u03be\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03af\u03b1\u03bd here signifies the\n \u2018_right_\u2019 or \u2018privilege\u2019 of sonship, it is a right which may\n presuppose faith as the work of the Spirit in regeneration\u2014a work\n apart from which no genuine faith exists in the soul. But it is\n possible that John means to say that, in the case of all who\n received Christ, their power to believe was _given_ to them by\n him. In the original the emphasis is on \u2018_gave,_\u2019 and this is\n shown by the order of the words\u201d; see Hovey, Manual of Theology,\n 345, and Com. on _John 1:12, 13_\u2014\u201cThe meaning would then be this:\n \u2018Many did not receive him; but some did; and as to all who\n received him, he _gave_ them grace by which they were enabled to\n do this, and so to become God\u2019s children.\u2019 \u201d\n\n Ruskin: \u201cThe first and last and closest trial question to any\n living creature is, \u2018What do you like?\u2019 Go out into the street and\n ask the first man you meet what his taste is, and, if he answers\n candidly, you know him, body and soul. What we like determines\n what we are, and is the sign of what we are; and to teach taste is\n inevitably to form character.\u201d If the taste here spoken of is\n moral and spiritual taste, the words of Ruskin are sober truth.\n Regeneration is essentially a changing of the fundamental taste of\n the soul. But by taste we mean the direction of man\u2019s love, the\n bent of his affections, the trend of his will. And to alter that\n taste is not to impart a new faculty, or to create a new\n substance, but simply to set toward God the affections which\n hitherto have been set upon self and sin. We may illustrate by the\n engineer who climbs over the cab into a runaway locomotive and who\n changes its course, not by adding any new rod or cog to the\n machine, but simply by reversing the lever. The engine slows up\n and soon moves in an opposite direction to that in which it has\n been going. Man needs no new faculty of love; he needs only to\n have his love set in a new and holy direction; this is virtually\n to give him a new birth, to make him a new creature, to impart to\n him a new life. But being born again, created anew, made alive\n from the dead, are physical metaphors, to be interpreted not\n literally but spiritually.\n\n\n(_c_) It is objected, indeed, that we know only of mental substance and of\nmental acts, and that the new disposition or state just mentioned, since\nit is not an act, must be regarded as a new substance, and so lack all\nmoral quality. But we reply that, besides substance and acts, there are\nhabits, tendencies, proclivities, some of them native and some of them\nacquired. They are voluntary, and have moral character. If we can by\nrepeated acts originate sinful tendencies, God can surely originate in us\nholy tendencies. Such holy tendencies formed a part of the nature of Adam,\nas he came from the hand of God. As the result of the Fall, we are born\nwith tendencies toward evil for which we are responsible. Regeneration is\na restoration of the original tendencies toward God which were lost by the\nFall. Such holy tendencies (tastes, dispositions, affections) are not only\nnot unmoral\u2014they are the only possible springs of right moral action. Only\nin the restoration of them does man become truly free.\n\n\n _Mat. 12:33_\u2014\u201c_Make the tree good, and its fruit good_\u201d; _Eph.\n 2:10_\u2014\u201c_created in Christ Jesus for good works._\u201d The tree is\n first made good\u2014the character renewed in its fundamental\n principle, love to God\u2014in the certainty that when this is done the\n fruit will be good also. Good works are the necessary result of\n regeneration by union with Christ. Regeneration introduces a new\n force into humanity, the force of a new love. The work of the\n preacher is that of co\u00f6peration with God in the impartation of a\n new life\u2014a work far more radical and more noble than that of moral\n reform, by as much as the origination of a new force is more\n radical and more noble than the guidance of that force after it\n has been originated. Does regeneration cure disease and remove\n physical ills? Not primarily. _Mat. 1:21_\u2014\u201c_thou shalt call his\n name Jesus; for it is he that shall save his people from their\n sins._\u201d Salvation from sin is Christ\u2019s first and main work. He\n performed physical healing only to illustrate and further the\n healing of the soul. Hence in the case of the paralytic, when he\n was expected to cure the body, he said first: \u201c_thy sins are\n forgiven_\u201d (_Mat. 9:2_); but, that they who stood by might not\n doubt his power to forgive, he added the raising up of the palsied\n man. And ultimately in every redeemed man the holy heart will\n bring in its train the perfected body: _Rom. 8:23_\u2014\u201c_we ourselves\n groan within ourselves, waiting for our adoption, to wit, the\n redemption of our body._\u201d\n\n On holy affection as the spring of holy action, see especially\n Edwards, Religious Affections, in Works, 3:1\u201021. This treatise is\n Jonathan Edwards\u2019s Confessions, as much as if it were directly\n addressed to the Deity. Allen, his biographer, calls it \u201ca work\n which will not suffer by comparison with the work of great\n teachers in theology, whether ancient or modern.\u201d President\n Timothy Dwight regarded it as most worthy of preservation next to\n the Bible. See also Hodge, Essays and Reviews, 1:48; Owen on the\n Holy Spirit, in Works, 3:297\u2010336; Charnock on Regeneration; Andrew\n Fuller, Works, 2:461\u2010471, 512\u2010560, and 3:796; Bellamy, Works,\n 2:502; Dwight, Works, 2:418; Woods, Works, 3:1\u201021; Anderson,\n Regeneration, 21\u201050.\n\n\nB. It is an instantaneous change, in a region of the soul below\nconsciousness, and is therefore known only in its results.\n\n(_a_) It is an instantaneous change.\u2014Regeneration is not a gradual work.\nAlthough there may be a gradual work of God\u2019s providence and Spirit,\npreparing the change, and a gradual recognition of it after it has taken\nplace, there must be an instant of time when, under the influence of God\u2019s\nSpirit, the disposition of the soul, just before hostile to God, is\nchanged to love. Any other view assumes an intermediate state of\nindecision which has no moral character at all, and confounds regeneration\neither with conviction or with sanctification.\n\n\n Conviction of sin is an ordinary, if not an invariable, antecedent\n of regeneration. It results from the contemplation of truth. It is\n often accompanied by fear, remorse, and cries for mercy. But these\n desires and fears are not signs of regeneration. They are selfish.\n They are quite consistent with manifest and dreadful enmity to\n God. They have a hopeful aspect, simply because they are evidence\n that the Holy Spirit is striving with the soul. But this work of\n the Spirit is not yet regeneration; at most, it is preparation for\n regeneration. So far as the sinner is concerned, he is more of a\n sinner than ever before; because, under more light than has ever\n before been given him, he is still rejecting Christ and resisting\n the Spirit. The word of God and the Holy Spirit appeal to lower as\n well as to higher motives; most men\u2019s concern about religion is\n determined, at the outset, by hope or fear. See Shedd, Dogm.\n Theol., 2:512.\n\n All these motives, though they are not the highest, are yet proper\n motives to influence the soul; it is right to seek God from\n motives of self\u2010interest, and because we desire heaven. But the\n seeking which not only begins, but ends, upon this lower plane, is\n never successful. Until the soul gives itself to God from motives\n of love, it is never saved. And so long as these preliminary\n motives rule, regeneration has not yet taken place. Bible\u2010reading,\n and prayers, and church\u2010attendance, and partial reformations, are\n certainly better than apathy or outbreaking sin. They may be signs\n that God is working in the soul. But without complete surrender to\n God, they may be accompanied with the greatest guilt and the\n greatest danger; simply because, under such influences, the\n withholding of submission implies the most active hatred to God,\n and opposition to his will. Instance cases of outward reformation\n that preceded regeneration,\u2014like that of John Bunyan, who left off\n swearing before his conversion. Park: \u201cThe soul is a monad, and\n must turn all at once. If we are standing on the line, we are yet\n unregenerate. We are regenerate only when we cross it.\u201d There is a\n prevenient grace as well as a regenerating grace. Wendelius indeed\n distinguished five kinds of grace, namely, prevenient,\n preparatory, operant, co\u00f6perant, and perfecting.\n\n While in some cases God\u2019s preparatory work occupies a long time,\n there are many cases in which he cuts short his work in\n righteousness (_Rom. 9:28_). Some persons are regenerated in\n infancy or childhood, cannot remember a time when they did not\n love Christ, and yet take long to learn that they are regenerate.\n Others are convicted and converted suddenly in mature years. The\n best proof of regeneration is not the memory of a past experience,\n however vivid and startling, but rather a present inward love for\n Christ, his holiness, his servants, his work, and his word. Much\n sympathy should be given to those who have been early converted,\n but who, from timidity, self\u2010distrust, or the faults of\n inconsistent church members, have been deterred from joining\n themselves with Christian people, and so have lost all hope and\n joy in their religious lives. Instance the man who, though\n converted in a revival of religion, was injured by a professed\n Christian, and became a recluse, but cherished the memory of his\n dead wife and child, kept the playthings of the one and the\n clothing of the other, and left directions to have them buried\n with him.\n\n As there is danger of confounding regeneration with preparatory\n influences of God\u2019s Spirit, so there is danger of confounding\n regeneration with sanctification. Sanctification, as the\n development of the new affection, is gradual and progressive. But\n no _beginning_ is progressive or gradual; and regeneration is a\n beginning of the new affection. We may gradually come to the\n _knowledge_ that a new affection exists, but the knowledge of a\n beginning is one thing; the beginning itself is another thing.\n Luther had experienced a change of heart, long before he knew its\n meaning or could express his new feelings in scientific form. It\n is not in the sense of a gradual regeneration, but in the sense of\n a gradual recognition of the fact of regeneration, and a\n progressive enjoyment of its results, that \u201c_the path of the\n righteous_\u201d is said to be \u201c_as the dawning light_\u201d\u2014the morning\u2010\n dawn that begins in faintness, but\u2014\u201c_that shineth more and more\n unto the perfect day_\u201d (_Prov. 4:18_). _Cf._ _2 Cor. 4:4_\u2014\u201c_the\n god of this world hath blinded the minds of the unbelieving, that\n the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image\n of God, should not dawn upon them._\u201d Here the recognition of God\u2019s\n work is described as gradual; that the work itself is\n instantaneous, appears from the following _verse 6_\u2014\u201c_Seeing it is\n God, that said, Light shall shine out of darkness, who shined in\n our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God\n in the face of Jesus Christ._\u201d\n\n Illustrate by the unconscious crossing of the line which separates\n one State of the Federal Union from another. From this doctrine of\n instantaneous regeneration, we may infer the duty of reaping as\n well as of sowing: _John 4:38_\u2014\u201c_I sent you to reap._\u201d \u201cIt is a\n mistaken notion that it takes God a long time to give increase to\n the seed planted in a sinner\u2019s heart. This grows out of the idea\n that regeneration is a matter of _training_; that a soul must be\n _educated_ from a lost state into a state of salvation. Let us\n remember that three thousand, whom in the morning Peter called\n murderers of Christ, were before night regenerated and baptized\n members of his church.\u201d Drummond, in his Nat. Law in the Spir.\n World, remarks upon the humaneness of sudden conversion. As self\u2010\n limitation, self\u2010mortification, suicide of the old nature, it is\n well to have it at once done and over with, and not to die by\n degrees.\n\n\n(_b_) This change takes place in the region of the soul below\nconsciousness.\u2014It is by no means true that God\u2019s work in regeneration is\nalways recognized by the subject of it. On the other hand, it is never\ndirectly perceived at all. The working of God in the human soul, since it\ncontravenes no law of man\u2019s being, but rather puts him in the full and\nnormal possession of his own powers, is secret and inscrutable. Although\nman is conscious, he is not conscious of God\u2019s regenerating agency.\n\n\n We know our own natural existence only through the phenomena of\n thought and sense. So we know our own spiritual existence, as new\n creatures in Christ, only through the new feelings and experiences\n of the soul. \u201cThe will does not need to act solitarily, in order\n to act freely.\u201d God acts on the will, and the resulting holiness\n is true freedom. _John 8:36_\u2014\u201c_If therefore the Son shall make you\n free, ye shall be free indeed._\u201d We have the consciousness of\n freedom; but the act of God in giving us this freedom is beyond or\n beneath our consciousness.\n\n Both Luther and Calvin used the word regeneration in a loose way,\n confounding it with sanctification. After the Federalists made a\n distinct doctrine of it, Calvinists in general came to treat it\n separately. And John Wesley rescued it from identification with\n sacraments, by showing its connection with the truth. E. G.\n Robinson: \u201cRegeneration is in one sense instantaneous, in another\n sense not. There is necessity of some sort of knowledge in\n regeneration. The doctrine of Christ crucified is the fit\n instrument. The object of religion is to produce a _sound_ rather\n than an _emotional_ experience. Revivals of religion are valuable\n in just the proportion in which they produce rational conviction\n and permanently righteous action.\u201d But none are left unaffected by\n them. \u201cAn arm of the magnetic needle must be attracted to the\n magnetic pole of the earth, or it must be repelled,\u2014there is no\n such thing as indifference. Modern materialism, refusing to say\n that the fear of God is the beginning of wisdom, is led to declare\n that the hate of God is the beginning of wisdom\u201d (Diesselhoff, Die\n klassische Poesie, 8).\n\n\n(_c_) This change, however, is recognized indirectly in its results.\u2014At\nthe moment of regeneration, the soul is conscious only of the truth and of\nits own exercises with reference to it. That God is the author of its new\naffection is an inference from the new character of the exercises which it\nprompts. The human side or aspect of regeneration is Conversion. This, and\nthe Sanctification which follows it (including the special gifts of the\nHoly Spirit), are the sole evidences in any particular case that\nregeneration is an accomplished fact.\n\n\n Regeneration, though it is the birth of a perfect child, is still\n the birth of a child. The child is to grow, and the growth is\n sanctification; in other words, sanctification, as we shall see,\n is simply the strengthening and development of the holy affection\n which begins its existence in regeneration. Hence the subject of\n the epistle to the _Romans_\u2014salvation by faith\u2014includes not only\n justification by faith (_chapters 1\u20107_), but sanctification by\n faith (_chapters 8\u201016_). On evidences of regeneration, see\n Anderson, Regeneration, 169\u2010214, 227\u2010295; Woods, Works, 44\u201055. The\n transition from justification by faith to sanctification by faith\n is in _chapter 8_ of the epistle to the _Romans_. That begins by\n declaring that there is _no condemnation_ in Christ, and ends by\n declaring that there is _no separation_ from Christ. The work of\n the Holy Spirit follows upon the work of Christ. See Godet on the\n epistle.\n\n The doctrine of Alexander Campbell was a protest against laying an\n unscriptural emphasis on emotional states as evidences of\n regeneration\u2014a protest which certain mystical and antinomian\n exaggerations of evangelical teaching very justly provoked. But\n Campbell went to the opposite extreme of practically excluding\n emotion from religion, and of confining the work of the Holy\n Spirit to the conscious influence of the truth. Disciples need to\n recognize a power of the Holy Spirit exerted below consciousness,\n in order to explain the conscious acceptance of Christ and of his\n salvation.\n\n William James, Varieties of Religious Experience, 271\u2014\u201cIf we\n should conceive that the human mind, with its different\n possibilities of equilibrium, might be like a many sided solid\n with different surfaces on which it could lie flat, we might liken\n mental revolutions to the spatial revolutions of such a body. As\n it is pried up, say by a lever, from a position in which it lies\n on surface A, for instance, it will linger for a time unstably\n half way up, and if the lever cease to urge it, it will tumble\n back or relapse, under the continued pull of gravity. But if at\n last it rotate far enough for its centre of gravity to pass beyond\n the surface A altogether, the body will fall over, on surface B,\n say, and will abide there permanently. The pulls of gravity\n towards A have vanished, and may now be disregarded. The\n polyhedron has become immune against further attraction from this\n direction.\u201d\n\n\nIII. Conversion.\n\n\nConversion is that voluntary change in the mind of the sinner, in which he\nturns, on the one hand, from sin, and on the other hand, to Christ. The\nformer or negative element in conversion, namely, the turning from sin, we\ndenominate repentance. The latter or positive element in conversion,\nnamely, the turning to Christ, we denominate faith.\n\n\n For account of repentance and faith as elements of conversion, see\n Andrew Fuller, Works, 1:666; Luthardt, Compendium der Dogmatik, 3d\n ed., 201\u2010206. The two elements of conversion seem to be in the\n mind of Paul, when he writes in _Rom. 6:11_\u2014\u201c_reckon ye also\n yourselves to be dead unto sin, but alive unto God in Christ\n Jesus_\u201d; _Col. 3:3_\u2014\u201c_ye died, and your life is hid with Christ in\n God._\u201d _Cf._ \u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03c3\u03c4\u03c1\u03ad\u03c6\u03c9, in _Acts 3:26_\u2014\u201c_in turning away every one\n of you from your iniquities_,\u201d with \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03c1\u03ad\u03c6\u03c9 in _Acts\n 11:21_\u2014\u201c_believed_\u201d and \u201c_turned unto the Lord_.\u201d A candidate for\n ordination was once asked which came first: regeneration or\n conversion. He replied very correctly: \u201cRegeneration and\n conversion are like the cannon\u2010ball and the hole\u2014they both go\n through together.\u201d This is true however only as to their\n chronological relation. Logically the ball is first and causes the\n hole, not the hole first and causes the ball.\n\n\n(_a_) Conversion is the human side or aspect of that fundamental spiritual\nchange which, as viewed from the divine side, we call regeneration. It is\nsimply man\u2019s turning. The Scriptures recognize the voluntary activity of\nthe human soul in this change as distinctly as they recognize the\ncausative agency of God. While God turns men to himself (Ps. 85:4; Song\n1:4; Jer. 31:18; Lam. 5:21), men are exhorted to turn themselves to God\n(Prov. 1:23; Is. 31:6; 59:20; Ez. 14:6; 18:32; 33:9, 11; Joel 2:12\u201014).\nWhile God is represented as the author of the new heart and the new spirit\n(Ps. 51:10; Ez. 11:19; 36:26), men are commanded to make for themselves a\nnew heart and a new spirit (Ez. 18:31; 2 Cor. 7:1; cf. Phil. 2:12, 13;\nEph. 5:14).\n\n\n _Ps. 85:4_\u2014\u201c_Turn us, O God of our salvation_\u201d; _Song 1:4_\u2014\u201c_Draw\n me, we will run after thee_\u201d; _Jer. 31:18_\u2014\u201c_turn thou me, and I\n shall be turned_\u201d; _Lam. 5:21_\u2014\u201c_Turn thou us unto thee, O\n Jehovah, and we shall be turned._\u201d\n\n _Prov. 1:23_\u2014\u201c_Turn you at my reproof: Behold, I will pour out my\n spirit unto you_\u201d; _Is. 31:6_\u2014\u201c_Turn ye unto him from whom ye have\n deeply revolted, O children of Israel_\u201d; _59:20_\u2014\u201c_And a Redeemer\n will come to Zion, and unto them that turn from transgression in\n Jacob_\u201d; _Ez. 14:6_\u2014\u201c_Return ye, and turn yourselves from your\n idols_\u201d; _18:32_\u2014\u201c_turn yourselves and live_\u201d; _33:9_\u2014\u201c_if thou\n warn the wicked of his way to turn from it, and he turn not from\n his way, he shall die in his iniquity_\u201d; _11_\u2014\u201c_turn ye, turn ye\n from your evil ways; for why will ye die, O house of Israel?_\u201d\n _Joel 2:12\u201014_\u2014\u201c_turn ye unto me with all your heart._\u201d\n\n _Ps. 51:10_\u2014\u201c_Create in me a clean heart, O God; And renew a right\n spirit within me_\u201d; _Ez. 11:19_\u2014\u201c_And I will give them one heart,\n and I will put a new spirit within you; and I will take the stony\n heart out of their flesh, and will give them a heart of flesh_\u201d;\n _36:26_\u2014\u201c_A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will\n I put within you._\u201d\n\n _Ez. 18:31_\u2014\u201c_Cast away from you all your transgressions, wherein\n ye have transgressed; and make you a new heart and a new spirit:\n for why will ye die, O house of Israel?_\u201d _2 Cor. 7:1_\u2014\u201c_Having\n therefore these promises, beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from\n all defilement of flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the\n fear of God_\u201d; _cf._ _Phil. 2:12, 13_\u2014\u201c_work out your own\n salvation with fear and trembling; for it is God who worketh in\n you both to will and to work, for his good pleasure_\u201d; _Eph.\n 5:14_\u2014\u201c_Awake, thou that sleepest, and arise from the dead, and\n Christ shall shine upon thee._\u201d\n\n When asked the way to heaven, Bishop Wilberforce replied: \u201cTake\n the first turn to the right, and go straight forward.\u201d Phillips\n Brooks\u2019s conversion is described by Professor Allen, Life, 1:266,\n as consisting in the resolve \u201cto be true to himself, to renounce\n nothing which he knew to be good, and yet bring all things captive\n to the obedience of God, ... the absolute surrender of his will to\n God, in accordance with the example of Christ: \u2018_Lo, I am come ...\n to do thy will, O God_\u2019 (_Heb. 10:7_).\u201d\n\n\n(_b_) This twofold method of representation can be explained only when we\nremember that man\u2019s powers may be interpenetrated and quickened by the\ndivine, not only without destroying man\u2019s freedom, but with the result of\nmaking man for the first time truly free. Since the relation between the\ndivine and the human activity is not one of chronological succession, man\nis never to wait for God\u2019s working. If he is ever regenerated, it must be\nin and through a movement of his own will, in which he turns to God as\nunconstrainedly and with as little consciousness of God\u2019s operation upon\nhim, as if no such operation of God were involved in the change. And in\npreaching, we are to press upon men the claims of God and their duty of\nimmediate submission to Christ, with the certainty that they who do so\nsubmit will subsequently recognize this new and holy activity of their own\nwills as due to a working within them of divine power.\n\n\n _Ps. 110:3_\u2014\u201c_Thy people offer themselves willingly in the day of\n thy power._\u201d The act of God is accompanied by an activity of man.\n Dorner: \u201cGod\u2019s act initiates action.\u201d There is indeed an original\n changing of man\u2019s tastes and affections, and in this man is\n passive. But this is only the first aspect of regeneration. In the\n second aspect of it\u2014the rousing of man\u2019s powers\u2014God\u2019s action is\n accompanied by man\u2019s activity, and regeneration is but the obverse\n side of conversion. Luther\u2019s word: \u201cMan, in conversion, is purely\n passive,\u201d is true only of the first part of the change; and here,\n by \u201cconversion,\u201d Luther means \u201cregeneration.\u201d Melanchthon said\n better: \u201cNon est enim co\u00e4ctio, ut voluntas non possit repugnare:\n trahit Deus, sed volentem trahit.\u201d See Meyer on _Rom. 8:14_\u2014\u201c_led\n by the Spirit of God_\u201d: \u201cThe expression,\u201d Meyer says, \u201cis passive,\n though without prejudice to the human will, as _verse 13_ proves:\n \u2018_by the Spirit ye put to death the deeds of the body_.\u2019 \u201d\n\n As, by a well known principle of hydrostatics, the water contained\n in a little tube can balance the water of a whole ocean, so God\u2019s\n grace can be balanced by man\u2019s will. As sunshine on the sand\n produces nothing unless man sow the seed, and as a fair breeze\n does not propel the vessel unless man spread the sails, so the\n influences of God\u2019s Spirit require human agencies, and work\n through them. The Holy Spirit is sovereign,\u2014he bloweth where he\n listeth. Even though there be uniform human conditions, there will\n not be uniform spiritual results. Results are often independent of\n human conditions as such. This is the truth emphasized by Andrew\n Fuller. But this does not prevent us from saying that, whenever\n God\u2019s Spirit works in regeneration, there is always accompanying\n it a voluntary change in man, which we call conversion, and that\n this change is as free, and as really man\u2019s own work, as if there\n were no divine influence upon him.\n\n Jesus told the man with the withered hand to stretch forth his\n hand; it was the man\u2019s duty to stretch it forth, not to wait for\n strength from God to do it. Jesus told the man sick of the palsy\n to take up his bed and walk. It was that man\u2019s duty to obey the\n command, not to pray for power to obey. Depend wholly upon God?\n Yes, as you depend wholly upon wind when you sail, yet need to\n keep your sails properly set. \u201c_Work out your own salvation_\u201d\n comes first in the apostle\u2019s exhortation; \u201c_for it is God who\n worketh in you_\u201d follows (_Phil. 2:12, 13_); which means that our\n first business is to use our wills in obedience; then we shall\n find that God has gone before us to prepare us to obey.\n\n _Mat. 11:12_\u2014\u201c_the kingdom of heaven suffereth violence, and men\n of violence take it by force._\u201d Conversion is like the invasion of\n a kingdom. Men are not to wait for God\u2019s time, but to act at once.\n Not bodily exercises are required, but impassioned earnestness of\n soul. Wendt, Teaching of Jesus, 2:49\u201056\u2014\u201cNot injustice and\n violence, but energetic laying hold of a good to which they can\n make no claim. It is of no avail to wait idly, or to seek\n laboriously to earn it; but it is of avail to lay hold of it and\n to retain it. It is ready as a gift of God for men, but men must\n direct their desire and will toward it.... The man who put on the\n wedding garment did not earn his share of the feast thereby, yet\n he did show the disposition without which he was not permitted to\n partake of it.\u201d\n\n James, Varieties of Religious Experience, 12\u2014\u201cThe two main\n phenomena of religion, they will say, are essentially phenomena of\n adolescence, and therefore synchronous with the development of\n sexual life. To which the retort is easy: Even were the asserted\n synchrony unrestrictedly true as a fact (which it is not), it is\n not only the sexual life, but the entire higher mental life, which\n awakens during adolescence. One might then as well set up the\n thesis that the interest in mechanics, physics, chemistry, logic,\n physiology and sociology, which springs up during adolescent years\n along with that in poetry and religion, is also a perversion of\n the sexual instinct, but this would be too absurd. Moreover, if\n the argument from synchrony is to decide, what is to be done with\n the fact that the religious age _par excellence_ would seem to be\n old age, when the uproar of the sexual life is past?\u201d\n\n\n(_c_) From the fact that the word \u201cconversion\u201d means simply \u201ca turning,\u201d\nevery turning of the Christian from sin, subsequent to the first, may, in\na subordinate sense, be denominated a conversion (Luke 22:32). Since\nregeneration is not complete sanctification, and the change of governing\ndisposition is not identical with complete purification of the nature,\nsuch subsequent turnings from sin are necessary consequences and evidences\nof the first (_cf._ John 13:10). But they do not, like the first, imply a\nchange in the governing disposition,\u2014they are rather new manifestations of\na disposition already changed. For this reason, conversion proper, like\nthe regeneration of which it is the obverse side, can occur but once. The\nphrase \u201csecond conversion,\u201d even if it does not imply radical\nmisconception of the nature of conversion, is misleading. We prefer,\ntherefore, to describe these subsequent experiences, not by the term\n\u201cconversion,\u201d but by such phrases as \u201cbreaking off, forsaking, returning\nfrom, neglects or transgressions,\u201d and \u201ccoming back to Christ, trusting\nanew in him.\u201d It is with repentance and faith, as elements in that first\nand radical change by which the soul enters upon a state of salvation,\nthat we have now to do.\n\n\n _Luke 22:31, 32_\u2014\u201c_Simon, Simon, behold, Satan asked to have you,\n that he might sift you as wheat: but I made supplication for thee,\n that thy faith fail not; and do thou, when once thou hast turned\n again_ [A. V.: \u2018_art converted_\u2019], _establish thy brethren_\u201d;\n _John 13:10_\u2014\u201c_He that is bathed_ [has taken a full bath] _needeth\n not save to wash his feet, but is clean every whit_ [as a whole].\u201d\n Notice that Jesus here announces that only one regeneration is\n needed,\u2014what follows is not conversion but sanctification.\n Spurgeon said he believed in regeneration, but not in re\u2010\n regeneration. Second blessing? Yes, and a forty\u2010second. The stages\n in the Christian life are like ice, water, invisible vapor, steam,\n all successive and natural results of increasing temperature,\n seemingly different from one another, yet all forms of the same\n element.\n\n On the relation between the divine and the human agencies, we\n quote a different view from another writer: \u201cGod decrees to employ\n means which in every case are sufficient, and which in certain\n cases it is foreseen will be effectual. Human action converts a\n sufficient means into an effectual means. The result is not always\n according to the varying use of means. The power is all of God.\n Man has power to resist only. There is a universal influence of\n the Spirit, but the influences of the Spirit vary in different\n cases, just as external opportunities do. The love of holiness is\n blunted, but it still lingers. The Holy Spirit quickens it. When\n this love is wholly lost, sin against the Holy Ghost results.\n Before regeneration there is a desire for holiness, an\n apprehension of its beauty, but this is overborne by a greater\n love for sin. If the man does not quickly grow worse, it is not\n because of positive action on his part, but only because\n negatively he does not resist as he might. \u2018_Behold, I stand at\n the door and knock_.\u2019 God leads at first by a resistible\n influence. When man yields, God leads by an irresistible\n influence. The second influence of the Holy Spirit confirms the\n Christian\u2019s choice. This second influence is called \u2018sealing.\u2019\n There is no necessary interval of time between the two. Prevenient\n grace comes first; conversion comes after.\u201d\n\n To this view, we would reply that a partial love for holiness, and\n an ability to choose it before God works effectually upon the\n heart, seem to contradict those Scriptures which assert that \u201c_the\n mind of the flesh is enmity against God_\u201d (_Rom. 8:7_), and that\n all good works are the result of God\u2019s new creation (_Eph. 2:10_).\n Conversion does not precede regeneration,\u2014it chronologically\n accompanies regeneration, though it logically follows it.\n\n\n1. Repentance.\n\n\nRepentance is that voluntary change in the mind of the sinner in which he\nturns from sin. Being essentially a change of mind, it involves a change\nof view, a change of feeling, and a change of purpose. We may therefore\nanalyze repentance into three constituents, each succeeding term of which\nincludes and implies the one preceding:\n\nA. An intellectual element,\u2014change of view\u2014recognition of sin as involving\npersonal guilt, defilement, and helplessness (Ps. 51:3, 7, 11). If\nunaccompanied by the following elements, this recognition may manifest\nitself in fear of punishment, although as yet there is no hatred of sin.\nThis element is indicated in the Scripture phrase \u1f10\u03c0\u03af\u03b3\u03bd\u03c9\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f01\u03bc\u03b1\u03c1\u03c4\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 (Rom.\n3:20; _cf._ 1:32).\n\n\n _Ps. 51:3, 11_\u2014\u201c_For I know my transgressions; And my sin is ever\n before me.... Cast me not away from thy presence, And take not thy\n Holy Spirit from me_\u201d; _Rom. 3:20_\u2014\u201c_through the law cometh the\n knowledge of sin_\u201d; _cf._ _1:32_\u2014\u201c_who, knowing the ordinance of\n God, that they that practise such things are worthy of death, not\n only do the same, but also consent with them that practise them._\u201d\n\n It is well to remember that God requires us to cherish no views or\n emotions that contradict the truth. He wants of us no false\n humility. Humility (_humus_) = groundness\u2014a coming down to the\n hard\u2010pan of facts\u2014a facing of the truth. Repentance, therefore, is\n not a calling ourselves by hard names. It is not cringing, or\n exaggerated self\u2010contempt. It is simple recognition of what we\n are. The \u201c\u2019umble\u201d Uriah Heep is the arrant hypocrite. If we see\n ourselves as God sees us, we shall say with _Job 42:5, 6_\u2014\u201c_I had\n heard of thee by the hearing of the ear; But now mine eye seeth\n thee: Wherefore I abhor myself, And repent in dust and ashes._\u201d\n\n Apart from God\u2019s working in the heart there is no proper\n recognition of sin, either in people of high or low degree. Lady\n Huntington invited the Duchess of Buckingham to come and hear\n Whitefield, when the Duchess answered: \u201cIt is monstrous to be told\n that you have a heart as sinful as the common wretches that crawl\n on the earth,\u2014it is highly offensive and insulting.\u201d Mr. Moody,\n after preaching to the prisoners in the jail at Chicago, visited\n them in their cells. In the first cell he found two, playing\n cards. They said false witnesses had testified against them. In\n the second cell, the convict said that the guilty man had escaped,\n but that he, a mere accomplice, had been caught. In the last cell\n only Mr. Moody found a man crying over his sins. Henry Drummond,\n after hearing the confessions of inquirers, said: \u201cI am sick of\n the sins of these men,\u2014how can God bear it?\u201d\n\n Experience of sin does not teach us to recognize sin. We do not\n learn to know chloroform by frequently inhaling it. The drunkard\n does not understand the degrading effects of drink so well as his\n miserable wife and children do. Even the natural conscience does\n not give the recognition of sin that is needed in true repentance.\n The confession \u201c_I have sinned_\u201d is made by hardened Pharaoh (_Ex.\n 9:27_), double minded Balaam (_Num. 22:34_), remorseful Achan\n (_Josh. 7:20_), insincere King Saul (_1 Sam. 15:24_), despairing\n Judas (_Mat. 27:4_); but in no one of these cases was there true\n repentance. True repentance takes God\u2019s part against ourselves,\n has sympathy with God, feels how unworthily the Ruler, Father,\n Friend of men has been treated. It does not ask, \u201cWhat will my sin\n bring to me?\u201d but, \u201cWhat does my sin mean to God?\u201d It involves, in\n addition to the mere recognition of sin:\n\n\nB. An emotional element,\u2014change of feeling\u2014sorrow for sin as committed\nagainst goodness and justice, and therefore hateful to God, and hateful in\nitself (Ps. 51:1, 2, 10, 14). This element of repentance is indicated in\nthe Scripture word \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03bc\u03ad\u03bb\u03bf\u03bc\u03b1\u03b9. If accompanied by the following element,\nit is a \u03bb\u03cd\u03c0\u03b7 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u0398\u03b5\u03cc\u03bd. If not so accompanied, it is a \u03bb\u03cd\u03c0\u03b7 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03ba\u03cc\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5 =\nremorse and despair (Mat. 27:3; Luke 18:23; 2 Cor. 7:9, 10).\n\n\n _Ps. 51:1, 2, 10, 14_\u2014\u201c_Have mercy upon me ... blot out my\n transgressions. Wash me thoroughly from mine iniquity, And cleanse\n me from my sin.... Create in me a clean heart, O God; ... Deliver\n me from bloodguiltiness, O God_\u201d; _Mat. 27:3_\u2014\u201c_Then Judas, who\n betrayed him, when he saw that he was condemned, repented himself,\n and brought back the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests\n and elders, saying, I have sinned in that I betrayed innocent __\n blood_\u201d; _Luke 18:23_\u2014\u201c_when he heard these things, he became\n exceeding sorrowful; for he was very rich_\u201d; _2 Cor. 7:9, 10_\u2014\u201c_I\n now rejoice, not that ye were made sorry, but that ye were made\n sorry unto repentance; for ye were made sorry after a godly\n sort.... For godly sorrow worketh repentance unto salvation, a\n repentance which bringeth no regret: but the sorrow of the world\n worketh death._\u201d We must distinguish sorrow for sin from shame on\n account of it and fear of its consequences. These last are\n selfish, while godly sorrow is disinterested. \u201cA man may be angry\n with himself and may despise himself without any humble\n prostration before God or confession of his guilt\u201d (Shedd, Dogm.\n Theol., 2:535, note).\n\n True repentance, as illustrated in _Ps. 51_, does not think of 1.\n consequences, 2. other men, 3. heredity, as an excuse; but it sees\n sin as 1. transgression against God, 2. personal guilt, 3.\n defiling the inmost being. Perowne on _Ps. 51:1_\u2014\u201cIn all godly\n sorrow there is hope. Sorrow without hope may be remorse or\n despair, but it is not repentance.\u201d Much so\u2010called repentance is\n illustrated by the little girl\u2019s prayer: \u201cO God, make me good,\u2014not\n real good, but just good enough so that I won\u2019t have to be\n whipped!\u201d Shakespeare, Measure for Measure, 2:3\u2014\u201c\u2019Tis meet so,\n daughter; but lest you do repent As that the sin hath brought you\n to this shame, Which sorrow is always towards ourselves, not\n heaven, Showing we would not spare heaven as we love it, But as we\n stand in fear.... I do repent me as it is an evil, And take the\n shame with joy.\u201d Tempest, 3:3\u2014\u201cFor which foul deed, the Powers\n delaying, not forgetting, Have incensed the seas, and shores, yea,\n all the creatures, Against your peace.... Whose wrath to guard you\n from ... is nothing but heart\u2019s sorrow And a clear life ensuing.\u201d\n\n Simon, Reconciliation, 195, 379\u2014\u201cAt the very bottom it is God\n whose claims are advocated, whose part is taken, by that in us\n which, whilst most truly our own, yea, our very selves, is also\n most truly his, and of him. The divine energy and idea which\n constitutes us will not let its own root and source suffer wrong\n unatoned. God intends us to be givers as well as receivers, givers\n even to him. We share in his image that we may be creators and\n givers, not from compulsion, but in love.\u201d Such repentance as this\n is wrought only by the Holy Spirit. Conscience indeed is present\n in every human heart, but only the Holy Spirit convinces of sin.\n Why is the Holy Spirit needed? A. J. Gordon, Ministry of the\n Spirit, 189\u2010201\u2014\u201cConscience is the witness to the law; the Spirit\n is the witness to grace. Conscience brings legal conviction; the\n Spirit brings evangelical conviction. The one begets a conviction\n unto despair; the other a conviction unto hope. Conscience\n convinces of sin committed, of righteousness impossible, of\n judgment impending; the Comforter convinces of sin committed, of\n righteousness imputed, of judgment accomplished\u2014in Christ. God\n alone can reveal the divine view of sin, and enable man to\n understand it.\u201d But, however agonizing the sorrow, it will not\n constitute true repentance, unless it leads to, or is accompanied\n by:\n\n\nC. A voluntary element,\u2014change of purpose\u2014inward turning from sin and\ndisposition to seek pardon and cleansing (Ps. 51:5, 7, 10; Jer. 25:5).\nThis includes and implies the two preceding elements, and is therefore the\nmost important aspect of repentance. It is indicated in the Scripture term\n\u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03ac\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03b1 (Acts 2:38; Rom. 2:4).\n\n\n _Ps. 51:5, 7, 10_\u2014\u201c_Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity; And\n in sin did my mother conceive me.... Purge me with hyssop, and I\n shall be clean: Wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow....\n Create in me a clean heart, O God; And renew a right spirit within\n me_\u201d; _Jer. 25:5_\u2014\u201c_Return ye now every one from his evil way, and\n from the evil of your doings_\u201d; _Acts 2:38_\u2014\u201c_And Peter said unto\n them, Repent ye, and be baptized every one of you in the name of\n Jesus Christ_\u201d; _Rom. 2:4_\u2014\u201c_despisest thou the riches of his\n goodness and forbearance and longsuffering, not knowing that the\n goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance?_\u201d\n\n Walden, The Great Meaning of _Metanoia_, brings out well the fact\n that \u201crepentance\u201d is not the true translation of the word, but\n rather \u201cchange of mind\u201d; indeed, he would give up the word\n \u201crepentance\u201d altogether in the N. T., except as the translation of\n \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03bc\u03ad\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1. The idea of \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03ac\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03b1 is abandonment of sin rather than\n sorrow for sin,\u2014an act of the will rather than a state of the\n sensibility. Repentance is participation in Christ\u2019s revulsion\n from sin and suffering on account of it. It is repentance _from_\n sin, not _of_ sin, nor _for_ sin\u2014always \u1f00\u03c0\u03cc and \u1f14\u03ba, never \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03af or\n \u1f10\u03c0\u03af. The true illustrations of repentance are found in Job\n (_42:6_\u2014\u201c_I abhor myself, And repent in dust and ashes_\u201d); in\n David (_Ps. 51:10_\u2014\u201c_Create in me a clean heart; And renew a right\n spirit within me_\u201d); in Peter (_John 21:17_\u2014\u201c_thou knowest that I\n love thee_\u201d); in the penitent thief (_Luke 23:42_\u2014\u201c_Jesus,\n remember me when thou comest in thy kingdom_\u201d); in the prodigal\n son (_Luke 15:18_\u2014\u201c_I will arise and go to my Father_\u201d).\n\n Repentance implies free will. Hence Spinoza, who knows nothing of\n free will, knows nothing of repentance. In book 4 of his Ethics,\n he says: \u201cRepentance is not a virtue, that is, it does not spring\n from reason; on the contrary, the man who repents of what he has\n done is doubly wretched or impotent.\u201d Still he urges that for the\n good of society it is not desirable that vulgar minds should be\n enlightened as to this matter; see Upton, Hibbert Lectures, 315.\n Determinism also renders it irrational to feel righteous\n indignation either at the misconduct of other people or of\n ourselves. Moral admiration is similarly irrational in the\n determinist; see Balfour, Foundations of Belief, 24.\n\n\nIn broad distinction from the Scriptural doctrine, we find the Romanist\nview, which regards the three elements of repentance as the following: (1)\ncontrition; (2) confession; (3) satisfaction. Of these, contrition is the\nonly element properly belonging to repentance; yet from this contrition\nthe Romanist excludes all sorrow for sin of nature. Confession is\nconfession to the priest; and satisfaction is the sinner\u2019s own doing of\noutward penance, as a temporal and symbolic submission and reparation to\nviolated law. This view is false and pernicious, in that it confounds\nrepentance with its outward fruits, conceives of it as exercised rather\ntoward the church than toward God, and regards it as a meritorious ground,\ninstead of a mere condition, of pardon.\n\n\n On the Romanist doctrine of Penance, Thornwell (Collected\n Writings, 1:423) remarks: \u201cThe _culpa_ may be remitted, they say,\n while the _p\u0153na_ is to some extent retained.\u201d The priest absolves,\n not declaratively, but judicially. Denying the greatness of the\n sin, it makes man able to become his own Savior. Christ\u2019s\n satisfaction, for sins after baptism, is not sufficient; our\n satisfaction is sufficient. But performance of one duty, we\n object, cannot make satisfaction for the violation of another.\n\n We are required to confess one to another, and specially to those\n whom we have wronged: _James 5:16_\u2014\u201c_Confess therefore your sins\n one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed._\u201d\n This puts the hardest stress upon our natural pride. There are a\n hundred who will confess to a priest or to God, where there is one\n who will make frank and full confession to the aggrieved party.\n Confession to an official religious superior is not penitence nor\n a test of penitence. In the Confessional women expose their inmost\n desires to priests who are forbidden to marry. These priests are\n sometimes, though gradually, corrupted to the core, and at the\n same time they are taught in the Confessional precisely to what\n women to apply. In France many noble families will not permit\n their children to confess, and their women are not permitted to\n incur the danger.\n\n Lord Salisbury in the House of Lords said of auricular confession:\n \u201cIt has been injurious to the moral independence and virility of\n the nation to an extent to which probably it has been given to no\n other institution to affect the character of mankind.\u201d See Walsh,\n Secret History of the Oxford Movement; A. J. Gordon, Ministry of\n the Spirit, 111\u2014\u201cAsceticism is an absolute inversion of the divine\n order, since it seeks life through death, instead of finding death\n through life. No degree of mortification can ever bring us to\n sanctification.\u201d Penance can never effect true repentance, nor be\n other than a hindrance to the soul\u2019s abandonment of sin. Penance\n is something external to be done, and it diverts attention from\n the real inward need of the soul. The monk does penance by\n sleeping on an iron bed and by wearing a hair shirt. When Anselm\n of Canterbury died, his under garments were found alive with\n vermin which the saint had cultivated in order to mortify the\n flesh. Dr. Pusey always sat on a hard chair, traveled as\n uncomfortably as possible, looked down when he walked, and\n whenever he saw a coal\u2010fire thought of hell. Thieves do penance by\n giving a part of their ill\u2010gotten wealth to charity. In all these\n things there is no transformation of the inner life.\n\n\nIn further explanation of the Scripture representations, we remark:\n\n(_a_) That repentance, in each and all of its aspects, is wholly an inward\nact, not to be confounded with the change of life which proceeds from it.\n\nTrue repentance is indeed manifested and evidenced by confession of sin\nbefore God (Luke 18:13), and by reparation for wrongs done to men (Luke\n19:8). But these do not constitute repentance; they are rather fruits of\nrepentance. Between \u201crepentance\u201d and \u201cfruit worthy of repentance,\u201d\nScripture plainly distinguishes (Mat. 3:8).\n\n\n _Luke 18:13_\u2014\u201c_But the publican, standing afar off, would not lift\n up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote his breast, saying,\n God, be thou merciful to me a sinner_ [\u2018be propitiated to me the\n sinner\u2019]\u201d; _19:8_\u2014\u201c_And Zacch\u00e6us stood, and said unto the Lord,\n Behold, Lord, the half of my goods I give to the poor; and if I\n have wrongfully exacted aught of any man, I restore fourfold_\u201d;\n _Mat. 3:8_\u2014\u201c_Bring forth therefore fruit worthy of repentance._\u201d\n Fruit worthy of repentance, or fruits meet for repentance, are: 1.\n Confession of sin; 2. Surrender to Christ; 3. Turning from sin; 4.\n Reparation for wrong doing; 5. Right moral conduct; 6. Profession\n of Christian faith.\n\n On _Luke 17:3_\u2014\u201c_if thy brother sin, rebuke him; and if he repent,\n forgive him_\u201d\u2014Dr. B. H. Carroll remarks that the law is uniform\n which makes repentance indispensable to forgiveness. It applies to\n man\u2019s forgiveness of man, as well as to God\u2019s forgiveness of man,\n or the church\u2019s forgiveness of man. But I must be sure that I\n cherish toward the offender the spirit of love, whether he repents\n or not. Freedom from all malice toward him, however, and even\n loving prayerful labor to lead him to repentance, is not\n forgiveness. This I can grant only when he actually repents. If I\n do forgive him without repentance, then I impose my rule on God\n when I pray: \u201c_Forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our\n debtors_\u201d (_Mat. 6:12_).\n\n On the question whether the requirement that we forgive without\n atonement implies that God does, see Brit. and For. Evang. Rev.,\n Oct 1881:678\u2010691\u2014\u201cAnswer: 1. The present constitution of things is\n based upon atonement. Forgiveness on our part is required upon the\n ground of the Cross, without which the world would be hell. 2. God\n is Judge. We forgive, as brethren. When he forgives, it is as\n Judge of all the earth, of whom all earthly judges are\n representatives. If earthly judges may exact justice, much more\n God. The argument that would abolish atonement would abolish all\n civil government. 3. I should forgive my brother on the ground of\n God\u2019s love, and Christ\u2019s bearing of his sins. 4. God, who requires\n atonement, is the same being that provides it. This is \u2018handsome\n and generous.\u2019 But I can never provide atonement for my brother. I\n must, therefore, forgive freely, only upon the ground of what\n Christ has done for him.\u201d\n\n\n(_b_) That repentance is only a negative condition, and not a positive\nmeans of salvation.\n\nThis is evident from the fact that repentance is no more than the sinner\u2019s\npresent duty, and can furnish no offset to the claims of the law on\naccount of past transgression. The truly penitent man feels that his\nrepentance has no merit. Apart from the positive element of conversion,\nnamely, faith in Christ, it would be only sorrow for guilt unremoved. This\nvery sorrow, moreover, is not the mere product of human will, but is the\ngift of God.\n\n\n _Acts 5:31_\u2014\u201c_Him did God exalt with his right hand to be a Prince\n and a Savior, to give repentance to Israel, and remission of\n sins_\u201d; _11:18_\u2014\u201c_Then to the Gentiles also hath God granted\n repentance unto life_\u201d; _2 Tim. 2:25_\u2014\u201c_if peradventure God may\n give them repentance unto the knowledge of the truth._\u201d The truly\n penitent man recognizes the fact that his sin deserves punishment.\n He never regards his penitence as offsetting the demands of law,\n and as making his punishment unjust. Whitefield: \u201cOur repentance\n needeth to be repented of, and our very tears to be washed in the\n blood of Christ.\u201d Shakespeare, Henry V, 4:1\u2014\u201cMore will I do:\n Though all that I can do is nothing worth, Since that my penitence\n comes after all, Imploring pardon\u201d\u2014imploring pardon both for the\n crime and for the imperfect repentance.\n\n\n(_c_) That true repentance, however, never exists except in conjunction\nwith faith.\n\nSorrow for sin, not simply on account of its evil consequences to the\ntransgressor, but on account of its intrinsic hatefulness as opposed to\ndivine holiness and love, is practically impossible without some\nconfidence in God\u2019s mercy. It is the Cross which first makes us truly\npenitent (_cf._ John 12:32, 33). Hence all true preaching of repentance is\nimplicitly a preaching of faith (Mat. 3:1\u201012; _cf._ Acts 19:4), and\nrepentance toward God involves faith in the Lord Jesus Christ (Acts 20:21;\nLuke 15:10, 24; 19:8, 9; _cf._ Gal. 3:7).\n\n\n _John 12:32, 33_\u2014\u201c_And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will\n draw all men unto myself. But this he said, signifying by what\n manner of death he should die._\u201d _Mat. 3:1\u201012_\u2014John the Baptist\u2019s\n preaching of repentance was also a preaching of faith; as is shown\n by _Acts 19:4_\u2014\u201c_John baptized with the baptism of repentance,\n saying unto the people that they should believe on him that should\n come after him, that is, on Jesus._\u201d Repentance involves faith:\n _Acts 20:21_\u2014\u201c_testifying both to Jews and to Greeks repentance\n toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ_\u201d; _Luke 15:10,\n 24_\u2014\u201c_there is joy in the presence of the angels of God over one\n sinner that repenteth.... this my son was dead, and is alive\n again; he was lost, and is found_\u201d; _19:8, 9_\u2014\u201c_the half of my\n goods I give to the poor; and if I have wrongfully exacted aught\n of any man, I restore fourfold. And Jesus said unto him, To\u2010day is\n salvation come to this house, forasmuch as he also is a son of\n Abraham_\u201d\u2014the father of all believers; _cf._ _Gal. 3:6, 7_\u2014\u201c_Even\n as Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned unto him for\n righteousness. Know therefore that they that are of faith, the\n same are sons of Abraham._\u201d\n\n _Luke 3:18_ says of John the Baptist: \u201c_he preached the gospel\n unto the people_,\u201d and the gospel message, the glad tidings, is\n more than the command to repent,\u2014it is also the offer of salvation\n through Christ; see Prof. Wm. Arnold Stevens, on John the Baptist\n and his Gospel, in Studies on the Gospel according to John. _2\n Chron. 34:19_\u2014\u201c_And it came to pass, when the king had heard the\n words of the law, that he rent his clothes._\u201d Moberly, Atonement\n and Personality, 44\u201046\u2014\u201cJust in proportion as one sins, does he\n render it impossible for him truly to repent. Repentance must be\n the work of another in him. Is it not the Spirit of the Crucified\n which is the reality of the penitence of the truly penitent?\u201d If\n this be true, then it is plain that there is no true repentance\n which is not accompanied by the faith that unites us to Christ.\n\n\n(_d_) That, conversely, wherever there is true faith, there is true\nrepentance also.\n\nSince repentance and faith are but different sides or aspects of the same\nact of turning, faith is as inseparable from repentance as repentance is\nfrom faith. That must be an unreal faith where there is no repentance,\njust as that must be an unreal repentance where there is no faith. Yet\nbecause the one aspect of his change is more prominent in the mind of the\nconvert than the other, we are not hastily to conclude that the other is\nabsent. Only that degree of conviction of sin is essential to salvation,\nwhich carries with it a forsaking of sin and a trustful surrender to\nChrist.\n\n\n Bishop Hall: \u201cNever will Christ enter into that soul where the\n herald of repentance hath not been before him.\u201d _2 Cor.\n 7:10_\u2014\u201c_repentance unto salvation._\u201d In consciousness, sensation\n and perception are in inverse ratio to each other. Clear vision is\n hardly conscious of sensation, but inflamed eyes are hardly\n conscious of anything besides sensation. So repentance and faith\n are seldom equally prominent in the consciousness of the converted\n man; but it is important to know that neither can exist without\n the other. The truly penitent man will, sooner or later, show that\n he has faith; and the true believer will certainly show, in due\n season, that he hates and renounces sin.\n\n The question, how much conviction a man needs to insure his\n salvation, may be answered by asking how much excitement one needs\n on a burning steamer. As, in the latter case, just enough to\n prompt persistent effort to escape; so, in the former case, just\n enough remorseful feeling is needed, to induce the sinner to\n betake himself believingly to Christ.\n\n On the general subject of Repentance, see Anderson, Regeneration,\n 279\u2010288; Bp. Ossory, Nature and Effects of Faith, 40\u201048, 311\u2010318;\n Woods, Works, 3:68\u201078; Philippi, Glaubenslehre, 5:1\u201010, 208\u2010246;\n Luthardt, Compendium, 3d ed., 206\u2010208; Hodge, Outlines of\n Theology, 375\u2010381; Alexander, Evidences of Christianity, 47\u201060;\n Crawford, Atonement, 413\u2010419.\n\n\n2. Faith.\n\n\nFaith is that voluntary change in the mind of the sinner in which he turns\nto Christ. Being essentially a change of mind, it involves a change of\nview, a change of feeling, and a change of purpose. We may therefore\nanalyze faith also into three constituents, each succeeding term of which\nincludes and implies the preceding:\n\nA. An intellectual element (_notitia, credere Deum_),\u2014recognition of the\ntruth of God\u2019s revelation, or of the objective reality of the salvation\nprovided by Christ. This includes not only a historical belief in the\nfacts of the Scripture, but an intellectual belief in the doctrine taught\ntherein as to man\u2019s sinfulness and dependence upon Christ.\n\n\n _John 2:23, 24_\u2014\u201c_How when he was in Jerusalem at the passover,\n during the feast, many believed on his name, beholding his signs\n which he did. But Jesus did not trust himself unto them, for that\n he knew all men_\u201d; _cf._ _3:2_\u2014Nicodemus has this external faith:\n \u201c_no one can do these signs that thou doest, except God be with\n him_.\u201d _James 2:19_\u2014\u201c_Thou believest that God is one; thou doest\n well: the demons also believe, and shudder._\u201d Even this historical\n faith is not without its fruits. It is the spring of much\n philanthropic work. There were no hospitals in ancient Rome. Much\n of our modern progress is due to the leavening influence of\n Christianity, even in the case of those who have not personally\n accepted Christ.\n\n McLaren, S. S. Times, Feb. 22, 1902:107\u2014\u201cLuke does not hesitate to\n say, in _Acts 8:13_, that \u2018_Simon Magus also himself believed_.\u2019\n But he expects us to understand that Simon\u2019s belief was not faith\n that saved, but mere credence in the gospel narrative as true\n history. It had no ethical or spiritual worth. He was \u2018_amazed_,\u2019\n as the Samaritans had been at his juggleries. It did not lead to\n repentance, or confession, or true trust. He was only \u2018_amazed_\u2019\n at Philip\u2019s miracles, and there was no salvation in that.\u201d Merely\n historical faith, such as Disciples and Ritschlians hold to, lacks\n the element of affection, and besides this lacks the present\n reality of Christ himself. Faith that does not lay hold of a\n present Christ is not saving faith.\n\n\nB. An emotional element (_assensus, credere Deo_),\u2014assent to the\nrevelation of God\u2019s power and grace in Jesus Christ, as applicable to the\npresent needs of the soul. Those in whom this awakening of the\nsensibilities is unaccompanied by the fundamental decision of the will,\nwhich constitutes the next element of faith, may seem to themselves, and\nfor a time may appear to others, to have accepted Christ.\n\n\n _Mat. 13:20, 21_\u2014\u201c_he that was sown upon the rocky places, this is\n he that heareth the word, and straightway with joy receiveth it;\n yet hath he not root in himself, but endureth for a while; and\n when tribulation or persecution ariseth because of the word,\n straightway he stumbleth_\u201d; _cf._ _Ps. 106:12, 13_\u2014\u201c_Then believed\n they his words; they sang his praise. They soon forgat his works;\n they waited not for his counsel_\u201d; _Ez. 33:31, 32_\u2014\u201c_And they come\n unto thee as the people cometh, and they sit before thee as my\n people, and they hear thy words, but do them not; for with their\n mouth they show much love, but their heart goeth after their gain.\n And, lo, thou art unto them as a very lovely song of one that hath\n a pleasant voice, and can play well on an instrument; for they\n hear thy words, but they do them not_\u201d; _John 5:35_\u2014Of John the\n Baptist: \u201c_He was the lamp that burneth and shineth; and ye were\n willing to rejoice for a season in his light_\u201d; _8:30, 31_\u2014\u201c_As he\n spake these things, many believed on him_ (\u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03cc\u03bd). _Jesus\n therefore said to those Jews that had believed him_ (\u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff7), _If ye\n abide in my word, then are ye truly my disciples._\u201d They believed\n _him_, but did not yet believe _on_ him, that is, make him the\n foundation of their faith and life. Yet Jesus graciously\n recognizes this first faint foreshadowing of faith. It might lead\n to full and saving faith.\n\n \u201cProselytes of the gate\u201d were so called, because they contented\n themselves with sitting in the gate, as it were, without going\n into the holy city. \u201cProselytes of righteousness\u201d were those who\n did their whole duty, by joining themselves fully to the people of\n God. Not _emotion_, but _devotion_, is the important thing.\n Temporary faith is as irrational and valueless as temporary\n repentance. It perhaps gained temporary blessing in the way of\n healing in the time of Christ, but, if not followed by complete\n surrender of the will, it might even aggravate one\u2019s sin; see\n _John 5:14_\u2014\u201c_Behold, thou art made whole; sin no more, lest a\n worse thing befall thee._\u201d The special faith of miracles was not a\n high, but a low, form of faith, and it is not to be sought in our\n day as indispensable to the progress of the kingdom. Miracles have\n ceased, not because of decline in faith, but because the Holy\n Spirit has changed the method of his manifestations, and has led\n the church to seek more spiritual gifts.\n\n\nSaving faith, however, includes also:\n\nC. A voluntary element (_fiducia, credere in Deum_),\u2014trust in Christ as\nLord and Savior; or, in other words\u2014to distinguish its two aspects:\n\n(_a_) Surrender of the soul, as guilty and defiled, to Christ\u2019s\ngovernance.\n\n\n _Mat. 11:28, 29_\u2014\u201c_Come unto me all ye that labor and are heavy\n laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn\n of me_\u201d; _John 8:12_\u2014\u201c_I am the light of the world: he that\n followeth me shall not walk in the darkness_\u201d; _14:1_\u2014\u201c_Let not\n your heart be troubled: believe in God, believe also in me_\u201d;\n _Acts 16:31_\u2014\u201c_Believe on the Lord Jesus, and thou shalt be\n saved._\u201d Instances of the use of \u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03cd\u03c9, in the sense of trustful\n committance or surrender, are: _John 2:24_\u2014\u201c_But Jesus did not\n trust himself unto them, for that he knew all men_\u201d; _Rom.\n 3:2_\u2014\u201c_they were intrusted with the oracles of God_\u201d; _Gal.\n 2:7_\u2014\u201c_when they saw that I had been intrusted with the gospel of\n the uncircumcision._\u201d \u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 = \u201ctrustful self\u2010surrender to God\u201d\n (Meyer).\n\n In this surrender of the soul to Christ\u2019s governance we have the\n guarantee that the gospel salvation is not an unmoral trust which\n permits continuance in sin. Aside from the fact that saving faith\n is only the obverse side of true repentance, the very nature of\n faith, as submission to Christ, the embodied law of God and source\n of spiritual life, makes a life of obedience and virtue to be its\n natural and necessary result. Faith is not only a declaration of\n dependence, it is also a vow of allegiance. The sick man\u2019s faith\n in his physician is shown not simply by trusting him, but by\n obeying him. Doing what the doctor says is the very proof of\n trust. No physician will long care for a patient who refuses to\n obey his orders. Faith is self\u2010surrender to the great Physician,\n and a leaving of our case in his hands. But it is also the taking\n of his prescriptions, and the active following of his directions.\n\n We need to emphasize this active element in saving faith, lest men\n get the notion that mere indolent acquiescence in Christ\u2019s plan\n will save them. Faith is not simple receptiveness. It gives\n itself, as well as receives Christ. It is not mere passivity,\u2014it\n is also self\u2010committal. As all reception of knowledge is active,\n and there must be attention if we would learn, so all reception of\n Christ is active, and there must be intelligent giving as well as\n taking. The Watchman, April 30, 1896\u2014\u201cFaith is more than belief\n and trust. It is the action of the soul going out toward its\n object. It is the exercise of a spiritual faculty akin to that of\n sight; it establishes a personal relation between the one who\n exercises faith and the one who is its object. When the\n intellectual feature predominates, we call it belief; when the\n emotional element predominates, we call it trust. This faith is at\n once \u2018An affirmation and an act Which bids eternal truth be\n present fact.\u2019 \u201d\n\n There are great things received in faith, but nothing is received\n by the man who does not first give himself to Christ. A conquered\n general came into the presence of his conqueror and held out to\n him his hand: \u201cYour sword first, sir!\u201d was the response. But when\n General Lee _offered_ his sword to General Grant at Appomattox,\n the latter returned it, saying: \u201cNo, keep your sword, and go to\n your home.\u201d Jacobi said that \u201cFaith is the reflection of the\n divine knowing and willing in the finite spirit of man.\u201d G. B.\n Foster, in Indiana Baptist Outlook, June 19, 1902\u2014\u201cCatholic\n orthodoxy is wrong in holding that the authority for faith is the\n church; for that would be an external authority. Protestant\n orthodoxy is wrong in holding that the authority for faith is the\n book; for that would be an external authority. Liberalism is wrong\n in holding that the reason is the authority for faith. The\n authority for faith is the revelation of God.\u201d Faith in this\n revelation is faith in Christ the Revealer. It puts the soul in\n connection with the source of all knowledge and power. As the\n connection of a wire with the reservoir of electric force makes it\n the channel of vast energies, so the smallest measure of faith,\n any real connection of the soul with Christ, makes it the\n recipient of divine resources.\n\n While faith is the act of the whole man, and intellect, affection,\n and will are involved in it, will is the all\u2010inclusive and most\n important of its elements. No other exercise of will is such a\n revelation of our being and so decisive of our destiny. The\n voluntary element in faith is illustrated in marriage. Here one\n party pledges the future in permanent self\u2010surrender, commits\n one\u2019s self to another person in confidence that this future, with\n all its new revelations of character, will only justify the\n decision made. Yet this is rational; see Holland, in Lux Mundi,\n 46\u201048. To put one\u2019s hand into molten iron, even though one knows\n of the \u201cspheroidal state\u201d that gives impunity, requires an\n exertion of will; and not all workmen in metals are courageous\n enough to make the venture. The child who leaped into the dark\n cellar, in confidence that her father\u2019s arms would be open to\n receive her, did not act irrationally, because she had heard her\n father\u2019s command and trusted his promise. Though faith in Christ\n is a leap in the dark, and requires a mighty exercise of will, it\n is nevertheless the highest wisdom, because Christ\u2019s word is\n pledged that \u201c_him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out_\u201d\n (_John 6:37_).\n\n J. W. A. Stewart: \u201cFaith is 1. a bond between persons, trust,\n confidence; 2. it makes ventures, takes much for granted; 3. its\n security is the character and power of him in whom we believe,\u2014not\n our faith, but his fidelity, is the guarantee that our faith is\n rational.\u201d Kant said that nothing in the world is good but the\n good will which freely obeys the law of the good. Pfleiderer\n defines faith as the free surrender of the heart to the gracious\n will of God. Kaftan, Dogmatik, 21, declares that the Christian\n religion is essentially faith, and that this faith manifests\n itself as 1. doctrine; 2. worship; 3. morality.\n\n\n(_b_) Reception and appropriation of Christ, as the source of pardon and\nspiritual life.\n\n\n _John 1:12_\u2014\u201c_as many as received him, to them gave he the right\n to become children of God, even to them that believe on his\n name_\u201d; _4:14_\u2014\u201c_whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give\n him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall\n become in him a well of water springing up unto eternal life_\u201d;\n _6:53_\u2014\u201c_Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his\n blood, ye have not life in yourselves_\u201d; _20:31_\u2014\u201c_these are\n written, that ye may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of\n God; and that believing ye may have life in his name_\u201d; _Eph.\n 3:17_\u2014\u201c_that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith_\u201d;\n _Heb. 11:1_\u2014\u201c_Now faith is assurance of things hoped for, a\n conviction of things not seen_\u201d; _Rev. 3:20_\u2014\u201c_Behold, I stand at\n the door and knock: if any man hear my voice and open the door, I\n will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me._\u201d\n\n The three constituents of faith may be illustrated from the\n thought, feeling, and action of a person who stands by a boat,\n upon a little island which the rising stream threatens to\n submerge. He first regards the boat from a purely intellectual\n point of view,\u2014it is merely an _actually existing boat_. As the\n stream rises, he looks at it, secondly, with some accession of\n emotion,\u2014his prospective danger awakens in him the conviction that\n it is a _good boat for a time of need_, though he is not yet ready\n to make use of it. But, thirdly, when he feels that the rushing\n tide must otherwise sweep him away, a volitional element is\n added,\u2014he gets into the boat, trusts himself to it, accepts it as\n his _present, and only, means of safety_. Only this last faith in\n the boat is faith that saves, although this last includes both the\n preceding. It is equally clear that the getting into the boat may\n actually save a man, while at the same time he may be full of\n fears that the boat will never bring him to shore. These fears may\n be removed by the boatman\u2019s word. So saving faith is not\n necessarily assurance of faith; but it becomes assurance of faith\n when the Holy Spirit \u201c_beareth witness with our spirit, that we\n are children of God_\u201d (_Rom. 8:16_). On the nature of this\n assurance, and on the distinction between it and saving faith, see\n pages 844\u2010846.\n\n \u201cComing to Christ,\u201d \u201clooking to Christ,\u201d \u201creceiving Christ,\u201d are\n all descriptions of faith, as are also the phrases: \u201csurrender to\n Christ,\u201d \u201csubmission to Christ,\u201d \u201cclosing in with Christ.\u201d Paul\n refers to a confession of faith in _Rom. 10:9_\u2014\u201c_if thou shalt\n confess with thy mouth Jesus as Lord._\u201d Faith, then, is a taking\n of Christ as both Savior and Lord; and it includes both\n appropriation of Christ, and consecration to Christ. The voluntary\n element in faith, however, is a giving as well as a taking. The\n giving, or surrender, is illustrated in baptism by submergence;\n the taking, or reception, by emergence. See further on the\n Symbolism of Baptism. McCosh, Div. Government: \u201cSaving faith is\n the consent of the will to the assent of the understanding, and\n commonly accompanied with emotion.\u201d Pres. Hopkins, in Princeton\n Rev., Sept. 1878:511\u2010540\u2014\u201cIn its intellectual element, faith is\n receptive, and believes that God _is_; in its affectional element,\n faith is assimilative, and believes that God is a _rewarder_; in\n its voluntary element, faith is operative, and actually _comes_ to\n God (_Heb. 11:6_).\u201d\n\n Where the element of surrender is emphasized and the element of\n reception is not understood, the result is a legalistic\n experience, with little hope or joy. Only as we _appropriate_\n Christ, in connection with our _consecration_, do we realize the\n full blessing of the gospel. Light requires two things: the sun to\n shine, and the eye to take in its shining. So we cannot be saved\n without Christ to save, and faith to take the Savior for ours.\n Faith is the act by which we receive Christ. The woman who touched\n the border of Jesus\u2019 garment received his healing power. It is\n better still to keep in touch with Christ so as to receive\n continually his grace and life. But best of all is taking him into\n our inmost being, to be the soul of our soul and the life of our\n life. This is the essence of faith, though many Christians do not\n yet realize it. Dr. Curry said well that faith can never be\n defined because it is a fact of life. It is a merging of our life\n in the life of Christ, and a reception of Christ\u2019s life to\n interpenetrate and energize ours. In faith we must take Christ as\n well as give ourselves. It is certainly true that surrender\n without trust will not make us possessors of God\u2019s peace. F. L.\n Anderson: \u201cFaith is submissive reliance on Jesus Christ for\n salvation: 1. Reliance on Jesus Christ\u2014not mere intellectual\n belief; 2. Reliance on him for salvation\u2014we can never undo the\n past or atone for our sins; 3. Submissive reliance on Christ.\n Trust without surrender will never save.\u201d\n\n\nThe passages already referred to refute the view of the Romanist, that\nsaving faith is simply implicit assent to the doctrines of the church; and\nthe view of the Disciple or Campbellite, that faith is merely intellectual\nbelief in the truth, on the presentation of evidence.\n\n\n The Romanist says that faith can co\u00ebxist with mortal sin. The\n Disciple holds that faith may and must exist before\n regeneration,\u2014regeneration being completed in baptism. With these\n erroneous views, compare the noble utterance of Luther, Com. on\n Galatians, 1:191, 247, quoted in Thomasius, III, 2:183\u2014\u201cTrue\n faith,\u201d says Luther, \u201cis that assured trust and firm assent of\n heart, by which Christ is laid hold of,\u2014so that Christ is the\n object of faith. Yet he is not merely the object of faith; but in\n the very faith, so to speak, Christ is present. Faith lays hold of\n Christ, and grasps him as a present possession, just as the ring\n holds the jewel.\u201d Edwards, Works, 4:71\u201073; 2:601\u2010641\u2014\u201cFaith,\u201d says\n Edwards, \u201cincludes the whole act of unition to Christ as a Savior.\n The entire active uniting of the soul, or the whole of what is\n called coming to Christ, and receiving of him, is called faith in\n the Scripture.\u201d See also Belief, What Is It? 150\u2010179, 290\u2010298.\n\n Hatch, Hibbert Lectures, 530\u2014\u201cFaith began by being: 1. a simple\n trust in God; then followed, 2. a simple expansion of that\n proposition into the assent to the proposition that God is good,\n and, 3. a simple acceptance of the proposition that Jesus Christ\n was his Son; then, 4. came in the definition of terms, and each\n definition of terms involved a new theory; finally, 5. the\n theories were gathered together into systems, and the martyrs and\n witnesses of Christ died for their faith, not outside but inside\n the Christian sphere; and instead of a world of religious belief\n which resembled the world of actual fact in the sublime unsymmetry\n of its foliage and the deep harmony of its discords, there\n prevailed the most fatal assumption of all, that the symmetry of a\n system is the test of its truth and the proof thereof.\u201d We regard\n this statement of Hatch as erroneous, in that it attributes to the\n earliest disciples no larger faith than that of their Jewish\n brethren. We claim that the earliest faith involved an implicit\n acknowledgement of Jesus as Savior and Lord, and that this faith\n of simple obedience and trust became explicit recognition of our\n Lord\u2019s deity and atonement just so soon as persecution and the\n Holy Spirit disclosed to them the real contents of their own\n consciousness.\n\n An illustration of the simplicity and saving power of faith is\n furnished by Principal J. R. Andrews, of New London, Conn.,\n Principal of the Bartlett Grammar School. When the steamer\n Atlantic was wrecked off Fisher\u2019s Island, though Mr. Andrews could\n not swim, he determined to make a desperate effort to save his\n life. Binding a life\u2010preserver about him, he stood on the edge of\n the deck waiting his opportunity, and when he saw a wave moving\n shoreward, he jumped into the rough breakers and was borne safely\n to land. He was saved by faith. He accepted the conditions of\n salvation. Forty perished in a scene where he was saved. In one\n sense he saved himself; in another sense he depended upon God. It\n was a combination of personal activity and dependence upon God\n that resulted in his salvation. If he had not used the life\u2010\n preserver, he would have perished; if he had not cast himself into\n the sea, he would have perished. So faith in Christ is reliance\n upon him for salvation; but it is also our own making of a new\n start in life and the showing of our trust by action. Tract 357,\n Am. Tract Society\u2014\u201cWhat is it to believe on Christ? It is: To feel\n your need of him; To believe that he is able and willing to save\n you, and to save you now; and To cast yourself unreservedly upon\n his mercy, and trust in him alone for salvation.\u201d\n\n\nIn further explanation of the Scripture representations, we remark:\n\n(_a_) That faith is an act of the affections and will, as truly as it is\nan act of the intellect.\n\nIt has been claimed that faith and unbelief are purely intellectual\nstates, which are necessarily determined by the facts at any given time\npresented to the mind; and that they are, for this reason, as destitute of\nmoral quality and as far from being matters of obligation, as are our\ninstinctive feelings of pleasure and pain. But this view unwarrantably\nisolates the intellect, and ignores the fact that, in all moral subjects,\nthe state of the affections and will affects the judgment of the mind with\nregard to truth. In the intellectual act the whole moral nature expresses\nitself. Since the tastes determine the opinions, faith is a moral act, and\nmen are responsible for not believing.\n\n\n _John 3:18\u201020_\u2014\u201c_He that believeth on him is not judged: he that\n believeth not hath been judged already, because he hath not\n believed on the name of the only begotten Son of God. And this is\n the judgment, that the light is come into the world, and men loved\n the darkness rather than the light; for their works were evil. For\n every one that doeth evil hateth the light, and cometh not to the\n light, lest his works should be reproved_\u201d; _5:40_\u2014\u201c_ye will not\n come to me, that ye may have life_\u201d; _16:8, 9_\u2014\u201c_And he, when he\n is come, will convict the world in respect of sin ... of sin,\n because they believe not on me_\u201d; _Rev. 2:21_\u2014\u201c_she willed not to\n repent._\u201d Notice that the Revised Version very frequently\n substitutes the voluntary and active terms \u201cdisobedience\u201d and\n \u201cdisobedient\u201d for the \u201c_unbelief_\u201d and \u201c_unbelieving_\u201d of the\n Authorized Version,\u2014as in _Rom. 15:31_; _Heb. 3:18; 4:6, 11;\n 11:31_. See Park, Discourses, 45, 46.\n\n Savages do not know that they are responsible for their physical\n appetites, or that there is any right and wrong in matters of\n sense, until they come under the influence of Christianity. In\n like manner, even men of science can declare that the intellectual\n sphere has no part in man\u2019s probation, and that we are no more\n responsible for our opinions and beliefs than we are for the color\n of our skin. But faith is not a merely intellectual act,\u2014the\n affections and will give it quality. There is no moral quality in\n the belief that 2 + 2 = 4, because we can not help that belief.\n But in believing on Christ there is moral quality, because there\n is the element of choice. Indeed it may be questioned, whether, in\n every judgment upon moral things, there is not an act of will.\n\n Hence on _John 7:17_\u2014\u201c_If any man willeth to do his will, he shall\n know of the teaching, whether it is of God, or whether I speak\n from myself_\u201d\u2014F. L. Patton calls attention to the two common\n errors: (1) that obedience will certify doctrine,\u2014which is untrue,\n because obedience is the result of faith, not _vice versa_; (2)\n that personal experience is the ultimate test of faith,\u2014which is\n untrue, because the Bible is the only rule of faith, and it is one\n thing to receive truth through the feelings, but quite another to\n test truth by the feelings. The text really means, that if any man\n is willing to do God\u2019s will, he shall know whether it be of God;\n and the two lessons to be drawn are: (1) the gospel needs no\n additional evidence; (2) the Holy Ghost is the hope of the world.\n On responsibility for opinions and beliefs, see Mozley, on Blanco\n White, in Essays Philos. and Historical, 2:142; T. T. Smith,\n Hulsean Lectures for 1839. Wilfrid Ward, The Wish to Believe,\n quotes Shakespeare: \u201cThy wish was father, Harry, to that thought\u201d;\n and Thomas Arnold: \u201cThey dared not lightly believe what they so\n much wished to be true.\u201d\n\n Pascal: \u201cFaith is an act of the will.\u201d Emerson, Essay on Worship:\n \u201cA man bears beliefs as a tree bears apples. Man\u2019s religious faith\n is the expression of what he is.\u201d Bain: \u201cIn its essential\n character, belief is a phase of our active nature, otherwise\n called the will.\u201d Nash, Ethics and Revelation, 257\u2014\u201cFaith is the\n creative human answer to the creative divine offer. It is not the\n passive acceptance of a divine favor.... By faith man, laying hold\n of the personality of God in Christ, becomes a true person. And by\n the same faith he becomes, under God, a creator and founder of\n true society.\u201d Inge, Christian Mysticism, 52\u2014\u201cFaith begins with an\n experiment and ends with an experience. But even the power to make\n the experiment is given from above. Eternal life is not \u03b3\u03bd\u1ff6\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2,\n but the state of acquiring knowledge\u2014\u1f34\u03bd\u03b1 \u03b3\u03b9\u03b3\u03bd\u03ce\u03c3\u03ba\u03c9\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd. It is\n significant that John, who is so fond of the verb \u2018to know,\u2019 never\n uses the substantive \u03b3\u03bd\u1ff6\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2.\u201d Crane, Religion of To\u2010morrow,\n 148\u2014\u201c \u2018I will not obey, because I do not yet know\u2019? But this is\n making the intellectual side the only side of faith, whereas the\n most important side is the will\u2010side. Let a man follow what he\n does believe, and he shall be led on to larger faith. Faith is the\n reception of the personal influence of a living Lord, and a\n corresponding action.\u201d\n\n William James, Will to Believe, 61\u2014\u201cThis life is worth living,\n since it is what we make it, from the moral point of view....\n Often enough our faith beforehand in an uncertified result is the\n only thing that makes the result come true.... If your heart does\n not _want_ a world of moral reality, your head will assuredly\n never make you believe in one.... Freedom to believe covers only\n living options which the intellect cannot by itself resolve.... We\n are not to put a stopper on our heart, and meantime act as if\n religion were not true\u201d; Psychology, 2:282, 321\u2014\u201cBelief is\n consent, willingness, turning of our disposition. It is the mental\n state or function of cognizing reality. We never disbelieve\n anything except for the reason that we believe something else\n which contradicts the first thing. We give higher reality to\n whatever things we select and emphasize and turn to with a\n will.... We need only in cold blood act as if the thing in\n question were real, and keep acting as if it were real, and it\n will infallibly end by growing into such a connection with our\n life that it will become real. Those to whom God and duty are mere\n names, can make them much more than that, if they make a little\n sacrifice to them every day.\u201d\n\n E. G. Robinson: \u201cCampbellism makes intellectual belief to be\n saving faith. But saving faith is consent of the heart as well as\n assent of the intellect. On the one hand there is the intellectual\n element: faith is belief upon the ground of evidence; faith\n without evidence is credulity. But on the other hand faith has an\n element of affection; the element of love is always wrapped up in\n it. So Abraham\u2019s faith made Abraham like God; for we always become\n like that which we trust.\u201d Faith therefore is not chronologically\n subsequent to regeneration, but is its accompaniment. As the\n soul\u2019s appropriation of Christ and his salvation, it is not the\n result of an accomplished renewal, but rather the medium through\n which that renewal is effected. Otherwise it would follow that one\n who had not yet believed (_i. e._, received Christ) might still be\n regenerate, whereas the Scripture represents the privilege of\n sonship as granted only to believers. See _John 1:12, 13_\u2014\u201c_But as\n many as received him, to them gave he the right to become children\n of God, even to them that believe on his name: who were born, not\n of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man,\n but of God_\u201d; also _3:5, 6, 10\u201015_; _Gal. 3:26_; _2 Pet. 1:3_;\n _cf._ _1 John 5:1_.\n\n\n(_b_) That the object of saving faith is, in general, the whole truth of\nGod, so far as it is objectively revealed or made known to the soul; but,\nin particular, the person and work of Jesus Christ, which constitutes the\ncentre and substance of God\u2019s revelation (Acts 17:18; 1 Cor. 1:23; Col.\n1:27; Rev. 19:10).\n\nThe patriarchs, though they had no knowledge of a personal Christ, were\nsaved by believing in God so far as God had revealed himself to them; and\nwhoever among the heathen are saved, must in like manner be saved by\ncasting themselves as helpless sinners upon God\u2019s plan of mercy, dimly\nshadowed forth in nature and providence. But such faith, even among the\npatriarchs and heathen, is implicitly a faith in Christ, and would become\nexplicit and conscious trust and submission, whenever Christ were made\nknown to them (Mat. 8:11, 12; John 10:16; Acts 4:12; 10:31, 34, 35, 44;\n16:31).\n\n\n _Acts 17:18_\u2014\u201c_he preached Jesus and the resurrection_\u201d; _1 Cor.\n 1:23_\u2014\u201c_we preach Christ crucified_\u201d; _Col. 1:27_\u2014\u201c_this mystery\n among the Gentiles, which is Christ in you, the hope of glory:\n whom we proclaim_\u201d; _Rev. 19:10_\u2014\u201c_the testimony of Jesus is the\n spirit of prophecy._\u201d Saving faith is not belief in a dogma, but\n personal trust in a personal Christ. It is, therefore, possible to\n a child. Dorner: \u201cThe object of faith is the Christian\n revelation\u2014God in Christ.... Faith is union with objective\n Christianity\u2014appropriation of the real contents of Christianity.\u201d\n Dr. Samuel Hopkins, the great uncle, defined faith as \u201can\n understanding, cordial receiving of the divine testimony\n concerning Jesus Christ and the way of salvation by him, in which\n the heart accords and conforms to the gospel.\u201d Dr. Mark Hopkins,\n the great nephew, defined it as \u201cconfidence in a personal being.\u201d\n Horace Bushnell: \u201cFaith rests on a person. Faith is that act by\n which one person, a sinner, commits himself to another person, a\n Savior.\u201d In _John 11:25_\u2014\u201c_I am the resurrection and the\n life_\u201d\u2014Martha is led to substitute belief in a person for belief\n in an abstract doctrine. Jesus is \u201c_the resurrection_,\u201d because he\n is \u201c_the life_.\u201d All doctrine and all miracle is significant and\n important only because it is the expression of the living Christ,\n the Revealer of God.\n\n The object of faith is sometimes represented in the N. T., as\n being God the Father. _John 5:24_\u2014\u201c_He that heareth my word, and\n believeth him that sent me, hath eternal life_\u201d; _Rom. 4:5_\u2014\u201c_to\n him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the\n ungodly, his faith is reckoned for righteousness._\u201d We can explain\n these passages only when we remember that Christ is God\n \u201c_manifested in the flesh_\u201d (_1 Tim. 3:16_), and that \u201c_he that\n hath seen me hath seen the Father_\u201d (_John 14:9_). Man may receive\n a gift without knowing from whom it comes, or how much it has\n cost. So the heathen, who casts himself as a sinner upon God\u2019s\n mercy, may receive salvation from the Crucified One, without\n knowing who is the giver, or that the gift was purchased by agony\n and blood. Denney, Studies in Theology, 154\u2014\u201cNo N. T. writer ever\n _remembered_ Christ. They never thought of him as belonging to the\n past. Let us not preach about the _historical_ Christ, but rather,\n about the _living_ Christ; nay, let us preach _him_, present and\n omnipotent. Jesus could say: \u2018_Whither I go, ye know the way_\u2019\n (_John 14:4_); for they knew _him_, and he was both the _end_ and\n the _way_.\u201d\n\n Dr. Charles Hodge unduly restricts the operations of grace to the\n preaching of the incarnate Christ: Syst. Theol., 2:648\u2014\u201cThere is\n no faith where the gospel is not heard; and where there is no\n faith, there is no salvation. This is indeed an awful doctrine.\u201d\n And yet, in 2:668, he says most inconsistently: \u201cAs God is\n everywhere present in the material world, guiding its operations\n according to the laws of nature; so he is everywhere present with\n the minds of men, as the Spirit of truth and goodness, operating\n on them according to laws of their free moral agency, inclining\n them to good and restraining them from evil.\u201d This presence and\n revelation of God we hold to be through Christ, the eternal Word,\n and so we interpret the prophecy of Caiaphas as referring to the\n work of the personal Christ: _John 11:51, 52_\u2014\u201c_he prophesied that\n Jesus should die for the nation; and not for the nation only, but\n that he might also gather together into one the children of God\n that are scattered abroad._\u201d\n\n Since Christ is the Word of God and the Truth of God, he may be\n received even by those who have not heard of his manifestation in\n the flesh. A proud and self\u2010righteous morality is inconsistent\n with saving faith; but a humble and penitent reliance upon God, as\n a Savior from sin and a guide of conduct, is an implicit faith in\n Christ; for such reliance casts itself upon God, so far as God has\n revealed himself,\u2014and the only Revealer of God is Christ. We have,\n therefore, the hope that even among the heathen there may be some,\n like Socrates, who, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit working\n through the truth of nature and conscience, have found the way of\n life and salvation.\n\n The number of such is so small as in no degree to weaken the\n claims of the missionary enterprise upon us. But that there are\n such seems to be intimated in Scripture: _Mat. 8:11, 12_\u2014\u201c_many\n shall come from the east and the west, and shall sit down with\n Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven: but the\n sons of the kingdom shall be cast forth into the outer darkness_\u201d;\n _John 10:16_\u2014\u201c_And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold:\n them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and they\n shall become one flock, one shepherd_\u201d; _Acts 4:12_\u2014\u201c_And in none\n other is there salvation: for neither is there any other name\n under heaven, that is given among men, wherein we must be saved_\u201d;\n _10:31, 34, 35, 44_\u2014\u201c_Cornelius, thy prayer is heard, and thine\n alms are had in remembrance in the sight of God.... Of a truth I\n perceive that God is no respecter of persons: but in every nation\n he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is acceptable to\n him.... While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Spirit fell on\n all them that heard the word_\u201d; _16:31_\u2014\u201c_Believe on the Lord\n Jesus, and thou shalt be saved, thou and thy house._\u201d\n\n And instances are found of apparently regenerated heathen; see in\n Godet on _John 7:17_, note (vol. 2:277), the account of the so\u2010\n called \u201cChinese hermit,\u201d who accepted Christ, saying: \u201cThis is the\n only Buddha whom men ought to worship!\u201d Edwards, Life of Brainard,\n 173\u2010175, gives an account \u201cof one who was a devout and zealous\n reformer, or rather restorer, of what he supposed was the ancient\n religion of the Indians.\u201d After a period of distress, he says that\n God \u201ccomforted his heart and showed him what he should do, and\n since that time he had known God and tried to serve him; and loved\n all men, be they who they would, so as he never did before.\u201d See\n art. by Dr. Lucius E. Smith, in Bib. Sac., Oct. 1881:622\u2010645, on\n the question: \u201cIs salvation possible without a knowledge of the\n gospel?\u201d H. B. Smith, System, 323, note, rightly bases hope for\n the heathen, not on morality, but on sacrifice.\n\n A chief of the Camaroons in S. W. Africa, fishing with many of his\n tribe long before the missionaries came, was overtaken by a storm,\n and while almost all the rest were drowned, he and a few others\n escaped. He gathered his people together afterwards and told the\n story of disaster. He said: \u201cWhen the canoes upset and I found\n myself battling with the waves, I thought: To whom shall I cry for\n help? I knew that the god of the hills could not help me; I knew\n that the evil spirit would not help me. So I cried to the Great\n Father, Lord, save me! At that moment my feet touched the sand of\n the beach, and I was safe. Now let all my people honor the Great\n Father, and let no man speak a word against him, for he can help\n us.\u201d This chief afterwards used every effort to prevent strife and\n bloodshed, and was remembered by those who came after as a peace\u2010\n maker. His son told this story to Alfred Saker, the missionary,\n saying \u201cWhy did you not come sooner? My father longed to know what\n you have told us; he thirsted for the knowledge of God.\u201d Mr. Saker\n told this in England in 1879.\n\n John Fiske appends to his book, The Idea of God, 168, 169, the\n following pathetic words of a Kafir, named Sekese, in conversation\n with a French traveler, M. Arbrouseille, on the subject of the\n Christian religion: \u201cYour tidings,\u201d said this uncultured\n barbarian, \u201care what I want, and I was seeking before I knew you,\n as you shall hear and judge for yourself. Twelve years ago I went\n to feed my flocks; the weather was hazy. I sat down upon a rock,\n and asked myself sorrowful questions; yes, sorrowful, because I\n was unable to answer them. Who has touched the stars with his\n hands\u2014on what pillars do they rest? I asked myself. The waters\n never weary, they know no other law than to flow without ceasing\n from morning till night and from night till morning; but where do\n they stop, and who makes them flow thus? The clouds also come and\n go, and burst in water over the earth. Whence come they\u2014who sends\n them? The diviners certainly do not give us rain; for how could\n they do it? And why do I not see them with my own eyes, when they\n go up to heaven to fetch it? I cannot see the wind; but what is\n it? Who brings it, makes it blow and roar and terrify us? Do I\n know how the corn sprouts? Yesterday there was not a blade in my\n field; to\u2010day I returned to my field and found some; who can have\n given to the earth the wisdom and the power to produce it? Then I\n buried my head in both hands.\u201d\n\n On the question whether men are ever led to faith, without\n intercourse with living Christians or preachers, see Life of\n Judson, by his son, 84. The British and Foreign Bible Society\n publish a statement, made upon the authority of Sir Bartle Frere,\n that he met with \u201can instance, which was carefully investigated,\n in which all the inhabitants of a remote village in the Deccan had\n abjured idolatry and caste, removed from their temples the idols\n which had been worshiped there time out of mind, and agreed to\n profess a form of Christianity which they had deduced from the\n careful perusal of a single Gospel and a few tracts.\u201d Max M\u00fcller,\n Chips, 4:177\u2010189, apparently proves that Buddha is the original of\n St. Josaphat, who has a day assigned to him in the calendar of\n both the Greek and the Roman churches. \u201cSancte Socrates, ora pro\n nobis.\u201d\n\n The Missionary Review of the World, July, 1896:519\u2010523, tells the\n story of Adiri, afterwards called John King, of Maripastoon in\n Dutch Guiana. The Holy Spirit wrought in him mightily years before\n he heard of the missionaries. He was a coal\u2010black negro, a heathen\n and a fetish worshiper. He was convicted of sin and apparently\n converted through dreams and visions. Heaven and hell were\n revealed to him. He was sick unto death, and One appeared to him\n declaring himself to be the Mediator between God and man, and\n telling him to go to the missionaries for instruction. He was\n persecuted, but he won his tribe from heathenism and transformed\n them into a Christian community.\n\n S. W. Hamblen, missionary to China, tells of a very earnest and\n consistent believer who lived at rather an obscure town of about\n 2800 people. The evangelist went to visit him and found that he\n was a worthy example to those around him. He had become a\n Christian before he had seen a single believer, by reading a\n Chinese New Testament. Although till the evangelist went to his\n house he had never met a Baptist and did not know that there were\n any Baptist churches in existence, yet by reading the New\n Testament he had become not only a Christian but a strong Baptist\n in belief, so strong that he could argue with the missionary on\n the subject of baptism.\n\n The Rev. K. E. Malm, a pioneer Baptist preacher in Sweden, on a\n journey to the district as far north as Gestrikland, met a woman\n from Lapland who was on her way to Upsala in order to visit Dr.\n Fjellstedt and converse with him as to how she might obtain peace\n with God and get rid of her anxiety concerning her sins. She said\n she had traveled 60 (= 240 English) miles, and she had still far\n to go. Malm improved the opportunity to speak to her concerning\n the crucified Christ, and she found peace in believing on his\n atonement. She became so happy that she clapped her hands, and for\n joy could not sleep that night. She said later: \u201cNow I will return\n home and tell the people what I have found.\u201d This she did, and did\n not care to continue her journey to Upsala, in order to get\n comfort from Dr. Fjellstedt.\n\n\n(_c_) That the ground of faith is the external word of promise. The ground\nof assurance, on the other hand, is the inward witness of the Spirit that\nwe fulfil the conditions of the promise (Rom. 4:20, 21; 8:16; Eph. 1:13; 1\nJohn 4:13; 5:10). This witness of the Spirit is not a new revelation from\nGod, but a strengthening of faith so that it becomes conscious and\nindubitable.\n\nTrue faith is possible without assurance of salvation. But if Alexander\u2019s\nview were correct, that the object of saving faith is the proposition:\n\u201cGod, for Christ\u2019s sake, now looks with reconciling love on me, a sinner,\u201d\nno one could believe, without being at the same time assured that he was a\nsaved person. Upon the true view, that the object of saving faith is not a\nproposition, but a person, we can perceive not only the simplicity of\nfaith, but the possibility of faith even where the soul is destitute of\nassurance or of joy. Hence those who already believe are urged to seek for\nassurance (Heb. 6:11; 2 Peter 1:10).\n\n\n _Rom. 4:20, 21_\u2014\u201c_looking unto the promise of God, he wavered not\n through unbelief, but waxed strong through faith, giving glory to\n God, and being fully assured that what he had promised, he was\n able also to perform_\u201d; _8:16_\u2014\u201c_The Spirit himself beareth\n witness with our spirit, that we are children of God_\u201d; _Eph.\n 1:13_\u2014\u201c_in whom, having also believed, ye were sealed with the\n Holy Spirit of promise_\u201d; _1 John 4:13_\u2014\u201c_hereby we know that we\n abide in him, and he in us, because he hath given us of his\n Spirit_\u201d; _5:10_\u2014\u201c_He that believeth on the Son of God hath the\n witness in him._\u201d This assurance is not of the essence of faith,\n because believers are exhorted to attain to it: _Heb. 6:11_\u2014\u201c_And\n we desire that each one of you may show the same diligence unto\n the fulness of hope_ [marg.\u2014\u2018_full assurance_\u2019] _even to the\n end_\u201d; _2 Pet. 1:10_\u2014\u201c_Wherefore, brethren, give the more\n diligence to make your calling and election sure._\u201d _Cf._ _Prov.\n 14:14_\u2014\u201c_a good man shall be satisfied from himself._\u201d\n\n There is need to guard the doctrine of assurance from mysticism.\n The witness of the Spirit is not a new and direct revelation from\n God. It is a strengthening of previously existing faith until he\n who possesses this faith cannot any longer doubt that he possesses\n it. It is a general rule that all our emotions, when they become\n exceedingly strong, also become conscious. Instance affection\n between man and woman.\n\n Edwards, Religious Affections, in Works, 3:83\u201091, says the witness\n of the Spirit is not a new word or suggestion from God, but an\n enlightening and sanctifying influence, so that the heart is drawn\n forth to embrace the truth already revealed, and to perceive that\n it embraces it. \u201cBearing witness\u201d is not in this case to declare\n and assert a thing to be true, but to hold forth evidence from\n which a thing may be proved to be true: God \u201c_beareth witness ...\n by signs and wonders_\u201d (_Heb. 2:4_). So the \u201cseal of the Spirit\u201d\n is not a voice or suggestion, but a work or effect of the Spirit,\n left as a divine mark upon the soul, to be an evidence by which\n God\u2019s children may be known. Seals had engraved upon them the\n image or name of the persons to whom they belonged. The \u201cseal of\n the Spirit,\u201d the \u201cearnest of the Spirit,\u201d the \u201cwitness of the\n Spirit,\u201d are all one thing. The childlike spirit, given by the\n Holy Spirit, is the Holy Spirit\u2019s witness or evidence in us.\n\n See also illustration of faith and assurance, in C. S. Robinson\u2019s\n Short Studies for S. S. Teachers, 179, 180. Faith should be\n distinguished not only from assurance, but also from feeling or\n joy. Instance Abraham\u2019s faith when he went to sacrifice Isaac; and\n Madame Guyon\u2019s faith, when God\u2019s face seemed hid from her. See, on\n the witness of the Spirit, Short, Bampton Lectures for 1846;\n British and For. Evan. Rev., 1888:617\u2010631. For the view which\n confounds faith with assurance, see Alexander, Discourses on\n Faith, 63\u2010118.\n\n It is important to distinguish saving faith from assurance of\n faith, for the reason that lack of assurance is taken by so many\n real Christians as evidence that they know nothing of the grace of\n God. To use once more a well\u2010worn illustration: It is getting into\n the boat that saves us, and not our comfortable feelings about the\n boat. What saves us is faith in _Christ_, not faith in _our_\n faith, or faith in _the_ faith. The astronomer does not turn his\n telescope to the reflection of the sun or moon in the water, when\n he can turn it to the sun or moon itself. Why obscure our faith,\n when we can look to Christ?\n\n The faith in a distant Redeemer was the faith of Christian, in\n Bunyan\u2019s Pilgrim\u2019s Progress. Only at the end of his journey does\n Christian have Christ\u2019s presence. This representation rests upon a\n wrong conception of faith as laying hold of a promise or a\n doctrine, rather than as laying hold of the living and present\n Christ. The old Scotch woman\u2019s direction to the inquirer to \u201cgrip\n the promise\u201d is not so good as the direction to \u201cgrip Christ.\u201d Sir\n Francis Drake, the great English sailor, had for his crest an\n anchor with a cable running up into the sky. A poor boy, taught in\n a mission school in Ireland, when asked what was meant by saving\n faith, replied: \u201cIt is grasping God with the heart.\u201d\n\n The view of Charles Hodge, like that of Alexander, puts doctrine\n before Christ, and makes the formal principle, the supremacy of\n Scripture, superior to the material principle, justification by\n faith. The Shorter Catechism is better: \u201cFaith in Christ is a\n saving grace, whereby we receive and rest _on him alone_ for\n salvation, as he is offered to us in the gospel.\u201d If this relation\n of faith to the personal Christ had been kept in mind, much\n religious despondency might have been avoided. Murphy, Natural\n Selection and Spiritual Freedom, 30, 31, tells us that Frances\n Ridley Havergal could never fix the date of her conversion. From\n the age of six to that of fourteen she suffered from religious\n fears, and did not venture to call herself a Christian. It was the\n result of confounding _being_ at peace with God and being\n _conscious_ of that peace. So the mother of Frederick Denison\n Maurice, an admirable and deeply religious woman, endured long and\n deep mental suffering from doubts as to her personal election.\n\n There is a witness of the Spirit, with some sinners, that they are\n _not_ children of God, and this witness is through the truth,\n though the sinner does not know that it is the Spirit who reveals\n it to him. We call this work of the Spirit conviction of sin. The\n witness of the Spirit that we are children of God, and the\n assurance of faith of which Scripture speaks, are one and the same\n thing, the former designation only emphasizing the source from\n which the assurance springs. False assurance is destitute of\n humility, but true assurance is so absorbed in Christ that self is\n forgotten. Self\u2010consciousness, and desire to display one\u2019s faith,\n are not marks of true assurance. When we say: \u201cThat man has a\n great deal of assurance,\u201d we have in mind the false and self\u2010\n centered assurance of the hypocrite or the self\u2010deceiver.\n\n Allen, Jonathan Edwards, 231\u2014\u201cIt has been said that any one who\n can read Edwards\u2019s Religious Affections, and still believe in his\n own conversion, may well have the highest assurance of its\n reality. But how few there were in Edwards\u2019s time who gained the\n assurance, may be inferred from the circumstance that Dr. Hopkins\n and Dr. Emmons, disciples of Edwards and religious leaders in New\n England, remained to the last uncertain of their conversion.\u201d He\n can attribute this only to the semi\u2010deistic spirit of the time,\n with its distant God and imperfect apprehension of the\n omnipresence and omnipotence of Christ. Nothing so clearly marks\n the practical progress of Christianity as the growing faith in\n Jesus, the only Revealer of God in nature and history as well as\n in the heart of the believer. As never before, faith comes\n directly to Christ, abides in him, and finds his promise true:\n \u201c_Lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world_\u201d\n (_Mat. 28:20_). \u201cNothing before, nothing behind; The steps of\n faith Fall on the seeming void and find The Rock beneath.\u201d\n\n\n(_d_) That faith necessarily leads to good works, since it embraces the\nwhole truth of God so far as made known, and appropriates Christ, not only\nas an external Savior, but as an internal sanctifying power (Heb. 7:15,\n16; Gal. 5:6).\n\nGood works are the proper evidence of faith. The faith which does not lead\nmen to act upon the commands and promises of Christ, or, in other words,\ndoes not lead to obedience, is called in Scripture a \u201cdead,\u201d that is, an\nunreal, faith. Such faith is not saving, since it lacks the voluntary\nelement\u2014actual appropriation of Christ (James 2:14\u201026).\n\n\n _Heb. 7:15, 16_\u2014\u201c_another priest, who hath been made, not after\n the law of a carnal commandment, but after the power of an endless\n life_\u201d; _Gal. 5:6_\u2014\u201c_For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision\n availeth anything, nor uncircumcision; but faith working through\n love_\u201d; _James 2:14, 26_\u2014\u201c_What doth it profit, my brethren, if a\n man say he hath faith, but have not works? Can that faith save\n him?... For as the body apart from the spirit is dead, even so\n faith apart from works is dead._\u201d\n\n The best evidence that I believe a man\u2019s word is that I act upon\n it. Instance the bank\u2010cashier\u2019s assurance to me that a sum of\n money is deposited with him to my account. If I am a millionaire,\n the communication may cause me no special joy. My faith in the\n cashier\u2019s word is tested by my going, or not going, for the money.\n So my faith in Christ is evidenced by my acting upon his commands\n and promises. We may illustrate also by the lifting of the trolley\n to the wire, and the resulting light and heat and motion to the\n car that before stood dark and cold and motionless upon the track.\n Salvation by works is like getting to one\u2019s destination by pushing\n the car. True faith depends upon God for energy, but it results in\n activity of all our powers. _Rom. 3:28_\u2014\u201c_We reckon therefore that\n a man is justified by faith apart from the works of the law._\u201d We\n are saved only by faith, yet this faith will be sure to bring\n forth good works; see _Gal. 5:6_\u2014\u201c_faith working through love._\u201d\n Dead faith might be illustrated by Abraham Lincoln\u2019s Mississippi\n steamboat, whose whistle was so big that, when it sounded, the\n boat stopped. Confession exhausts the energy, so that none is left\n for action.\n\n A. J. Gordon, The First Thing in the World, or The Primacy of\n Faith: \u201cDavid Brainard speaks with a kind of suppressed\n astonishment of what he observed among the degraded North American\n Indians; how, preaching to them the good news of salvation through\n the atonement of Christ and persuading them to accept it by faith,\n and then hastening on in his rapid missionary tours, he found, on\n returning upon his track a year or two later, that the fruits of\n righteousness and sobriety and virtue and brotherly love were\n everywhere visible, though it had been possible to impart to them\n only the slightest moral or ethical teaching.\u201d\n\n\n(_e_) That faith, as characteristically the inward act of reception, is\nnot to be confounded with love or obedience, its fruit.\n\nFaith is, in the Scriptures, called a work, only in the sense that man\u2019s\nactive powers are engaged in it. It is a work which God requires, yet\nwhich God enables man to perform (John 6:29\u2014\u1f14\u03c1\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u0398\u03b5\u03bf\u1fe6. _Cf._ Rom.\n1:17\u2014\u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03bf\u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b7 \u0398\u03b5\u03bf\u1fe6). As the gift of God and as the mere taking of\nundeserved mercy, it is expressly excluded from the category of works upon\nthe basis of which man may claim salvation (Rom. 3:28; 4:4, 5, 16). It is\nnot the act of the full soul bestowing, but the act of an empty soul\nreceiving. Although this reception is prompted by a drawing of heart\ntoward God inwrought by the Holy Spirit, this drawing of heart is not yet\na conscious and developed love: such love is the result of faith (Gal.\n5:6). What precedes faith is an unconscious and undeveloped tendency or\ndisposition toward God. Conscious and developed affection toward God, or\nlove proper, must always follow faith and be the product of faith. So,\ntoo, obedience can be rendered only after faith has laid hold of Christ,\nand with him has obtained the spirit of obedience (Rom. 1:5\u2014\u1f51\u03c0\u03b1\u03ba\u03bf\u1f74\u03bd\n\u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 = \u201cobedience resulting from faith\u201d). Hence faith is not the\nprocuring cause of salvation, but is only the instrumental cause. The\nprocuring cause is the Christ, whom faith embraces.\n\n\n _John 6:29_\u2014\u201c_This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom\n he hath sent_\u201d; _cf._ _Rom. 1:17_\u2014\u201c_For therein is revealed a\n righteousness of God from faith unto faith: as it is written, But\n the righteous shall live by faith_\u201d; _Rom. 3:28_\u2014\u201c_We reckon\n therefore that a man is justified by faith apart from the works of\n the law_\u201d; _4:4, 5, 16_\u2014\u201c_Now to him that worketh, the reward is\n not reckoned as of grace, but as of debt. But to him that worketh\n not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith\n is reckoned for righteousness.... For this cause it is of faith,\n that it may be according to grace_\u201d; _Gal. 5:6_\u2014\u201c_For in Christ\n Jesus neither circumcision availeth anything, nor uncircumcision;\n but faith working through love_\u201d; _Rom. 1:5_\u2014\u201c_through whom we\n received grace and apostleship, unto obedience of faith among all\n the nations._\u201d\n\n Faith stands as an intermediate factor between the unconscious and\n undeveloped tendency or disposition toward God inwrought in the\n soul by God\u2019s regenerating act, on the one hand, and the conscious\n and developed affection toward God which is one of the fruits and\n evidences of conversion, on the other. Illustrate by the motherly\n instinct shown in a little girl\u2019s care for her doll,\u2014a motherly\n instinct which becomes a developed mother\u2019s love, only when a\n child of her own is born. This new love of the Christian is an\n activity of his own soul, and yet it is a \u201c_fruit of the Spirit_\u201d\n (_Gal. 5:22_). To attribute it wholly to himself would be like\n calling the walking and leaping of the lame man (_Acts 3:8_)\n merely a healthy activity of his own. For illustration of the\n priority of faith to love, see Shedd, Dogm. Theol., 2:533, note;\n on the relation of faith to love, see Julius M\u00fcller, Doct. Sin,\n 1:116, 117.\n\n The logical order is therefore: 1. Unconscious and undeveloped\n love; 2. Faith in Christ and his truth; 3. Conscious and developed\n love; 4. Assurance of faith. Faith and love act and react upon one\n another. Each advance in the one leads to a corresponding advance\n in the other. But the source of all is in God. God loves, and\n therefore he gives love to us as well as receives love from us.\n The unconscious and undeveloped love which he imparts in\n regeneration is the root of all Christian faith. The Roman\n Catholic is right in affirming the priority of love to faith, if\n he means by love only this unconscious and undeveloped affection.\n But the Protestant is also right in affirming the priority of\n faith to love, if he means by love a conscious and developed\n affection. Stevens, Johannine Theology, 368\u2014\u201cFaith is not a mere\n passive receptivity. As the acceptance of a divine life, it\n involves the possession of a new moral energy. Faith works by\n love. In faith a new life\u2010force is received, and new life\u2010powers\n stir within the Christian man.\u201d\n\n We must not confound repentance with fruits meet for repentance,\n nor faith with fruits meet for faith. A. J. Gordon, The First\n Thing in the World: \u201cLove is the greatest thing in the world, but\n faith is the first. The tree is greater than the root, but let it\n not boast: \u2018_if thou gloriest, it is not thou that bearest the\n root, but the root thee_\u2019 (_Rom. 11:18_). Love has no power to\n branch out and bear fruit, except as, through faith, it is rooted\n in Christ and draws nourishment from him. _1 Pet. 1:5_\u2014\u2018_who by\n the power of God are guarded through faith unto a salvation ready\n to be revealed in the last time_\u2019; _1 Cor. 13:13_\u2014\u2018_now abideth\n faith, hope, love_\u2019; _Heb. 10:19\u201025_\u2014\u2018_draw near ... in fulness of\n faith ... hold fast the confession of our hope ... provoke unto\n love and good works_\u2019; _Rom. 5:1\u20105_\u2014\u2018_justified by faith ...\n rejoice in hope ... love of God hath been shed abroad in our\n hearts_\u2019; _1 Thess. 1:1, 2_\u2014\u2018_work of faith and labor of love and\n patience of hope._\u2019 Faith is the actinic ray, hope the\n luminiferous ray, love the calorific ray. But faith contains the\n principle of the divine likeness, as the life of the parent given\n to the child contains the principle of likeness to the father, and\n will insure moral and physical resemblance in due time.\u201d\n\n A. J. Gordon, Ministry of the Spirit, 112\u2014\u201c \u2018_The love of the\n Spirit_\u2019 (_Rom. 15:30_) is the love of the Spirit of Christ, and\n it is given us for overcoming the world. The divine life is the\n source of the divine love. Therefore the love of God is \u2018_shed\n abroad in our hearts by the Holy Spirit who is given unto us_\u2019\n (_Rom. 5:5_). Because we are by nature so wholly without heavenly\n affection, God, through the indwelling Spirit, gives us his own\n love with which to love himself.\u201d A. H. Strong, Christ in\n Creation, 286, 287, points out that in _2 Cor. 5:14_\u2014\u201c_the love of\n Christ constraineth us_\u201d\u2014the love of Christ is \u201cnot our love to\n Christ, for that is a very weak and uncertain thing; nor even\n Christ\u2019s love to us, for that is still something external to us.\n Each of these leaves a separation between Christ and us, and fails\n to act as a moving power within.... Not simply our love to Christ,\n nor simply Christ\u2019s love to us, but rather Christ\u2019s love _in_ us,\n is the love that constrains. This is the thought of the apostle.\u201d\n The first fruit of this love, in its still unconscious and\n undeveloped state, is faith.\n\n\n(_f_) That faith is susceptible of increase.\n\nThis is evident, whether we consider it from the human or from the divine\nside. As an act of man, it has an intellectual, an emotional, and a\nvoluntary element, each of which is capable of growth. As a work of God in\nthe soul of man, it can receive, through the presentation of the truth and\nthe quickening agency of the Holy Spirit, continually new accessions of\nknowledge, sensibility, and active energy. Such increase of faith,\ntherefore, we are to seek, both by resolute exercise of our own powers,\nand above all, by direct application to the source of faith in God (Luke\n17:5).\n\n\n _Luke 17:5_\u2014\u201c_And the apostles said unto the Lord, Increase our\n faith._\u201d The adult Christian has more faith than he had when a\n child,\u2014evidently there has been increase. _1 Cor. 12:8, 9_\u2014\u201c_For\n to one is given through the Spirit the word of wisdom ... to\n another faith, in the same Spirit._\u201d In this latter passage, it\n seems to be intimated that for special exigencies the Holy Spirit\n gives to his servants special faith, so that they are enabled to\n lay hold of the general promise of God and make special\n application of it. _Rom. 8:26, 27_\u2014\u201c_the Spirit also helpeth our\n infirmity ... maketh intercession for us ... maketh intercession\n for the saints according to the will of God_\u201d; _1 John 5:14,\n 15_\u2014\u201c_And this is the boldness which we have toward him, that, if\n we ask anything according to his will, he heareth us: and if we\n know that he heareth us whatsoever we ask, we know that we have\n the petitions which we have asked of him._\u201d Only when we begin to\n believe, do we appreciate our lack of faith, and the great need of\n its increase. The little beginning of light makes known the\n greatness of the surrounding darkness. _Mark 9:24_\u2014\u201c_I believe;\n help thou mine unbelief_\u201d\u2014was the utterance of one who recognized\n both the need of faith and the true source of supply.\n\n On the general subject of Faith, see K\u00f6stlin, Die Lehre von dem\n Glauben, 13\u201085, 301\u2010341, and in Jahrbuch f. d. Theol., 4:177\n _sq._; Romaine on Faith, 9\u201089; Bishop of Ossory, Nature and\n Effects of Faith, 1\u201040; Venn, Characteristics of Belief,\n Introduction; Nitzsch, System of Christ. Doct., 294.\n\n\nIV. Justification.\n\n\n1. Definition of Justification.\n\n\nBy justification we mean that judicial act of God by which, on account of\nChrist, to whom the sinner is united by faith, he declares that sinner to\nbe no longer exposed to the penalty of the law, but to be restored to his\nfavor. Or, to give an alternative definition from which all metaphor is\nexcluded: Justification is the reversal of God\u2019s attitude toward the\nsinner, because of the sinner\u2019s new relation to Christ. God did condemn;\nhe now acquits. He did repel; he now admits to favor.\n\nJustification, as thus defined, is therefore a declarative act, as\ndistinguished from an efficient act; an act of God external to the sinner,\nas distinguished from an act within the sinner\u2019s nature and changing that\nnature; a judicial act, as distinguished from a sovereign act; an act\nbased upon and logically presupposing the sinner\u2019s union with Christ, as\ndistinguished from an act which causes and is followed by that union with\nChrist.\n\n\n The word \u201cdeclarative\u201d does not imply a \u201cspoken\u201d word on God\u2019s\n part,\u2014much less that the sinner hears God speak. That\n justification is sovereign, is held by Arminians, and by those who\n advocate a governmental theory of the atonement. On any such\n theory, justification must be sovereign; since Christ bore, not\n the penalty of the law, but a substituted suffering which God\n graciously and sovereignly accepts in place of our suffering and\n obedience.\n\n Anselm, Archbishop of Canterbury, 1100, wrote a tract for the\n consolation of the dying, who were alarmed on account of sin. The\n following is an extract from it: \u201c_Question_. Dost thou believe\n that the Lord Jesus died for thee? _Answer._ I believe it. _Qu._\n Dost thou thank him for his passion and death? _Ans._ I do thank\n him. _Qu._ Dost thou believe that thou canst not be saved except\n by his death? _Ans._ I believe it.\u201d And then Anselm addresses the\n dying man: \u201cCome then, while life remaineth in thee; in his death\n alone place thy whole trust; in naught else place any trust; to\n his death commit thyself wholly; with this alone cover thyself\n wholly; and if the Lord thy God will to judge thee, say, \u2018Lord,\n between thy judgment and me I present the death of our Lord Jesus\n Christ; no otherwise can I contend with thee.\u2019 And if he shall say\n that thou art a sinner, say thou: \u2018Lord, I interpose the death of\n our Lord Jesus Christ between my sins and thee.\u2019 If he say that\n thou hast deserved condemnation, say: \u2018Lord, I set the death of\n our Lord Jesus Christ between my evil deserts and thee, and his\n merits I offer for those which I ought to have and have not.\u2019 If\n he say that he is wroth with thee, say: \u2018Lord, I oppose the death\n of our Lord Jesus Christ between thy wrath and me.\u2019 And when thou\n hast completed this, say again: \u2018Lord, I set the death of our Lord\n Jesus Christ between thee and me.\u2019 \u201d See Anselm, Opera (Migne),\n 1:686, 687. The above quotation gives us reason to believe that\n the New Testament doctrine of justification by faith was\n implicitly, if not explicitly, held by many pious souls through\n all the ages of papal darkness.\n\n\n2. Proof of the Doctrine of Justification.\n\n\nA. Scripture proofs of the doctrine as a whole are the following:\n\n\n _Rom. 1:17_\u2014\u201c_a righteousness of God from faith unto faith_\u201d;\n _3:24\u201030_\u2014\u201c_being justified freely by his grace through the\n redemption that is in Christ Jesus ... the justifier of him that\n hath faith in Jesus.... We reckon therefore that a man is\n justified by faith apart from the works of the law ... justify the\n circumcision by faith, and the uncircumsion through faith_\u201d; _Gal.\n 3:11_\u2014\u201c_Now that no man is justified by the law before God, is\n evident: for, The righteous shall live by faith; and the law is\n not of faith; but, He that doeth them shall live in them_\u201d; _Eph.\n 1:7_\u2014\u201c_in whom we have our redemption through his blood, the\n forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his\n grace_\u201d; _Heb. 11:4, 7_\u2014\u201c_By faith Abel offered unto God a more\n excellent sacrifice than Cain, through which he had witness borne\n to him that he was righteous.... By faith Noah ... moved with\n godly fear, prepared an ark ... became heir of the righteousness\n which is according to faith_\u201d; _cf._ _Gen. 15:6_\u2014\u201c_And he believed\n in Jehovah; and he reckoned it to him for righteousness_\u201d; _Is.\n 7:9_\u2014\u201c_If ye will not believe, surely ye shall not be\n established_\u201d; _28:16_\u2014\u201c_he that believeth shall not be in\n haste_\u201d; _Hab. 2:4_\u2014\u201c_the righteous shall live by his faith._\u201d\n\n _Ps. 85:8_\u2014\u201c_He will speak peace unto his people._\u201d God\u2019s great\n word of pardon includes all else. Peace with him implies all the\n covenant privileges resulting therefrom. _1 Cor. 3:21\u201023_\u2014\u201c_all\n things are yours,_\u201d because \u201c_ye are Christ\u2019s; and Christ is\n God\u2019s_.\u201d This is not salvation by law, nor by ideals, nor by\n effort, nor by character; although obedience to law, and a loftier\n ideal, and unremitting effort, and a pure character, are\n consequences of justification. Justification is the change in\n God\u2019s attitude toward the sinner which makes all these\n consequences possible. The only condition of justification is the\n sinner\u2019s faith in Jesus, which merges the life of the sinner in\n the life of Christ. Paul expresses the truth in _Gal. 2:16,\n 20_\u2014\u201c_Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law\n but through faith in Jesus Christ, even we believed on Christ\n Jesus, that we might be justified by faith in Christ, and not by\n the works of the law ... I have been crucified with Christ; and it\n is no longer I that live, but Christ liveth in me: and that life\n which I now live in the flesh I live in faith, the faith which is\n in the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself up for me._\u201d\n\n With these observations and qualifications we may assent to much\n that is said by Whiton, Divine Satisfaction, 64, who distinguishes\n between forgiveness and remission: \u201cForgiveness is the righting of\n disturbed personal relations. Remission is removal of the\n consequences which in the natural order of things have resulted\n from our fault. God forgives all that is strictly personal, but\n remits nothing that is strictly natural in sin. He imparts to the\n sinner the power to bear his burden and work off his debt of\n consequences. Forgiveness is not remission. It is introductory to\n remission, just as conversion is not salvation, but introductory\n to salvation. The prodigal was received by his father, but he\n could not recover his lost patrimony. He could, however, have been\n led by penitence to work so hard that he earned more than he had\n lost.\n\n \u201cHere is an element in justification which Protestantism has\n ignored, and which Romanism has tried to retain. Debts must be\n paid to the uttermost farthing. The scars of past sins must remain\n forever. Forgiveness converts the persistent energy of past sin\n from a destructive to a constructive power. There is a\n transformation of energy into a new form. Genuine repentance spurs\n us up to do what we can to make up for time lost and for wrong\n done. The sinner is clothed anew with moral power. We are all to\n be judged by our works. That Paul had been a blasphemer was ever\n stimulating him to Christian endeavor. The faith which receives\n Christ is a peculiar _spirit_, a certain moral activity of love\n and obedience. It is not mere reliance on what Christ was and did,\n but active endeavor to become and to do like him. Human justice\n takes hold of _deeds_; divine righteousness deals with\n _character_. Justification by faith is justification by spirit and\n inward principle, apart from the merit of works or performances,\n but never without these. God\u2019s charity takes the will for the\n deed. This is not justification by outward conduct, as the\n Judaizers thought, but by the godly spirit.\u201d If this new spirit be\n the Spirit of Christ to whom faith has united the soul, we can\n accept the statement. There is danger however of conceiving this\n spirit as purely man\u2019s own, and justification as not external to\n the sinner nor as the work of God, but as the mere name for a\n subjective process by which man justifies himself.\n\n\nB. Scripture use of the special words translated \u201cjustify\u201d and\n\u201cjustification\u201d in the Septuagint and in the New Testament.\n\n(_a_) \u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03cc\u03c9\u2014uniformly, or with only a single exception, signifies, not\nto make righteous, but to declare just, or free from guilt and exposure to\npunishment. The only O. T. passage where this meaning is questionable is\nDan. 12:3. But even here the proper translation is, in all probability,\nnot \u201cthey that turn many to righteousness,\u201d but \u201cthey that justify many,\u201d\n_i. e._, cause many to be justified. For the Hiphil force of the verb, see\nGirdlestone, O. T. Syn., 257, 258, and Delitzsch on Is. 53:11; _cf._ James\n5:19, 20.\n\n\n O. T. texts: _Ex. 23:7_\u2014\u201c_I will not justify the wicked_\u201d; _Deut.\n 25:1_\u2014\u201c_they_ [the judges] _shall justify the righteous, and\n condemn the wicked_\u201d; _Job 27:5_\u2014\u201c_Far be it from me that I should\n justify you_\u201d; _Ps. 143:2_\u2014\u201c_in thy sight no man living is\n righteous_\u201d; _Prov. 17:15_\u2014\u201c_He that justifieth the wicked, and he\n that condemneth the righteous, Both of them alike are an\n abomination to Jehovah_\u201d; _Is. 5:23_\u2014\u201c_that justify the wicked for\n a bribe, and take away the righteousness of the righteous from\n him_\u201d; _50:8_\u2014\u201c_He is near that justifieth me_\u201d; _53:11_\u2014\u201c_by the\n knowledge of __ himself shall my righteous servant justify many;\n and he shall bear their iniquities_\u201d; _Dan. 12:3_\u2014\u201c_and they that\n turn many to righteousness, as the stars for ever and ever_\u201d\n (\u201cthey that justify many,\u201d _i. e._, cause many to be justified);\n _cf._ _James 5:19, 20_\u2014\u201c_My brethren, if any among you err from\n the truth, and one convert him; let him know, that he who\n converteth a sinner from the error of his way shall save a soul\n from death, and shall cover a multitude of sins._\u201d\n\n The Christian minister absolves from sin, only as he marries a\n couple: he does not join them,\u2014he only declares them joined. So he\n declares men forgiven, if they have complied with the appointed\n divine conditions. Marriage may be invalid where these conditions\n are lacking, but the minister\u2019s absolution is of no account where\n there is no repentance of sin and faith in Christ; see G. D.\n Boardman, The Church, 178. We are ever to remember that the term\n justification is a forensic term which presents the change of\n God\u2019s attitude toward the sinner in a pictorial way derived from\n the procedure of earthly tribunals. The fact is larger and more\n vital than the figure used to describe it.\n\n McConnell, Evolution of Immortality, 134, 135\u2014\u201cChrist\u2019s terms are\n biological; those of many theologians are legal. It may be ages\n before we recover from the misfortune of having had the truth of\n Christ interpreted and fixed by jurists and logicians, instead of\n by naturalists and men of science. It is much as though the\n rationale of the circulation of the blood had been wrought out by\n Sir Matthew Hale, or the germ theory of disease interpreted by\n Blackstone, or the doctrine of evolution formulated by a\n legislative council.... The Christ is intimately and vitally\n concerned with the eternal life of men, but the question involved\n is of their living or perishing, not of a system of judicial\n rewards and penalties.\u201d We must remember however that even biology\n gives us only one side of the truth. The forensic conception of\n justification furnishes its complement and has its rights also.\n The Scriptures represent both sides of the truth. Paul gives us\n the judicial aspect, John the vital aspect, of justification.\n\n\nIn Rom. 6:7\u2014\u1f41 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03b8\u03b1\u03bd\u1f7c\u03bd \u03b4\u03b5\u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03af\u03c9\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f00\u03c0\u1f78 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f01\u03bc\u03b1\u03c1\u03c4\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 = \u201che that once\ndied with Christ was acquitted from the service of sin considered as a\npenality.\u201d In 1 Cor. 4:4\u2014\u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u1f72\u03bd \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f10\u03bc\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03b4\u03b1. \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u1fbd \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u1ff3\n\u03b4\u03b5\u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03af\u03c9\u03bc\u03b1\u03b9 = \u201cI am conscious of no fault, but that does not in itself\nmake certain God\u2019s acquittal as respects this particular charge.\u201d The\nusage of the epistle of James does not contradict this; the doctrine of\nJames is that we are justified only by such faith as makes us faithful and\nbrings forth good works. \u201cHe uses the word exclusively in a judicial\nsense; he combats a mistaken view of \u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03c2, not a mistaken view of\n\u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03cc\u03c9\u201d; see James 2:21, 23, 24, and Cremer, N. T. Lexicon, Eng. trans.,\n182, 183. The only N. T. passage where this meaning is questionable is\nRev. 22:11; but here Alford, with \u05d0, A and B, reads \u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03bf\u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b7\u03bd \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03b7\u03c3\u03ac\u03c4\u03c9.\n\n\n N. T. texts: _Mat. 12:37_\u2014\u201c_For by thy words thou shalt be\n justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned_\u201d; _Luke\n 7:29_\u2014\u201c_And all the people ... justified God, being baptized with\n the baptism of John_\u201d; _10:29_\u2014\u201c_But he, desiring to justify\n himself, said unto Jesus, And who is my neighbor?_\u201d _16:15_\u2014\u201c_Ye\n are they that justify yourselves in the sight of men; but God\n knoweth your hearts_\u201d; _18:14_\u2014\u201c_This man went down to his house\n justified rather than the other_\u201d; _cf._ _13_ (lit.) \u201c_God, be\n thou propitiated toward me the sinner_\u201d; _Rom. 4:6\u20108_\u2014\u201c_Even as\n David also pronounceth blessing upon the man, unto whom God\n reckoneth righteousness apart from works, saying, Blessed are they\n whose iniquities are forgiven, And whose sins are covered. Blessed\n is the man to whom the Lord will not reckon sin_\u201d; _cf._ _Ps.\n 32:1, 2_,\u2014\u201c_Blessed is he whose transgression is forgiven, Whose\n sin is covered. Blessed is the man unto whom Jehovah imputeth not\n iniquity, And in whose spirit there is no guile._\u201d\n\n _Rom. 5:18, 19_\u2014\u201c_So then as through one trespass the judgment\n came unto all men to condemnation; even so through one act of\n righteousness the free gift came unto all men to justification of\n life. For as through the one man\u2019s disobedience the many were made\n sinners, even so through the obedience of the one shall the many\n be made righteous_\u201d; _8:33, 34_\u2014\u201c_Who shall lay anything to the\n charge of God\u2019s elect? It is God that justifieth; who is he that\n condemneth?_\u201d _2 Cor. 5:19, 21_\u2014\u201c_God was in Christ reconciling\n the world unto himself, not reckoning unto them their\n trespasses.... Him who knew no sin he made to be sin on our\n behalf; that we might become the righteousness of God_ [God\u2019s\n justified persons] _in him_\u201d; _Rom. 6:7_\u2014\u201c_he that hath died is\n justified from sin_\u201d; _1 Cor. 4:4_\u2014\u201c_For I know nothing against\n myself; yet am I not hereby justified: but he that judgeth me is\n the Lord_\u201d (on this last text, see Expositor\u2019s Greek Testament,\n _in loco_).\n\n _James 2:21, 23, 24_\u2014\u201c_Was not Abraham our father justified by\n works, in that he offered up Isaac his son upon the altar?...\n Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned unto him for\n righteousness.... Ye see that by works __ a man is justified, and\n not only by faith._\u201d James is denouncing a dead faith, while Paul\n is speaking of the necessity of a living faith; or, rather, James\n is describing the nature of faith, while Paul is describing the\n instrument of justification. \u201cThey are like two men beset by a\n couple of robbers. Back to back each strikes out against the\n robber opposite him,\u2014each having a different enemy in his eye\u201d\n (Wm. M. Taylor). Neander on _James 2:14\u201026_\u2014\u201cJames is denouncing\n mere adhesion to an external law, trust in intellectual possession\n of it. With him, law means an inward principle of life. Paul,\n contrasting law as he does with faith, commonly means by law mere\n external divine requisition.... James does not deny salvation to\n him who _has_ faith, but only to him who falsely _professes_ to\n have. When he says that \u2018_by works a man is justified_,\u2019 he takes\n into account the outward manifestation only, speaks from the point\n of view of human consciousness. In works only does faith show\n itself as genuine and complete.\u201d _Rev. 22:11_\u2014\u201c_he that is\n righteous, let him do righteousness still_\u201d\u2014not, as the A. V.\n seemed to imply, \u201che that is just, let him be justified still\u201d\u2014_i.\n e._, made subjectively holy.\n\n Christ is the great Physician. The physician says: \u201cIf you wish to\n be cured, you must trust me.\u201d The patient replies: \u201cI do trust you\n fully.\u201d But the physician continues: \u201cIf you wish to be cured, you\n must take my medicines and do as I direct.\u201d The patient objects:\n \u201cBut I thought I was to be cured by trust in you. Why lay such\n stress on what I do?\u201d The physician answers: \u201cYou must show your\n trust in me by your action. Trust in me, without action in proof\n of trust, amounts to nothing\u201d (S. S. Times). Doing without a\n physician is death; hence Paul says works cannot save. Trust in\n the physician implies obedience; hence James says faith without\n works is dead. Crane, Religion of To\u2010morrow, 152\u2010155\u2014\u201cPaul insists\n on apple\u2010tree righteousness, and warns us against Christmas\u2010tree\n righteousness.\u201d Sagebeer, The Bible in Court, 77,78\u2014\u201cBy works,\n Paul means works of law; James means by works, works of faith.\u201d\n Hovey, in The Watchman, Aug. 27, 1891\u2014\u201cA difference of emphasis,\n occasioned chiefly by the different religious perils to which\n readers were at the time exposed.\u201d\n\n\n(_b_) \u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03af\u03c9\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2\u2014is the act, in process, of declaring a man just,\u2014that is,\nacquitted from guilt and restored to the divine favor (Rom. 4:25; 5:18).\n\n\n _Rom. 4:25_\u2014\u201c_who was delivered up for our trespasses, and was\n raised for our justification_\u201d; _5:18_\u2014\u201c_unto all men to\n justification of life._\u201d Griffith\u2010Jones, Ascent through Christ,\n 367, 368\u2014\u201cRaised for our justification\u201d = Christ\u2019s death made our\n justification possible, but it did not consummate it. Through his\n rising from the dead he was able to come into that relationship to\n the believer which restores the lost or interrupted sonship. In\n the church the fact of the resurrection is perpetuated, and the\n idea of the resurrection is realized.\n\n\n(_c_) \u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03af\u03c9\u03bc\u03b1\u2014is the act, as already accomplished, of declaring a man\njust,\u2014that is, no longer exposed to penalty, but restored to God\u2019s favor\n(Rom. 5:16, 18; _cf._ 1 Tim. 3:16). Hence, in other connections, \u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03af\u03c9\u03bc\u03b1\nhas the meaning of statute, legal decision, act of justice (Luke 1:6; Rom.\n2:26; Heb. 9:1).\n\n\n _Rom. 5:16, 18_\u2014\u201c_of many trespasses unto justification ...\n through one act of righteousness_\u201d; _cf._ _1 Tim.\n 3:16_\u2014\u201c_justified in the spirit._\u201d The distinction between\n \u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03af\u03c9\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2 and \u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03af\u03c9\u03bc\u03b1 may be illustrated by the distinction\n between poesy and poem,\u2014the former denoting something in process,\n an ever\u2010working spirit; the latter denoting something fully\n accomplished, a completed work. Hence \u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03af\u03c9\u03bc\u03b1 is used in _Luke\n 1:6_\u2014\u201c_ordinances of the Lord_\u201d; _Rom. 2:26_\u2014\u201c_ordinances of the\n law_\u201d; _Heb. 9:1_\u2014\u201c_ordinances of divine service._\u201d\n\n\n(_d_) \u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03bf\u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b7\u2014is the state of one justified, or declared just (Rom.\n8:10; 1 Cor. 1:30). In Rom. 10:3, Paul inveighs against \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f30\u03b4\u03af\u03b1\u03bd\n\u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03bf\u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b7\u03bd as insufficient and false, and in its place would put \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\n\u0398\u03b5\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03bf\u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b7\u03bd,\u2014that is, a \u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03bf\u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b7 which God not only requires, but\nprovides; which is not only acceptable to God, but proceeds from God, and\nis appropriated by faith,\u2014hence called \u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03bf\u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b7 \u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 or \u1f10\u03ba \u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2.\n\u201cThe primary signification of the word, in Paul\u2019s writings, is therefore\nthat state of the believer which is called forth by God\u2019s act of\nacquittal,\u2014the state of the believer as justified,\u201d that is, freed from\npunishment and restored to the divine favor.\n\n\n _Rom. 8:10_\u2014\u201c_the spirit is life because of righteousness_\u201d; _1\n Cor. 1:30_\u2014\u201c_Christ Jesus, who was made unto us ...\n righteousness_\u201d; _Rom. 10:3_\u2014\u201c_being ignorant of God\u2019s\n righteousness, and seeking to establish their own, they did not\n subject themselves to the righteousness of God._\u201d Shedd, Dogm.\n Theol., 2:542\u2014\u201cThe \u2018_righteousness of God_\u2019 is the active and\n passive obedience of incarnate God.\u201d See, on \u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03bf\u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b7, Cremer,\n N. T. Lexicon, Eng. trans., 174; Meyer on Romans, trans.,\n 68\u201070\u2014\u201c\u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03bf\u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b7 \u0398\u03b5\u03bf\u1fe6 (gen. of origin, emanation from) =\n rightness which proceeds from God\u2014the relation of being right into\n which man is put by God (by an act of God declaring him\n righteous).\u201d\n\n E. G. Robinson, Christian Theology, 304\u2014\u201cWhen Paul addressed those\n who trusted in their own righteousness, he presented salvation as\n attainable only through faith in another; when he addressed\n Gentiles who were conscious of their need of a helper, the\n forensic imagery is not employed. Scarce a trace of it appears in\n his discourses as recorded in the Acts, and it is noticeably\n absent from all the epistles except the Romans and the Galatians.\u201d\n\n\nSince this state of acquittal is accompanied by changes in the character\nand conduct, \u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03bf\u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b7 comes to mean, secondarily, the moral condition of\nthe believer as resulting from this acquittal and inseparably connected\nwith it (Rom. 14:17; 2 Cor. 5:21). This righteousness arising from\njustification becomes a principle of action (Mat. 3:15; Acts 10:35; Rom.\n6:13, 18). The term, however, never loses its implication of a justifying\nact upon which this principle of action is based.\n\n\n _Rom. 14:17_\u2014\u201c_the kingdom of God is not eating and drinking, but\n righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit_\u201d; _2 Cor.\n 5:21_\u2014\u201c_that we might become the righteousness of God in him_\u201d;\n _Mat. 3:15_\u2014\u201c_Suffer it now: for thus it becometh us to fulfil all\n righteousness_\u201d; _Acts 10:35_\u2014\u201c_in every nation he that feareth\n him, and worketh righteousness, is acceptable to him_\u201d; _Rom.\n 6:13_\u2014\u201c_present yourselves unto God, as alive from the dead, and\n your members as instruments of righteousness unto God._\u201d Meyer on\n _Rom. 3:23_\u2014\u201cEvery mode of conception which refers redemption and\n the forgiveness of sins, not to a real atonement through the death\n of Christ, but subjectively to the dying and reviving with him\n guaranteed and produced by that death (Schleiermacher, Nitzsch,\n Hofmann), is opposed to the N. T.,\u2014a mixing up of justification\n and sanctification.\u201d\n\n On these Scripture terms, see Bp. of Ossory, Nature and Effects of\n Faith, 436\u2010496; Lange, Com., on _Romans 3:24_; Buchanan on\n Justification, 226\u2010249. _Versus_ Moehler, Symbolism, 102\u2014\u201cThe\n forgiveness of sins ... is undoubtedly a remission of the guilt\n and the punishment which Christ hath taken and borne upon himself;\n but it is _likewise_ the transfusion of his Spirit into us\u201d;\n Newman, Lectures on Justification, 68\u2010143; Knox, Remains; N. W.\n Taylor, Revealed Theology, 310\u2010372.\n\n It is a great mistake in method to derive the meaning of \u03b4\u03af\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2\n from that of \u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03bf\u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b7, and not _vice versa_. Wm. Arnold Stevens,\n in Am. Jour. Theology, April, 1897\u2014\u201c\u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03bf\u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b7, righteousness, in\n all its meanings, whether ethical or forensic, has back of it the\n idea of _law_; also the idea of _violated_ law; it derives its\n forensic sense from the verb \u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03cc\u03c9 and its cognate noun\n \u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03af\u03c9\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2; \u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03bf\u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b7 therefore is legal acceptableness, _the\n status before the law of a pardoned sinner_.\u201d\n\n Denney, in Expos. Gk. Test., 2:565\u2014\u201cIn truth, \u2018sin,\u2019 \u2018the law,\u2019\n \u2018the curse of the law,\u2019 \u2018death,\u2019 are names for something which\n belongs not to the Jewish but to the human conscience; and it is\n only because this is so that the gospel of Paul is also a gospel\n for us. Before Christ came and redeemed the world, all men were at\n bottom on the same footing: Pharisaism, legalism, moralism, or\n whatever it is called, is in the last resort the attempt to be\n good without God, to achieve a righteousness of our own, without\n an initial all\u2010inclusive immeasurable debt to him; in other words,\n without submitting, as sinful men must submit, to be justified by\n faith apart from works of our own, and to find in that\n justification, and in that only, the spring and impulse of all\n good.\u201d\n\n\nIt is worthy of special observation that, in the passages cited above, the\nterms \u201cjustify\u201d and \u201cjustification\u201d are contrasted, not with the process\nof depraving or corrupting, but with the outward act of condemning; and\nthat the expressions used to explain and illustrate them are all derived,\nnot from the inward operation of purifying the soul or infusing into it\nrighteousness, but from the procedure of courts in their judgments, or of\noffended persons in their forgiveness of offenders. We conclude that these\nterms, wherever they have reference to the sinner\u2019s relation to God,\nsignify a declarative and judicial act of God, external to the sinner, and\nnot an efficient and sovereign act of God changing the sinner\u2019s nature and\nmaking him subjectively righteous.\n\n\n In the Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent, session 6,\n chap. 9 is devoted to the refutation of the \u201cinanis h\u00e6reticorum\n fiducia\u201d; and Canon 12 of the session anathematizes those who say:\n \u201cfidem justificantem nihil aliud esse quam fiduciam divin\u00e6\n misericordi\u00e6, peccata remittentis propter Christum\u201d; or that\n \u201cjustifying faith is nothing but trust in the divine mercy which\n pardons sins for Christ\u2019s sake.\u201d The Roman Catholic doctrine on\n the contrary maintains that the ground of justification is not\n simply the faith by which the sinner appropriates Christ and his\n atoning work, but is also the new love and good works wrought\n within him by Christ\u2019s Spirit. This introduces a subjective\n element which is foreign to the Scripture doctrine of\n justification.\n\n Dr. E. G. Robinson taught that justification consists of three\n elements: 1. Acquittal; 2. Restoration to favor; 3. Infusion of\n righteousness. In this he accepted a fundamental error of\n Romanism. He says: \u201cJustification and sanctification are not to be\n distinguished as chronologically and statically different.\n Justification and righteousness are the same thing from different\n points of view. Pardon is not a mere declaration of forgiveness\u2014a\n merely arbitrary thing. Salvation introduces a new law into our\n sinful nature which annuls the law of sin and destroys its penal\n and destructive consequences. Forgiveness of sins must be in\n itself a gradual process. The final consequences of a man\u2019s sins\n are written indelibly upon his nature and remain forever. When\n Christ said: \u2018Thy sins are forgiven thee\u2019, it was an objective\n statement of a subjective fact. The person was already in a state\n of living relation to Christ. The gospel is damnation to the\n damnable, and invitation, love and mercy to those who feel their\n need of it. We are saved through the enforcement of law on every\n one of us. Forgiveness consists in the removal from consciousness\n of a sense of ill\u2010desert. Justification, aside from its forensic\n use, is a transformation and a promotion. Sense of forgiveness is\n a sense of relief from a hated habit of mind.\u201d This seems to us\n dangerously near to a denial that justification is an act of God,\n and to an affirmation that it is simply a subjective change in\n man\u2019s condition.\n\n E. H. Johnson: \u201cIf Dr. Robinson had been content to say that the\n divine fiat of justification had the manward effect of\n regeneration, he would have been correct; for the verdict would be\n empty without this manward efficacy. But unfortunately, he made\n the effect a part of the cause, identifying the divine\n justification with its human fruition, the clearance of the past\n with the provision for the future.\u201d We must grant that the words\n _inward_ and _outward_ are misleading, for God is not under the\n law of space, and the soul itself is not in space. Justification\n takes place just as much in man as outside of him. Justification\n and regeneration take place at the same moment, but logically\n God\u2019s act of renewing is the cause and God\u2019s act of approving is\n the effect. Or we may say that regeneration and justification are\n both of them effects of our union with Christ. _Luke 1:37_\u2014\u201c_For\n no word from God shall be void of power._\u201d Regeneration and\n justification may be different aspects of God\u2019s turning\u2014his\n turning us, and his turning himself. But it still is true that\n justification is a change in God and not in the creature.\n\n\n3. Elements of Justification.\n\n\nThese are two:\n\nA. Remission of punishment.\n\n(_a_) God acquits the ungodly who believe in Christ, and declares them\njust. This is not to declare them innocent,\u2014that would be a judgment\ncontrary to truth. It declares that the demands of the law have been\nsatisfied with regard to them, and that they are now free from its\ncondemnation.\n\n\n _Rom. 4:5_\u2014\u201c_But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him\n that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is reckoned for\n righteousness_\u201d; _cf._ _John 3:16_\u2014\u201c_gave his only begotten Son,\n that whosoever believeth on him should not perish_\u201d; see page 856,\n (_a_), and Shedd, Dogm. Theol., 2:549. _Rom. 5:1_\u2014\u201c_Being\n therefore justified by faith, we have peace with God_\u201d\u2014not\n subjective peace or quietness of mind, but objective peace or\n reconciliation, the opposite of the state of war, in which we are\n subject to the divine wrath. Dale, Ephesians, 67\u2014\u201cForgiveness may\n be defined: 1. in _personal_ terms, as a cessation of the anger or\n moral resentment of God against sin; 2. in _ethical_ terms, as a\n release from the guilt of sin which oppresses the conscience; 3.\n in _legal_ terms, as a remission of the punishment of sin, which\n is eternal death.\u201d\n\n\n(_b_) This acquittal, in so far as it is the act of God as judge or\nexecutive, administering law, may be denominated pardon. In so far as it\nis the act of God as a father personally injured and grieved by sin, yet\nshowing grace to the sinner, it is denominated forgiveness.\n\n\n _Micah 7:18_\u2014\u201c_Who is a God like into thee, that pardoneth\n iniquity, and passeth over the transgression of the remnant of his\n heritage?_\u201d _Ps. 130:4_\u2014\u201c_But there is forgiveness with thee, That\n thou mayst be feared._\u201d It is hard for us to understand God\u2019s\n feeling toward sin. Forgiveness seems easy to us, largely because\n we are indifferent toward sin. But to the holy One, to whom sin is\n the abominable thing which he hates, forgiveness involves a\n fundamental change of relation, and nothing but Christ\u2019s taking\n the penalty of sin upon him can make it possible. B. Fay Mills: \u201cA\n tender spirited follower of Jesus Christ said to me, not long ago,\n that it had taken him twelve years to forgive an injury that had\n been committed against him.\u201d How much harder for God to forgive,\n since he can never become indifferent to the nature of the\n transgression!\n\n\n(_c_) In an earthly tribunal, there is no acquittal for those who are\nproved to be transgressors,\u2014for such there is only conviction and\npunishment. But in God\u2019s government there is remission of punishment for\nbelievers, even though they are confessedly offenders; and, in\njustification, God declares this remission.\n\n\n There is no forgiveness in nature. F. W. Robertson preached this.\n But he ignored the _vis medicatrix_ of the gospel, in which\n forgiveness is offered to all. The natural conscience says: \u201cI\n must pay my debt.\u201d But the believer finds that \u201cJesus paid it\n all.\u201d Illustrate by the poor man, who on coming to pay his\n mortgage finds that the owner at death had ordered it to be\n burned, so that now there is nothing to pay. _Ps. 34:22_\u2014\u201c_Jehovah\n redeemeth the soul of his servants, And none of them that take\n refuge in him shall be condemned._\u201d\n\n A child disobeys his father and breaks his arm. His sin involves\n two penalties, the alienation from his father and the broken arm.\n The father, on repentance, may forgive his child. The personal\n relation is re\u2010established, but the broken bone is not therefore\n at once reknit. The father\u2019s forgiveness, however, will assure the\n father\u2019s help toward complete healing. So justification does not\n ensure the immediate removal of all the natural consequences of\n our sins. It does ensure present reconciliation and future\n perfection. Clarke, Christian Theology, 364\u2014\u201cJustification is not\n equivalent to acquittal, for acquittal declares that the man has\n not done wrong. Justification is rather the acceptance of a man,\n on sufficient grounds, although he has done wrong.\u201d As the\n Plymouth Brethren say: \u201cIt is not the _sin_\u2010question, but the\n _Son_\u2010question.\u201d \u201c_Their sins and their iniquities will I remember\n no more_\u201d (_Heb. 10:17_). The father did not allow the prodigal to\n complete the confession he had prepared to make, but interrupted\n him, and dwelt only upon his return home (_Luke 15:22_).\n\n\n(_d_) The declaration that the sinner is no longer exposed to the penalty\nof law, has its ground, not in any satisfaction of the law\u2019s demand on the\npart of the sinner himself, but solely in the bearing of the penalty by\nChrist, to whom the sinner is united by faith. Justification, in its first\nelement, is therefore that act by which God, for the sake of Christ,\nacquits the transgressor and suffers him to go free.\n\n\n _Acts 13:38, 39_\u2014\u201c_Be it known unto you therefore, brethren, that\n through this man is proclaimed unto you remission of sins: and by\n him_ [lit.: \u2018in him\u2019] _every one that believeth is justified from\n all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of\n Moses_\u201d; _Rom. 3:24, 26_\u2014\u201c_being justified freely by his grace\n through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus ... that he might\n himself be just, and the justifier of him that hath faith in\n Jesus_\u201d; _1 Cor. 6:11_\u2014\u201c_but ye were justified in the name of the\n Lord Jesus_\u201d; _Eph. 1:7_\u2014\u201c_in whom we have our redemption through\n his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the\n riches of his grace._\u201d\n\n This acquittal is not to be conceived of as the sovereign act of a\n Governor, but rather as a judicial procedure. Christ secures a new\n trial for those already condemned\u2014a trial in which he appears for\n the guilty, and sets over against their sin his own righteousness,\n or rather shows them to be righteous in him. C. H. M.: \u201cWhen Balak\n seeks to curse the seed of Abraham, it is said of Jehovah: \u2018_He\n hath not beheld iniquity in Jacob, Neither hath he seen\n perverseness in Israel_\u2019 (_Num. 23:21_). When Satan stands forth\n to rebuke Joshua, the word is: \u2018_Jehovah rebuke thee, O Satan ...\n is not this a brand plucked out of the fire?_\u2019 (_Zech. 3:2_). Thus\n he ever puts himself between his people and every tongue that\n would accuse them. \u2018_Touch not mine anointed ones_,\u2019 he says,\n \u2018_and do my prophets no harm_\u2019 (_Ps. 105:15_). \u2018_It is God that\n justifieth; who is he that condemneth?_\u2019 (_Rom. 8:33, 34_).\u201d It is\n not sin, then, that condemns,\u2014it is the failure to ask pardon for\n sin, through Christ. Illustrate by the ring presented by Queen\n Elizabeth to the Earl of Essex. Queen Elizabeth did not forgive\n the penitent Countess of Nottingham for withholding the ring of\n Essex which would have purchased his pardon. She shook the dying\n woman and cursed her, even while she was imploring forgiveness.\n There is no such failure of mercy in God\u2019s administration.\n\n Kaftan, in Am. Jour. Theology, 4:698\u2014\u201cThe peculiar characteristic\n of Christian experience is the forgiveness of sins, or\n reconciliation\u2014a forgiveness which is conceived as an unmerited\n gift of God, which is bestowed on man independently of his own\n moral worthiness. Other religions have some measure of revelation,\n but Christianity alone has the clear revelation of this\n forgiveness, and this is accepted by faith. And forgiveness leads\n to a better ethics than any religion of works can show.\u201d\n\n\nB. Restoration to favor.\n\n(_a_) Justification is more than remission or acquittal. These would leave\nthe sinner simply in the position of a discharged criminal,\u2014law requires a\npositive righteousness also. Besides deliverance from punishment,\njustification implies God\u2019s treatment of the sinner as if he were, and had\nbeen, personally righteous. The justified person receives not only\nremission of penalty, but the rewards promised to obedience.\n\n\n _Luke 15:22\u201024_\u2014\u201c_Bring forth quickly the best robe, and put it on\n him; and put a ring on his hand, and shoes on his feet: and bring\n the fatted calf, and kill it, and let us eat, and make merry: for\n this my son was dead, and is alive again; he was lost, and is\n found_\u201d; _John 3:16_\u2014\u201c_gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever\n believeth on him should ... have eternal life_\u201d; _Rom. 5:1,\n 2_\u2014\u201c_Being therefore justified by faith, we have peace with God\n through our Lord Jesus Christ; through whom also we have had our\n access by faith into this grace wherein we stand; and we rejoice\n in hope of the glory of God_\u201d\u2014\u201c_this grace_\u201d being a permanent\n state of divine favor; _1 Cor. 1:30_\u2014\u201c_But of him are ye in Christ\n Jesus, who was made unto us wisdom from God, and righteousness and\n sanctification, and redemption: that, according as it is written,\n He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord_\u201d; _2 Cor.\n 5:21_\u2014\u201c_that we might become the righteousness of God in him._\u201d\n\n _Gal. 3:6_\u2014\u201c_Even as Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned\n unto him for righteousness_\u201d; _Eph. 2:7_\u2014\u201c_the exceeding riches of\n his grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus_\u201d; _3:12_\u2014\u201c_in\n whom we have boldness and access in confidence through our faith\n in him_\u201d; _Phil. 3:8, 9_\u2014\u201c_I count all things to be loss for the\n excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord ... the\n righteousness which is from God by faith_\u201d; _Col.\n 1:22_\u2014\u201c_reconciled in the body of his flesh through death, to\n present you holy and without blemish and unreprovable before\n him_\u201d; _Tit. 3:4, 7_\u2014\u201c_the kindness of God our Savior ... that,\n being justified by his grace, we might be made heirs according to\n the hope of eternal life_\u201d; _Rev. 19:8_\u2014\u201c_And it was given unto\n her that she should array herself in fine linen, bright and pure:\n for the fine linen is the righteous acts of the saints._\u201d\n\n Justification is setting one right before law. But law requires\n not merely freedom from offence negatively, but all manner of\n obedience and likeness to God positively. Since justification is\n in Christ and by virtue of the believer\u2019s union with Christ, it\n puts the believer on the same footing before the law that Christ\n is on, namely, not only acquittal but favor. _1 Tim. 3:16_\u2014Christ\n was himself \u201c_justified in the spirit_,\u201d and the believer partakes\n of _his_ justification and of the whole of it, _i. e._, not only\n acquittal but favor. _Acts 13:39_\u2014\u201c_in him every one that\n believeth is justified_\u201d _i. e._, in Christ; _1 Cor.\n 6:11_\u2014\u201c_justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ_\u201d; _Gal.\n 4:5_\u2014\u201c_that we might receive the adoption of sons_\u201d\u2014a part of\n justification; _Rom. 5:11_\u2014\u201c_through whom we have now received the\n reconciliation_\u201d\u2014in justification; _2 Cor. 5:21_\u2014\u201c_that we might\n become the righteousness of God in him_\u201d; _Phil. 3:9_\u2014\u201c_the\n righteousness which is from God by faith_\u201d; _John 1:12_\u2014\u201c_to them\n gave he the right to become children of God_\u201d\u2014emphasis on\n \u201c_gave_\u201d\u2014intimation that the \u201c_becoming children_\u201d is not\n subsequent to the justification, but is a part of it.\n\n Ellicott on _Tit. 3:7_\u2014\u201c\u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03bf\u03b8\u03ad\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2, \u2018_justified_,\u2019 in the usual\n and more strict theological sense; not however as implying only a\n mere outward non\u2010imputation of sin, but as involving a \u2018mutationem\n status,\u2019 an acceptance into new privileges, and an enjoyment of\n the benefits thereof (Waterland, Justif, vol. vi, p. 5); in the\n words of the same writer: \u2018Justification cannot be conceived\n without some work of the Spirit in conferring a title to\n salvation.\u2019 \u201d The prisoner who has simply served out his term\n escapes without further punishment and that is all. But the\n pardoned man receives back in his pardon the full rights of\n citizenship, can again vote, serve on juries, testify in court,\n and exercise all his individual liberties, as the discharged\n convict cannot. The Society of Friends is so called, not because\n they are friends to one another, but because they regard\n themselves as friends of God. So, in the Middle Ages, Master\n Eckart, John Tauler, Henry Suso, called themselves the friends of\n God, after the pattern of Abraham; _2 Chron. 20:7_\u2014\u201c_Abraham thy\n friend_\u201d; _James 2:23_\u2014\u201c_Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned\n unto him for righteousness; and he was called the friend of God_\u201d,\n _i. e._, one not merely acquitted from the charge of sin, but also\n admitted into favor and intimacy with God.\n\n\n(_b_) This restoration to favor, viewed in its aspect as the renewal of a\nbroken friendship, is denominated reconciliation; viewed in its aspect as\na renewal of the soul\u2019s true relation to God as a father, it is\ndenominated adoption.\n\n\n _John 1:12_\u2014\u201c_But as many as received him, to them gave he the\n right to become children of God, even to them that believe on his\n name_\u201d; _Rom. 5:11_\u2014\u201c_and not only so, but we also rejoice in God\n through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received\n the reconciliation_\u201d; _Gal. 4:4, 5_\u2014\u201c_born under the law, that he\n might redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive\n the adoption of sons_\u201d; _Eph. 1:5_\u2014\u201c_having foreordained us unto\n adoption as sons through Jesus Christ unto himself_\u201d; _cf._ _Rom.\n 8:23_\u2014\u201c_even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for our\n adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body_\u201d\u2014that is, this\n adoption is completed, so far as the body is concerned, at the\n resurrection.\n\n Luther called _Psalms 32, 51, 130, 143_, \u201cthe Pauline Psalms,\u201d\n because these declare forgiveness to be granted to the believer\n without law and without works. _Ps. 130:3, 4_\u2014\u201c_If thou, Jehovah,\n shouldst mark iniquities, O Lord, who could stand? But there is\n forgiveness with thee, That thou mayest be feared_\u201d is followed by\n _verses 7, 8_\u2014\u201c_O Israel, hope in Jehovah; For with Jehovah there\n is lovingkindness, And with him is plenteous redemption. And he\n will redeem Israel From all his iniquities._\u201d Whitefield was\n rebuked for declaring in a discourse that Christ would receive\n even the devil\u2019s castaways; but that very day, while at dinner at\n Lady Huntington\u2019s, he was called out to meet two women who were\n sinners, and to whose broken hearts and blasted lives that remark\n gave hope and healing.\n\n\n(_c_) In an earthly pardon there are no special helps bestowed upon the\npardoned. There are no penalties, but there are also no rewards; law\ncannot claim anything of the discharged, but then they also can claim\nnothing of the law. But what, though greatly needed, is left unprovided by\nhuman government, God does provide. In justification, there is not only\nacquittal, but approval; not only pardon, but promotion. Remission is\nnever separated from restoration.\n\n\n After serving a term in the penitentiary, the convict goes out\n with a stigma upon him and with no friends. His past conviction\n and disgrace follow him. He cannot obtain employment. He cannot\n vote. Want often leads him to commit crime again; and then the old\n conviction is brought up as proof of bad character, and increases\n his punishment. Need of Friendly Inns and Refuges for discharged\n criminals. But the justified sinner is differently treated. He is\n not only delivered from God\u2019s wrath and eternal death, but he is\n admitted to God\u2019s favor and eternal life. The discovery of this is\n partly the cause of the convert\u2019s joy. Expecting pardon, at most,\n he is met with unmeasured favor. The prodigal finds the father\u2019s\n house and heart open to him, and more done for him than if he had\n never wandered. This overwhelms and subdues him. The two elements,\n acquittal and restoration to favor, are never separated. Like the\n expulsion of darkness and restoration of light, they always go\n together. No one can have, even if he would have, an incomplete\n justification. Christ\u2019s justification is ours; and, as Jesus\u2019 own\n seamless tunic could not be divided, so the robe of righteousness\n which he provides cannot be cut in two.\n\n Failure to apprehend this positive aspect of justification as\n restoration to favor is the reason why so many Christians have\n little joy and little enthusiasm in their religious lives. The\n preaching of the magnanimity and generosity of God makes the\n gospel \u201c_the power of God unto salvation_\u201d (_Rom. 1:16_). Edwin M.\n Stanton had ridden roughshod over Abraham Lincoln in the conduct\n of a case at law in which they had been joint counsel. Stanton had\n become vindictive and even violent when Lincoln was made\n President. But Lincoln invited Stanton to be Secretary of War, and\n he sent the invitation by Harding, who knew of all this former\n trouble. When Stanton heard it, he said with streaming eyes: \u201cDo\n you tell me, Harding, that Mr. Lincoln sent this message to me?\n Tell him that such magnanimity will make me work with him as man\n was never served before!\u201d\n\n\n(_d_) The declaration that the sinner is restored to God\u2019s favor, has its\nground, not in the sinner\u2019s personal character or conduct, but solely in\nthe obedience and righteousness of Christ, to whom the sinner is united by\nfaith. Thus Christ\u2019s work is the procuring cause of our justification, in\nboth its elements. As we are acquitted on account of Christ\u2019s suffering of\nthe penalty of the law, so on account of Christ\u2019s obedience we receive the\nrewards of law.\n\n\n All this comes to us in Christ. We participate in the rewards\n promised to his obedience: _John 20:31_\u2014\u201c_that believing ye may\n have life in his name_\u201d; _1 Cor. 3:21\u201023_\u2014\u201c_For all things are\n yours; ... all are yours; and ye are Christ\u2019s; and Christ is\n God\u2019s._\u201d Denovan, Toronto Baptist, Dec. 1883, maintains that\n \u201cgrace operates in two ways: (1) for the _rebel_ it provides a\n scheme of _justification_,\u2014this is judicial, matter of debt; (2)\n for the _child_ it provides pardon,\u2014fatherly forgiveness on\n repentance.\u201d _Heb. 7:19_\u2014\u201c_the law made nothing perfect ... a\n bringing in thereupon of a better hope, through which we draw nigh\n unto God._\u201d This \u201c_better hope_\u201d is offered to us in Christ\u2019s\n death and resurrection. The veil of the temple was the symbol of\n separation from God. The rending of that veil was the symbol on\n the one hand that sin had been atoned for, and on the other hand\n that unrestricted access to God was now permitted us in Christ the\n great forerunner. Bonar\u2019s hymn, \u201cJesus, whom angel hosts adore,\u201d\n has for its concluding stanza: \u201c\u2019T is finished all: the veil is\n rent. The welcome sure, the access free:\u2014Now then, we leave our\n banishment, O Father, to return to thee!\u201d See pages 749 (_b_), 770\n (_h_).\n\n James Russell Lowell: \u201cAt the devil\u2019s booth all things are sold.\n Each ounce of dross costs its ounce of gold; For a cap and bells\n our lives we pay: Bubbles we buy with a whole soul\u2019s tasking; \u2019T\n is heaven alone that is given away, \u2019T is only God may be had for\n the asking.\u201d John G. Whittier: \u201cThe hour draws near, howe\u2019er\n delayed and late, When at the Eternal Gate, We leave the words and\n works we call our own, And lift void hands alone For love to fill.\n Our nakedness of soul Brings to that gate no toll; Giftless we\n come to him who all things gives, And live because he lives.\u201d\n\n H. B. Smith, System of Christian Doctrine, 523, 524\u2014\u201cJustification\n and pardon are not the same in Scripture. We object to the view of\n Emmons (Works, vol. 5), that \u2018justification is no more nor less\n than pardon,\u2019 and that \u2018God rewards men for their own, and not\n Christ\u2019s, obedience,\u2019 for the reason that the words, as used in\n common life, relate to wholly different things. If a man is\n declared just by a human tribunal, he is not pardoned, he is\n acquitted; his own inherent righteousness, as respects the charge\n against him, is recognized and declared. The gospel proclaims both\n pardon and justification. There is no significance in the use of\n the word \u2018justify,\u2019 if pardon be all that is intended....\n\n \u201cJustification involves what pardon does not, a righteousness\n which is the ground of the acquittal and favor; not the mere favor\n of the sovereign, but the merit of Christ, is at the basis\u2014the\n righteousness which is of God. The ends of the law are so far\n satisfied by what Christ has done, that the sinner can be\n pardoned. The law is not merely set aside, but its great ends are\n answered by what Christ has done in our behalf. God might pardon\n as a sovereign, from mere benevolence (as regard to happiness);\n but in the gospel he does more,\u2014he pardons in consistency with his\n holiness,\u2014upholding that as the main end of all his dealings and\n works. Justification involves acquittal from all the penalty of\n the law, and the inheritance of all the blessings of the redeemed\n state. The penalty of the law\u2014spiritual, temporal, eternal\n death\u2014is all taken away; and the opposite blessings are conferred,\n in and through Christ\u2014the resurrection to blessedness, the gift of\n the Spirit, and eternal life....\n\n \u201cIf justification is forgiveness simply, it applies only to the\n _past_. If it is also a title to life, it includes the future\n condition of the soul. The latter alone is consistent with the\n plan and decrees of God respecting redemption\u2014his seeing the end\n from the beginning. The reason why justification has been taken as\n pardon is two\u2010fold: first, it _does_ involve pardon,\u2014this is its\n negative side, while it has a positive side also\u2014the title to\n eternal life; secondly, the tendency to resolve the gospel into an\n ethical system. Only our acts of choice as meritorious could\n procure a title to favor, a positive reward. Christ might remove\n the obstacle, but the title to heaven is derived only from what we\n ourselves do.\n\n \u201cJustification is, therefore, not a merely governmental provision,\n as it must be on any scheme that denies that Christ\u2019s work has\n direct respect to the ends of the law. Views of the atonement\n determine the views on justification, if logical sequence is\n observed. We have to do here, not with views of natural justice,\n but with divine methods. If we regard the atonement simply as\n answering the ends of a governmental scheme, our view must be that\n justification merely removes an obstacle, and the end of it is\n only pardon, and not eternal life.\u201d\n\n But upon the true view, that the atonement is a complete\n satisfaction to the holiness of God, justification embraces not\n merely pardon, or acquittal from the punishments of law, but also\n restoration to favor, or the rewards promised to actual obedience.\n See also Quenstedt, 3:524; Philippi, Active Obedience of Christ;\n Shedd, Dogm. Theol., 2:432, 433.\n\n\n4. Relation of Justification to God\u2019s Law and Holiness.\n\n\nA. Justification has been shown to be a forensic term. A man may, indeed,\nbe conceived of as just, in either of two senses: (_a_) as just in moral\ncharacter,\u2014that is, absolutely holy in nature, disposition, and conduct;\n(_b_) as just in relation to law,\u2014or as free from all obligation to suffer\npenalty, and as entitled to the rewards of obedience.\n\nSo, too, a man may be conceived of as justified, in either of two senses:\n(_a_) made just in moral character; or, (_b_) made just in his relation to\nlaw. But the Scriptures declare that there does not exist on earth a just\nman, in the first of these senses (Eccl. 7:20). Even in those who are\nrenewed in moral character and united to Christ, there is a remnant of\nmoral depravity.\n\nIf, therefore, there be any such thing as a just man, he must be just, not\nin the sense of possessing an unspotted holiness, but in the sense of\nbeing delivered from the penalty of law, and made partaker of its rewards.\nIf there be any such thing as justification, it must be, not an act of God\nwhich renders the sinner absolutely holy, but an act of God which declares\nthe sinner to be free from legal penalties and entitled to legal rewards.\n\n\n _Justus_ is derived from _jus_, and suggests the idea of courts\n and legal procedures. The fact that \u201cjustify\u201d is derived from\n _justus_ and _facio_, and might therefore seem to imply the making\n of a man subjectively righteous, should not blind us to its\n forensic use. The phrases \u201c_sanctify the Holy One of Jacob_\u201d (_Is.\n 29:23_; _cf._ _1 Pet. 3:15_\u2014\u201c_sanctify in your hearts Christ as\n Lord_\u201d) and \u201c_glorify God_\u201d (_1 Cor. 6:20_) do not mean, to _make_\n God subjectively holy or glorious, for this he _is_, whatever we\n may do; they mean rather, to _declare_, or _show_, him to be holy\n or glorious. So justification is not making a man righteous, or\n even pronouncing him righteous, for no man _is_ subjectively\n righteous. It is rather to count him righteous so far as respects\n his relations to law, to treat him as righteous, or to declare\n that God will, for reasons assigned, so treat him (Payne). So long\n as any remnant of sin exists, no justification, in the sense of\n making holy, can be attributed to man: _Eccl. 7:20_\u2014\u201c_Surely there\n is not a righteous man upon earth, that doeth good and sinneth\n not._\u201d If no man is just, in this sense, then God cannot pronounce\n him just, for God cannot lie. Justification, therefore, must\n signify a deliverance from legal penalties, and an assignment of\n legal rewards. O. P. Gifford: There is no such thing as \u201csalvation\n _by_ character\u201d; what men need is salvation _from_ character. The\n only sense in which salvation by character is rational or\n Scriptural is that suggested by George Harris, Moral Evolution,\n 409\u2014\u201cSalvation by character is not self\u2010righteousness, but Christ\n in us.\u201d But even here it must be remembered that Christ _in_ us\n presupposes Christ _for_ us. The objective atonement for sin must\n come before the subjective purification of our natures. And\n justification is upon the ground of that objective atonement, and\n not upon the ground of the subjective cleansing.\n\n The Jews had a proverb that if only one man could perfectly keep\n the whole law even for one day, the kingdom of Messiah would at\n once come upon the earth. This is to state in another form the\n doctrine of Paul, in _Rom. 7:9_\u2014\u201c_When the commandment came, sin\n revived, and I died._\u201d To recognize the impossibility of being\n justified by Pharisaic works was a preparation for the gospel; see\n Bruce, Apologetics, 419. The Germans speak of Werk\u2010, Lehre\u2010,\n Buchstaben\u2010, Negations\u2010, Parteigerechtigkeit; but all these are\n forms of self\u2010righteousness. Berridge: \u201cA man may steal some gems\n from the crown of Jesus and be guilty only of petty larceny, ...\n but the man who would justify himself by his own works steals the\n crown itself, puts it on his own head, and proclaims himself by\n his own conquests a king in Zion.\u201d\n\n\nB. The difficult feature of justification is the declaration, on the part\nof God, that a sinner whose remaining sinfulness seems to necessitate the\nvindicative reaction of God\u2019s holiness against him, is yet free from such\nreaction of holiness as is expressed in the penalties of the law.\n\nThe fact is to be accepted on the testimony of Scripture. If this\ntestimony be not accepted, there is no deliverance from the condemnation\nof law. But the difficulty of conceiving of God\u2019s declaring the sinner no\nlonger exposed to legal penalty is relieved, if not removed, by the three\u2010\nfold consideration:\n\n(_a_) That Christ has endured the penalty of the law in the sinner\u2019s\nstead.\n\n\n _Gal. 3:13_\u2014\u201c_Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law, having\n become a curse for us._\u201d Denovan: \u201cWe are justified by faith,\n instrumentally, in the same sense as a debt is paid by a good note\n or a check on a substantial account in a distant bank. It is only\n the intelligent and honest acceptance of justification already\n provided.\u201d _Rom. 8:3_\u2014\u201c_God, sending his own Son ... condemned sin\n in the flesh_\u201d = the believer\u2019s sins were judged and condemned on\n Calvary. The way of pardon through Christ honors God\u2019s justice as\n well as God\u2019s mercy; _cf._ _Rom. 3:26_\u2014\u201c_that he might himself be\n just, and the justifier of him that hath faith in Jesus._\u201d\n\n\n(_b_) That the sinner is so united to Christ, that Christ\u2019s life already\nconstitutes the dominating principle within him.\n\n\n _Gal. 2:20_\u2014\u201c_I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no\n longer I that live, but Christ liveth in me._\u201d God does not\n justify any man whom he does not foresee that he can and will\n sanctify. Some prophecies produce their own fulfilment. Tell a man\n he is brave, and you help him to become so. So declaratory\n justification, when published in the heart by the Holy Spirit,\n helps to make men just. Harris, God the Creator, 2:332\u2014\u201cThe\n objection to the doctrine of justification by faith insists that\n justification must be conditioned, not on faith, but on right\n character. But justification by faith is itself the doctrine of a\n justification conditioned on right character, because faith in God\n is the only possible beginning of right character, either in men\n or angels.\u201d Gould, Bib. Theol. N. T., 67\u201079, in a similar manner\n argues that Paul\u2019s emphasis is on the spiritual effect of the\n death of our Lord, rather than on its expiatory effect. The course\n of thought in the Epistle to the Romans seems to us to contradict\n this view. Sin and the objective atonement for sin are first\n treated; only after justification comes the sanctification of the\n believer. Still it is true that justification is never the sole\n work of God in the soul. The same Christ in union with whom we are\n justified does at that same moment a work of regeneration which is\n followed by sanctification.\n\n\n(_c_) That this life of Christ is a power in the soul which will\ngradually, but infallibly, extirpate all remaining depravity, until the\nwhole physical and moral nature is perfectly conformed to the divine\nholiness.\n\n\n _Phil. 3:21_\u2014\u201c_who shall fashion anew the body of our humiliation,\n that it may be conformed to the body of his glory, according to\n the working whereby he is able even to subject all things unto\n himself_\u201d; _Col. 3:1\u20104_\u2014\u201c_If then ye were raised together with\n Christ, seek the things that are above, where Christ is, seated on\n the right hand of God. Set your mind on the things that are above,\n not on the things that are upon the earth. For ye died, and your\n life is hid with Christ in God. When Christ, who is our life,\n shall be manifested, then shall ye also with him be manifested in\n glory._\u201d\n\n Truth of fact, and ideal truth, are not opposed to each other. F.\n W. Robertson, Lectures and Addresses, 256\u2014\u201cWhen the agriculturist\n sees a small, white, almond\u2010like thing rising from the ground, he\n calls that an oak; but this is not a truth of fact, it is an ideal\n truth. The oak is a large tree, with spreading branches and leaves\n and acorns; but that is only a thing an inch long, and\n imperceptible in all its development; yet the agriculturist sees\n in it the idea of what it shall be, and, if I may borrow a\n Scriptural phrase, he _imputes_ to it the majesty, and excellence,\n and glory, that is to be hereafter.\u201d This method of representation\n is effective and unobjectionable, so long as we remember that the\n force which is to bring about this future development and\n perfection is not the force of unassisted human nature, but rather\n the force of Christ and his indwelling Spirit. See Philippi,\n Glaubenslehre, v, 1:201\u2010208.\n\n Gore, Incarnation, 224\u2014\u201c\u2019Looking at the mother,\u2019 wrote George\n Eliot of Mrs. Garth in The Mill on the Floss, \u2018you might hope that\n the daughter would become like her\u2014which is a prospective\n advantage equal to a dowry\u2014the mother too often standing behind\n the daughter like a malignant prophecy: Such as I am, she will\n shortly be.\u2019 George Eliot imputes by anticipation to the daughter\n the merits of the mother, because her life is, so to speak, of the\n same piece. Now, by new birth and spiritual union, our life is of\n the same piece with the life of Jesus. Thus he, our elder brother,\n stands behind us, his people, as a prophecy of all good. Thus God\n accepts us, deals with us, \u2018_in the Beloved_,\u2019 rating us at\n something of his value, imputing to us his merits, because in\n fact, except we be reprobates, he himself is the most powerful and\n real force at work in us.\u201d\n\n\n5. Relation of Justification to Union with Christ and the Work of the\nSpirit.\n\n\nA. Since the sinner, at the moment of justification, is not yet completely\ntransformed in character, we have seen that God can declare him just, not\non account of what he is in himself, but only on account of what Christ\nis. The ground of justification is therefore not, (_a_) as the Romanists\nhold, a new righteousness and love infused into us, and now constituting\nour moral character; nor, (_b_) as Osiander taught, the essential\nrighteousness of Christ\u2019s divine nature, which has become ours by faith;\nbut (_c_) the satisfaction and obedience of Christ, as the head of a new\nhumanity, and as embracing in himself all believers as his members.\n\n\n Ritschl regarded justification as primarily an endowment of the\n church, in which the individual participated only so far as he\n belonged to the church; see Pfleiderer, Die Ritschl\u2019sche\n Theologie, 70. Here Ritschl committed an error like that of the\n Romanist,\u2014the church is the door to Christ, instead of Christ\n being the door to the church. Justification belongs primarily to\n Christ, then to all who join themselves to Christ by faith, and\n the church is the natural and voluntary aggregation of those who\n in Christ are thus justified. Hence the necessity for the\n resurrection and ascension of the Lord Jesus. \u201cFor as the ministry\n of Enoch was sealed by his reception into heaven, and as the\n ministry of Elijah was also abundantly proved by his translation,\n so also the righteousness and innocence of Christ. But it was\n necessary that the ascension of Christ should be more fully\n attested, because upon his righteousness, so fully proved by his\n ascension, we must depend for all our righteousness. For if God\n had not approved him after his resurrection, and he had not taken\n his seat at his right hand, we could by no means be accepted of\n God\u201d (Cartwright).\n\n A. J. Gordon, Ministry of the Spirit, 46, 193, 195, 206\u2014\u201cChrist\n must be justified in the spirit and received up into glory, before\n he can be made righteousness to us and we can become the\n righteousness of God in him. Christ\u2019s coronation is the\n indispensable condition of our justification.... Christ the High\n Priest has entered the Holy of Holies in heaven for us. Until he\n comes forth again at the second advent, how can we be assured that\n his sacrifice for us is accepted? We reply: By the gift of the\n Holy Spirit. The presence of the Spirit in the church is the proof\n of the presence of Christ before the throne.... The Holy Spirit\n convinces of righteousness, \u2018_because I go unto the Father, and ye\n see me no more_\u2019 (_John 16:10_). We can only know that \u2018_we have a\n Paraclete with the Father, even Jesus Christ the Righteous_\u2019 (_1\n John 2:1_), by that \u2018_other Paraclete_\u2019 sent forth from the\n Father, even the Holy Spirit (_John 14:25, 26; 15:26_). The\n church, having the Spirit, reflects Christ to the world. As Christ\n manifests the Father, so the church through the Spirit manifests\n Christ. So Christ gives to us his name, \u2018Christians,\u2019 as the\n husband gives his name to the wife.\u201d\n\n\nAs Adam\u2019s sin is imputed to us, not because Adam is in us, but because we\nwere in Adam; so Christ\u2019s righteousness is imputed to us, not because\nChrist is in us, but because we are in Christ,\u2014that is, joined by faith to\none whose righteousness and life are infinitely greater than our power to\nappropriate or contain. In this sense, we may say that we are justified\nthrough a Christ outside of us, as we are sanctified through a Christ\nwithin us. Edwards: \u201cThe justification of the believer is no other than\nhis being admitted to communion in, or participation of, this head and\nsurety of all believers.\u201d\n\n\n _1 Tim. 1:14_\u2014\u201c_faith and love which is in Christ Jesus_\u201d;\n _3:16_\u2014\u201c_He who was manifested in the flesh, Justified in the\n spirit_\u201d; _Acts 13:39_\u2014\u201c_and by him_ [lit.: \u2018_in him_\u2019] _every one\n that believeth is justified from all things, from which ye could\n not be justified by the law of Moses_\u201d; _Rom. 4:25_\u2014\u201c_who was\n delivered up for our trespasses, and was raised for our\n justification_\u201d; _Eph. 1:6_\u2014\u201c_accepted in the Beloved_\u201d\u2014Rev.\n Vers.: \u201c_freely bestowed on us in the Beloved_\u201d; _1 Cor.\n 6:11_\u2014\u201c_justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ._\u201d \u201cWe in\n Christ\u201d is the formula of our justification; \u201cChrist in us\u201d is the\n formula of our sanctification. As the water which the shell\n contains is little compared with the great ocean which contains\n the shell, so the actual change wrought within us by God\u2019s\n sanctifying grace is slight compared with the boundless freedom\n from condemnation and the state of favor with God into which we\n are introduced by justification; _Rom. 5:1, 2_\u2014\u201c_Being therefore\n justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus\n Christ; through whom also we have had our access by faith into\n this grace wherein we stand; and we rejoice in hope of the glory\n of God._\u201d\n\n Here we have the third instance of imputation. The first was the\n imputation of Adam\u2019s sin to us; and the second was the imputation\n of our sins to Christ. The third is now the imputation of Christ\u2019s\n righteousness to us. In each of the former cases, we have sought\n to show that the legal relation presupposes a natural relation.\n Adam\u2019s sin is imputed to us, because we are one with Adam; our\n sins are imputed to Christ, because Christ is one with humanity.\n So here, we must hold that Christ\u2019s righteousness is imputed to\n us, because we are one with Christ. Justification is not an\n arbitrary transfer to us of the merits of another with whom we\n have no real connection. This would make it merely a legal\n fiction; and there are no legal fictions in the divine government.\n\n Instead of this external and mechanical method of conception, we\n should first set before us the fact of Christ\u2019s justification,\n after he had borne our sins and risen from the dead. In him,\n humanity, for the first time, is acquitted from punishment and\n restored to the divine favor. But Christ\u2019s new humanity is the\n germinal source of spiritual life for the race. He was justified,\n not simply as a private person, but as our representative and\n head. By becoming partakers of the new life in him, we share in\n all he is and all he has done; and, first of all, we share in his\n justification. So Luther gives us, for substance, the formula: \u201cWe\n in Christ = justification; Christ in us = sanctification.\u201d And in\n harmony with this formula is the statement quoted in the text\n above from Edwards, Works, 4:66.\n\n See also H. B. Smith, Presb. Rev., July, 1881\u2014\u201cUnion with Adam and\n with Christ is the ground of imputation. But the parallelism is\n incomplete. While the sin of Adam is imputed to us because it is\n ours, the righteousness of Christ is imputed to us simply because\n of our union with him, not at all because of our personal\n righteousness. In the one case, character is taken into the\n account; in the other, it is not. In sin, our demerits are\n included; in justification, our merits are excluded.\u201d For further\n statements of Dr. Smith, see his System of Christian Theology,\n 524\u2010552.\n\n C. H. M. on Genesis, page 78\u2014\u201cThe question for every believer is\n not \u2018What am I?\u2019 but \u2018What is Christ?\u2019 Of Abel it is said: \u2018_God\n testified of his gifts_\u2019 (_Heb. 11:4_, A. V.). So God testifies,\n not of the believer, but of his gift,\u2014and his gift is Christ. Yet\n Cain was angry because he was not received _in his sins_, while\n Abel was accepted _in his gift_. This was right, if Abel was\n justified in himself; it was wrong, because Abel was justified\n only in Christ.\u201d See also Hodge, Outlines of Theology, 384\u2010388,\n 392; Baird, Elohim Revealed, 448.\n\n\nB. The relation of justification to regeneration and sanctification,\nmoreover, delivers it from the charges of externality and immorality. God\ndoes not justify ungodly men in their ungodliness. He pronounces them just\nonly as they are united to Christ, who is absolutely just, and who, by his\nSpirit, can make them just, not only in the eye of the law, but in moral\ncharacter. The very faith by which the sinner receives Christ is an act in\nwhich he ratifies all that Christ has done, and accepts God\u2019s judgment\nagainst sin as his own (John 16:11).\n\n\n _John 16:11_\u2014\u201c_of judgment, because the prince of this world hath\n been judged_\u201d\u2014the Holy Spirit leads the believer to ratify God\u2019s\n judgment against sin and Satan. Accepting Christ, the believer\n accepts Christ\u2019s death for sin, and resurrection to life for his\n own. If it were otherwise, the first act of the believer, after\n his discharge, might be a repetition of his offences. Such a\n justification would offend against the fundamental principles of\n justice and the safety of government. It would also fail to\n satisfy the conscience. This clamors not only for pardon, but for\n renewal. Union with Christ has one legal fruit\u2014justification; but\n it has also one moral fruit\u2014sanctification.\n\n A really guilty man, when acquitted by judge and jury, does not\n cease to be the victim of remorse and fear. Forgiveness of sin is\n not in itself a deliverance from sin. The outward acquittal needs\n to be accompanied by an inward change to be really effective.\n Pardon for sin without power to overcome sin would be a mockery of\n the criminal. Justification for Christ\u2019s sake therefore goes into\n effect through regeneration by the Holy Spirit; see E. H. Johnson,\n in Bib. Sac., July, 1892:362.\n\n A Buddhist priest who had studied some years in England printed in\n Shanghai not long ago a pamphlet entitled \u201cJustification by Faith\n the only true Basis of Morality.\u201d It argues that any other\n foundation is nothing but pure selfishness, but that morality, to\n have any merit, must be unselfish. Justification by faith supplies\n an unselfish motive, because we accept the work done for us by\n another, and we ourselves work from gratitude, which is not a\n selfish motive. After laying down this Christian foundation, the\n writer erects the structure of faith in the Amida incarnation of\n Buddha. Buddhism opposes to the Christian doctrine of a creative\n Person, only a creative process; sin has relation only to the man\n sinning, and has no relation to Amida Buddha or to the eternal law\n of causation; salvation by faith in Amida Buddha is faith in one\n who is the product of a process, and a product may perish.\n Tennyson: \u201cThey are but broken lights of Thee, And thou, O Christ,\n art more than they.\u201d\n\n\nJustification is possible, therefore, because it is always accompanied by\nregeneration and union with Christ, and is followed by sanctification. But\nthis is a very different thing from the Romanist confounding of\njustification and sanctification, as different stages of the same process\nof making the sinner actually holy. It holds fast to the Scripture\ndistinction between justification as a declarative act of God, and\nregeneration and sanctification as those efficient acts of God by which\njustification is accompanied and followed.\n\n\n Both history and our personal observation show that nothing can\n change the life and make men moral, like the gospel of free pardon\n in Jesus Christ. Mere preaching of morality will effect nothing of\n consequence. There never has been more insistence upon morality\n than in the most immoral times, like those of Seneca, and of the\n English deists. As to their moral fruits, we can safely compare\n Protestant with Roman Catholic systems and leaders and countries.\n We do not become right by doing right, for only those can do right\n who have become right. The prodigal son is forgiven before he\n actually confesses and amends (_Luke 15:20, 21_). Justification is\n always accompanied by regeneration, and is followed by\n sanctification; and all three are results of the death of Christ.\n But the sin\u2010offering must precede the thank\u2010offering. We must\n first be accepted ourselves before we can offer gifts; _Heb.\n 11:4_\u2014\u201c_By faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice\n than Cain, through which he had witness borne to him that he was\n righteous, God bearing witness in respect of his gifts._\u201d\n\n Hence we read in _Eph. 5:25, 26_\u2014\u201c_Christ also loved the church,\n and gave himself up for it; that he might sanctify it, having\n cleansed_ = [after he had cleansed] _it by the washing of water\n with the word_\u201d [= regeneration]; _1 Pet. 1:1, 2_\u2014\u201c_elect ...\n according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, in\n sanctification of the Spirit_ [regeneration], _unto obedience_\n [conversion] _and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ_\n [justification]\u201d; _1 John 1:7_\u2014\u201c_if we walk in the light, as he is\n in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood\n of Jesus his Son cleanseth us from all sin_\u201d\u2014here the \u201ccleansing\u201d\n refers primarily and mainly to justification, not to\n sanctification; for the apostle himself declares in _verse 8_\u2014\u201c_If\n we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is\n not in us._\u201d\n\n Quenstedt says well, that \u201cjustification, since it is an act,\n outside of man, in God, cannot produce an intrinsic change in us.\u201d\n And yet, he says, \u201calthough faith alone justifies, yet faith is\n not alone.\u201d Melanchthon: \u201cSola fides justificat; sed fides non est\n sola.\u201d With faith go all manner of gifts of the Spirit and\n internal graces of character. But we should let go all the\n doctrinal gains of the Reformation if we did not insist that these\n gifts and graces are accompaniments and consequences of\n justification, instead of being a part or a ground of\n justification. See Girdlestone, O. T. Synonyms, 104,\n note\u2014\u201cJustification is God\u2019s declaration that the individual\n sinner, on account of the faith which unites him to Christ, is\n taken up into the relation which Christ holds to the Father, and\n has applied to him personally the objective work accomplished for\n humanity by Christ.\u201d\n\n\n6. Relation of Justification to Faith.\n\n\nA. We are justified by faith, rather than by love or by any other grace:\n(_a_) not because faith is itself a work of obedience by which we merit\njustification,\u2014for this would be a doctrine of justification by works;\n(_b_) nor because faith is accepted as an equivalent of obedience,\u2014for\nthere is no equivalent except the perfect obedience of Christ; (_c_) nor\nbecause faith is the germ from which obedience may spring hereafter,\u2014for\nit is not the faith which accepts, but the Christ who is accepted, that\nrenders such obedience possible; but (_d_) because faith, and not\nrepentance, or love, or hope, is the medium or instrument by which we\nreceive Christ and are united to him. Hence we are never said to be\njustified \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03bd, = on account of faith, but only \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2, =\nthrough faith, or \u1f10\u03ba \u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2, = by faith. Or, to express the same truth in\nother words, while the grace of God is the efficient cause of\njustification, and the obedience and sufferings of Christ are the\nmeritorious or procuring cause, faith is the mediate or instrumental\ncause.\n\n\n Edwards, Works, 4:69\u201073\u2014\u201cFaith justifies, because faith includes\n the whole act of unition to Christ as a Savior. It is not the\n nature of any other graces or virtues directly to close with\n Christ as a mediator, any further than they enter into the\n constitution of justifying faith, and do belong to its nature\u201d;\n Observations on Trinity, 64\u201067\u2014\u201cSalvation is not offered to us\n upon any condition, but freely and for nothing. We are to do\n nothing for it,\u2014we are only to take it. This taking and receiving\n is faith.\u201d H. B. Smith, System, 524\u2014\u201cAn internal change is a _sine\n qua non_ of justification, but not its meritorious ground.\u201d Give a\n man a gold mine. It is _his_. He has not to work _for_ it; he has\n only to work _it_. Working _for_ life is one thing; working _from_\n life is quite another. The marriage of a poor girl to a wealthy\n proprietor makes her possessor of his riches despite her former\n poverty. Yet her acceptance has not _purchased_ wealth. It is\n hers, not because of what she is or has done, but because of what\n her husband is and has done. So faith is the condition of\n justification, only because through it Christ becomes ours, and\n with him his atonement and righteousness. Salvation comes not\n because our faith saves us, but because it links us to the Christ\n who saves; and believing is only the link. There is no more merit\n in it than in the beggar\u2019s stretching forth his hand to receive\n the offered purse, or the drowning man\u2019s grasping the rope that is\n thrown to him.\n\n The Wesleyan scheme is inclined to make faith a work. See Dabney,\n Theology, 637. This is to make faith _the_ cause and ground, or at\n least to add it to Christ\u2019s work as a _joint_ cause and ground, of\n justification; as if justification were \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03bd, instead of \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70\n \u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 or \u1f10\u03ba \u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2. Since faith is never perfect, this is to go\n back to the Roman Catholic uncertainty of salvation. See Dorner,\n Glaubenslehre, 2:744, 745 (Syst. Doct., 4:206, 207). C. H. M. on\n _Gen. 3:7_\u2014\u201cThey made themselves aprons of fig\u2010leaves, before God\n made them coats of skin. Man ever tries to clothe himself in\n garments of his own righteousness, before he will take the robe of\n Christ\u2019s. But Adam felt himself naked when God visited him, even\n though he had his fig\u2010leaves on him.\u201d\n\n We are justified efficiently by the grace of God, meritoriously by\n Christ, instrumentally by faith, evidentially by works. Faith\n justifies, as roots bring plant and soil together. Faith connects\n man with the source of life in Christ. \u201cWhen the boatman with his\n hook grapples the rock, he does not pull the shore to the boat,\n but the boat to the shore; so, when we by faith lay hold on\n Christ, we do not pull Christ to us, but ourselves to him.\u201d Faith\n is a coupling; the train is drawn, not by the coupling, but by the\n locomotive; yet without the coupling it would not be drawn. Faith\n is the trolley that reaches up to the electric wire; when the\n connection is sundered, not only does the car cease to move, but\n the heat dies and the lights go out. Dr. John Duncan: \u201cI have\n married the Merchant and all his wealth is mine!\u201d\n\n H. C. Trumbull: \u201cIf a man wants to cross the ocean, he can either\n try swimming, or he can trust the captain of a ship to carry him\n over in his vessel. By or through his faith in that captain, the\n man is carried safely to the other shore; yet it is the ship\u2019s\n captain, not the passenger\u2019s faith, which is to be praised for the\n carrying.\u201d So the sick man trusts his case in the hands of his\n physician, and his life is saved by the physician,\u2014yet by or\n through the patient\u2019s faith. This faith is indeed an inward act of\n allegiance, and no mere outward performance. Whiton, Divine\n Satisfaction, 92\u2014\u201cThe Protestant Reformers saw that it was by an\n inward act, not by penances or sacraments that men were justified.\n But they halted in the crude notion of a legal court room process,\n a governmental procedure external to us, whereas it is an\n educational, inward process, the awakening through Christ of the\n filial spirit in us, which in the midst of imperfections strives\n for likeness more and more to the Son of God. Justification by\n principle apart from performance makes Christianity the religion\n of the spirit.\u201d We would add that such justification excludes\n education, and is an act rather than a process, an act external to\n the sinner rather than internal, an act of God rather than an act\n of man. The justified person can say to Christ, as Ruth said to\n Boaz: \u201c_Why have I found favor in thy sight, that thou shouldest\n take knowledge of me, seeing I am a foreigner?_\u201d (_Ruth 2:10_).\n\n\nB. Since the ground of justification is only Christ, to whom we are united\nby faith, the justified person has peace. If it were anything in\nourselves, our peace must needs be proportioned to our holiness. The\npractical effect of the Romanist mingling of works with faith, as a joint\nground of justification, is to render all assurance of salvation\nimpossible. (Council of Trent, 9th chap.: \u201cEvery man, by reason of his own\nweakness and defects, must be in fear and anxiety about his state of\ngrace. Nor can any one know, with infallible certainty of faith, that he\nhas received forgiveness of God.\u201d). But since justification is an\ninstantaneous act of God, complete at the moment of the sinner\u2019s first\nbelieving, it has no degrees. Weak faith justifies as perfectly as strong\nfaith; although, since justification is a secret act of God, weak faith\ndoes not give so strong assurance of salvation.\n\n\n Foundations of our Faith, 216\u2014\u201cThe Catholic doctrine declares that\n justification is not dependent upon faith and the righteousness of\n Christ imputed and granted thereto, but on the actual condition of\n the man himself. But there remain in the man an undeniable amount\n of fleshly lusts or inclinations to sin, even though the man be\n regenerate. The Catholic doctrine is therefore constrained to\n assert that these lusts are not in themselves sinful, or objects\n of the divine displeasure. They are allowed to remain in the man,\n that he may struggle against them; and, as they say, Paul\n designates them as sinful, only because they are derived from sin,\n and incite to sin; but they only become sin by the positive\n concurrence of the human will. But is not internal lust\n displeasing to God? Can we draw the line between lust and will?\n The Catholic favors self here, and makes many things _lust_, which\n are really _will_. A Protestant is necessarily more earnest in the\n work of salvation, when he recognizes even the evil desire as sin,\n according to Christ\u2019s precept.\u201d\n\n All systems of religion of merely human origin tend to make\n salvation, in larger or smaller degree, the effect of human works,\n but only with the result of leaving man in despair. See, in\n Ecclesiasticus 3:30, an Apocryphal declaration that alms make\n atonement for sin. So Romanism bids me doubt God\u2019s grace and the\n forgiveness of sins. See Dorner, Gesch. prot. Theol., 228, 229,\n and his quotations from Luther. \u201cBut if the Romanist doctrine is\n true, that a man is justified only in such measure as he is\n sanctified, then: 1. Justification must be a matter of degrees,\n and so the Council of Trent declares it to be. The sacraments\n which sanctify are therefore essential, that one may be\n increasingly justified. 2. Since justification is a continuous\n process, the redeeming death of Christ, on which it depends, must\n be a continuous process also; hence its prolonged reiteration in\n the sacrifice by the Mass. 3. Since sanctification is obviously\n never completed in this life, no man ever dies completely\n justified; hence the doctrine of Purgatory.\u201d For the substance of\n Romanist doctrine, see Moehler, Symbolism, 79\u2010190; Newman,\n Lectures on Justification, 253\u2010345; Ritschl, Christian Doctrine of\n Justification, 121\u2010226.\n\n A better doctrine is that of the Puritan divine: \u201cIt is not the\n quantity of thy faith that shall save thee. A drop of water is as\n true water as the whole ocean. So a little faith is as true faith\n as the greatest. It is not the measure of thy faith that saves\n thee,\u2014it is the blood that it grips to that saves thee. The weak\n hand of the child, that leads the spoon to the mouth, will feed as\n well as the strong arm of a man; for it is not the hand that\n feeds, but the meat. So, if thou canst grip Christ ever so weakly,\n he will not let thee perish.\u201d I am troubled about the money I owe\n in New York, until I find that a friend has paid my debt there.\n When I find that the objective account against me is cancelled,\n then and only then do I have subjective peace.\n\n A child may be heir to a vast estate, even while he does not know\n it; and a child of God may be an heir of glory, even while,\n through the weakness of his faith, he is oppressed with painful\n doubts and fears. No man is lost simply because of the greatness\n of his sins; however ill\u2010deserving he may be, faith in Christ will\n save him. Luther\u2019s climbing the steps of St. John Lateran, and the\n voice of thunder: \u201cThe just shall live by faith,\u201d are not certain\n as historical facts; but they express the substance of Luther\u2019s\n experience. Not obeying, but receiving, is the substance of the\n gospel. A man cannot merit salvation; he cannot buy it; but one\n thing he must do,\u2014he must take it. And the least faith makes\n salvation ours, because it makes Christ ours.\n\n Augustine conceived of justification as a continuous process,\n proceeding until love and all Christian virtues fill the heart.\n There is his chief difference from Paul. Augustine believes in sin\n and grace. But he has not the freedom of the children of God, as\n Paul has. The influence of Augustine upon Roman Catholic theology\n has not been wholly salutary. The Roman Catholic, mixing man\u2019s\n subjective condition with God\u2019s grace as a ground of\n justification, continually wavers between self\u2010righteousness and\n uncertainty of acceptance with God, each of these being fatal to a\n healthful and stable religious life. High\u2010church Episcopalians,\n and Sacramentalists generally, are afflicted with this distemper\n of the Romanists. Dr. R. W. Dale remarks with regard to Dr. Pusey:\n \u201cThe absence of joy in his religious life was only the inevitable\n effect of his conception of God\u2019s method of saving men; in parting\n with the Lutheran truth concerning justification, he parted with\n the springs of gladness.\u201d Spurgeon said that a man might get from\n London to New York provided he took a steamer; but it made much\n difference in his comfort whether he had a first class or a second\n class ticket. A new realization of the meaning of justification in\n our churches would change much of our singing from the minor to\n the major key; would lead us to pray, not _for_ the presence of\n Christ, but _from_ the presence of Christ; would abolish the\n mournful upward inflections at the end of sentences which give\n such unreality to our preaching; and would replace the pessimistic\n element in our modern work and worship with the notes of praise\n and triumph. In the Pilgrim\u2019s Progress, the justification of the\n believer is symbolized by Christian\u2019s lodging in the Palace\n Beautiful whose window opened toward the sunrising.\n\n Even Luther did not fully apprehend and apply his favorite\n doctrine of justification by faith. Harnack, Wesen des\n Christenthums, 168 _sq._, states the fundamental principles of\n Protestantism as: \u201c1. The Christian religion is wholly given in\n the word of God and in the inner experience which answers to that\n word. 2. The assured belief that the Christian has a gracious God.\n \u2018Nun weisz und glaub\u2019 ich\u2019s feste, Ich r\u00fchm\u2019s auch ohne Scheu,\n Dasz Gott, der h\u00f6chst\u2019 und beste, Mein Freund und Vater sei; Und\n dasz in allen F\u00e4llen Er mir zur Rechten steh\u2019, Und dampfe Sturm\n und Wellen, Und was mir bringet Weh\u2019.\u2019 3. Restoration of simple\n and believing worship, both public and private. But Luther took\n too much dogma into Christianity; insisted too much on the\n authority of the written word; cared too much for the _means_ of\n grace, such as the Lord\u2019s Supper; identified the church too much\n with the organized body.\u201d Yet Luther talked of beating the heads\n of the Wittenbergers with the Bible, so as to get the great\n doctrine of justification by faith into their brains. \u201cWhy do you\n teach your child the same thing twenty times?\u201d he said. \u201cBecause I\n find that nineteen times is not sufficient.\u201d\n\n\nC. Justification is instantaneous, complete, and final: instantaneous,\nsince otherwise there would be an interval during which the soul was\nneither approved nor condemned by God (Mat. 6:24); complete, since the\nsoul, united to Christ by faith, becomes partaker of his complete\nsatisfaction to the demands of law (Col. 2:9, 10); and final, since the\nunion with Christ is indissoluble (John 10:28, 29). As there are many acts\nof sin in the life of the Christian, so there are many acts of pardon\nfollowing them. But all these acts of pardon are virtually implied in that\nfirst act by which he was finally and forever justified; as also\nsuccessive acts of repentance and faith, after such sins, are virtually\nimplied in that first repentance and faith which logically preceded\njustification.\n\n\n _Mat. 6:24_\u2014\u201c_No man can serve two masters_\u201d; _Col. 2:9, 10_\u2014\u201c_in\n him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily, and in him ye\n are made full, who is the head of all principality and power_\u201d;\n _John 10:28, 29_\u2014\u201c_they shall never perish, and no one shall\n snatch them out of my hand. My Father, who hath given them unto\n me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of\n the Father\u2019s hand._\u201d\n\n Plymouth Brethren say truly that the Christian has sin in him, but\n not on him, because Christ had sin on him, but not in him. The\n Christian has sin but not guilt, because Christ had guilt but not\n sin. All our sins are buried in the grave with Christ, and\n Christ\u2019s resurrection is our resurrection. Toplady: \u201cFrom whence\n this fear and unbelief? Hast thou, O Father, put to grief Thy\n spotless Son for me? And will the righteous Judge of men Condemn\n me for that debt of sin, Which, Lord, was laid on thee? If thou\n hast my discharge procured, And freely in my room endured The\n whole of wrath divine, Payment God cannot twice demand, First at\n my bleeding Surety\u2019s hand, And then again at mine. Complete\n atonement thou hast made, And to the utmost farthing paid Whate\u2019er\n thy people owed; How then can wrath on me take place, If sheltered\n in thy righteousness And sprinkled with thy blood? Turn, then, my\n soul, unto thy rest; The merits of thy great High\u2010priest Speak\n peace and liberty; Trust in his efficacious blood, Nor fear thy\n banishment from God, Since Jesus died for thee!\u201d\n\n Justification, however, is not eternal in the past. We are to\n repent unto the remission of our sins (_Act 2:38_). Remission\n comes after repentance. Sin is not pardoned before it is\n committed. In justification God grants us actual pardon for past\n sin, but virtual pardon for future sin. Edwards, Works,\n 4:104\u2014\u201cFuture sins are respected, in that first justification, no\n otherwise than as future faith and repentance are respected in it;\n and future faith and repentance are looked upon by him that\n justifies as virtually implied in that first repentance and faith,\n in the same manner that justification from future sins is implied\n in that first justification.\u201d\n\n A man is not justified from his sins before he has committed them,\n nor is he saved before he is born. A remarkable illustration of\n the extreme to which hyper\u2010Calvinism may go is found in Tobias\n Crisp, Sermons, 1:358\u2014\u201cThe Lord hath no more to lay to the charge\n of an elect person, yet in the height of iniquity, and in the\n excess of riot, and committing all the abomination that can be\n committed ... than he has to the charge of the saint triumphant in\n glory.\u201d A far better statement is found in Moberly, Atonement and\n Personality, 61\u2014\u201cAs there is upon earth no consummated penitence,\n so neither is there any forgiveness consummated.... Forgiveness is\n the recognition, by anticipation, of something which is to be,\n something toward which it is itself a mighty quickening of\n possibilities, but something which is not, or at least is not\n perfectly, yet.... Present forgiveness is inchoate, is\n educational.... It reaches its final and perfect consummation only\n when the forgiven penitent has become at last personally and\n completely righteous. If the consummation is not reached but\n reversed, then forgiveness is forfeited (_Mat. 18:32\u201035_).\u201d This\n last exception, however, as we shall see in our discussion of\n Perseverance, is only a hypothetical one. The truly forgiven do\n not finally fall away.\n\n\n7. Advice to Inquirers demanded by a Scriptural View of Justification.\n\n\n(_a_) Where conviction of sin is yet lacking, our aim should be to show\nthe sinner that he is under God\u2019s condemnation for his past sins, and that\nno future obedience can ever secure his justification, since this\nobedience, even though perfect, could not atone for the past, and even if\nit could, he is unable, without God\u2019s help, to render it.\n\n\n With the help of the Holy Spirit, conviction of sin may be roused\n by presentation of the claims of God\u2019s perfect law, and by drawing\n attention, first to particular overt transgressions, and then to\n the manifold omissions of duty, the general lack of supreme and\n all\u2010pervading love to God, and the guilty rejection of Christ\u2019s\n offers and commands. \u201cEven if the next page of the copy book had\n no blots or erasures, its cleanness would not alter the smudges\n and misshapen letters on the earlier pages.\u201d God takes no notice\n of the promise \u201c_Have patience with me, and I will pay thee_\u201d\n (_Mat. 18:29_), for he knows it can never be fulfilled.\n\n\n(_b_) Where conviction of sin already exists, our aim should be, not, in\nthe first instance, to secure the performance of external religious\nduties, such as prayer, or Scripture\u2010reading, or uniting with the church,\nbut to induce the sinner, as his first and all\u2010inclusive duty, to accept\nChrist as his only and sufficient sacrifice and Savior, and, committing\nhimself and the matter of his salvation entirely to the hands of Christ,\nto manifest this trust and submission by entering at once upon a life of\nobedience to Christ\u2019s commands.\n\n\n A convicted sinner should be exhorted, not first to prayer and\n then to faith, but first to faith, and then to the immediate\n expression of that faith in prayer and Christian activity. He\n should pray, not _for_ faith, but _in_ faith. It should not be\n forgotten that the sinner never sins against so much light, and\n never is in so great danger, as when he is convicted but not\n converted, when he is moved to turn but yet refuses to turn. No\n such sinner should be allowed to think that he has the right to do\n any other thing whatever before accepting Christ. This accepting\n Christ is not an outward act, but an inward act of mind and heart\n and will, although believing is naturally evidenced by immediate\n outward action. To teach the sinner, however apparently well\n disposed, how to believe on Christ, is beyond the power of man.\n God is the only giver of faith. But Scripture instances of faith,\n and illustrations drawn from the child\u2019s taking the father at his\n word and acting upon it, have often been used by the Holy Spirit\n as means of leading men themselves to put faith in Christ.\n\n Bengel: \u201cThose who are secure Jesus refers to the law; those who\n are contrite he consoles with the gospel.\u201d A man left work and\n came home. His wife asked why. \u201cBecause I am a sinner.\u201d \u201cLet me\n send for the preacher.\u201d \u201cI am too far gone for preachers. If the\n Lord Jesus Christ does not save me I am lost.\u201d That man needed\n only to be pointed to the Cross. There he found reason for\n believing that there was salvation for him. In surrendering\n himself to Christ he was justified. On the general subject of\n Justification, see Edwards, Works, 4:64\u2010132; Buchanan on\n Justification, 250\u2010411; Owen on Justification, in Works, vol. 5;\n Bp. of Ossory, Nature and Effects of Faith, 48\u2010152; Hodge, Syst.\n Theol., 3:114\u2010212; Thomasius, Christi Person und Werk, 3:133\u2010200;\n Herzog, Encyclop\u00e4die, art.: Rechtfertigung; Bushnell, Vicarious\n Sacrifice, 416\u2010420, 435.\n\n\n\nSection III.\u2014The Application Of Christ\u2019s Redemption In Its Continuation.\n\n\nUnder this head we treat of Sanctification and of Perseverance. These two\nare but the divine and the human sides of the same fact, and they bear to\neach other a relation similar to that which exists between Regeneration\nand Conversion.\n\n\nI. Sanctification.\n\n\n1. Definition of Sanctification.\n\n\nSanctification is that continuous operation of the Holy Spirit, by which\nthe holy disposition imparted in regeneration is maintained and\nstrengthened.\n\n\n Godet: \u201cThe work of Jesus in the world is twofold. It is a work\n accomplished _for us_, destined to effect _reconciliation_ between\n God and man; it is a work accomplished _in us_, with the object of\n effecting our _sanctification_. By the one, a right _relation_ is\n established between God and us; by the other, the _fruit_ of the\n re\u00ebstablished order is secured. By the former, the condemned\n sinner is received into the state of grace; by the latter, the\n pardoned sinner is associated with the life of God.... How many\n express themselves as if, when forgiveness with the peace which it\n procures has been once obtained, all is finished and the work of\n salvation is complete! They seem to have no suspicion that\n salvation consists in the health of the soul, and that the health\n of the soul consists in holiness. Forgiveness is not the\n re\u00ebstablishment of health; it is the crisis of convalescence. If\n God thinks fit to declare the sinner righteous, it is in order\n that he may by that means restore him to holiness.\u201d O. P. Gifford:\n \u201cThe steamship whose machinery is broken may be brought into port\n and made fast to the dock. She is _safe_, but not _sound_. Repairs\n may last a long time. Christ designs to make us both safe and\n sound. Justification gives the first\u2014safety; sanctification gives\n the second\u2014soundness.\u201d\n\n Bradford, Heredity and Christian Problems, 220\u2014\u201cTo be conscious\n that one is forgiven, and yet that at the same time he is so\n polluted that he cannot beget a child without handing on to that\n child a nature which will be as bad as if his father had never\n been forgiven, is not salvation in any _real_ sense.\u201d We would\n say: Is not salvation in any _complete_ sense. Justification needs\n sanctification to follow it. Man needs God to continue and\n preserve his spiritual life, just as much as he needed God to\n begin it at the first. Creation in the spiritual, as well as in\n the natural world, needs to be supplemented by preservation; see\n quotation from Jonathan Edwards, in Allen\u2019s biography of him, 371.\n\n Regeneration is instantaneous, but sanctification takes time. The\n \u201cdeveloping\u201d of the photographer\u2019s picture may illustrate God\u2019s\n process of sanctifying the regenerate soul. But it is development\n by new access of truth or light, while the photographer\u2019s picture\n is usually developed in the dark. This development cannot be\n accomplished in a moment. \u201cWe try in our religious lives to\n practise instantaneous photography. One minute for prayer will\n give us a vision of God, and we think that is enough. Our pictures\n are poor because our negatives are weak. We do not give God a long\n enough sitting to get a good likeness.\u201d\n\n Salvation is something past, something present, and something\n future; a past fact, justification; a present process,\n sanctification; a future consummation, redemption and glory.\n David, in Ps. 51:1, 2, prays not only that God will blot out his\n transgressions (justification), but that God will wash him\n thoroughly from his iniquity (sanctification). E. G. Robinson:\n \u201cSanctification consists _negatively_, in the removal of the penal\n consequences of sin from the moral nature; _positively_, in the\n progressive implanting and growth of a new principle of life....\n The Christian church is a succession of copies of the character of\n Christ. Paul never says: \u2018_be ye imitators of me_\u2019 (_1 Cor.\n 4:16_), except when writing to those who had no copies of the New\n Testament or of the Gospels.\u201d\n\n Clarke, Christian Theology, 366\u2014\u201cSanctification does not mean\n perfection reached, but the progress of the divine life toward\n perfection. Sanctification is the Christianizing of the\n Christian.\u201d It is not simply deliverance from the penalty of sin,\n but the development of a divine life that conquers sin. A. A.\n Hodge, Popular Lectures, 343\u2014\u201cAny man who thinks he is a\n Christian, and that he has accepted Christ for justification, when\n he did not at the same time accept him for sanctification, is\n miserably deluded in that very experience.\u201d\n\n\nThis definition implies:\n\n(_a_) That, although in regeneration the governing disposition of the soul\nis made holy, there still remain tendencies to evil which are unsubdued.\n\n\n _John 13:10_\u2014\u201c_He that is bathed needeth not save to wash his\n feet, but is clean every whit_ [_i. e._, as a whole]\u201d; _Rom.\n 6:12_\u2014\u201c_Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, that ye\n should obey the lusts thereof_\u201d\u2014sin _dwells_ in a believer, but it\n _reigns_ in an unbeliever (C. H. M.). Subordinate volitions in the\n Christian are not always determined in character by the\n fundamental choice; eddies in the stream sometimes run counter to\n the general course of the current.\n\n This doctrine is the opposite of that expressed in the phrase:\n \u201cthe essential divinity of the human.\u201d Not culture, but\n crucifixion, is what the Holy Spirit prescribes for the natural\n man. There are two natures in the Christian, as Paul shows in\n _Romans 7_. The one flourishes at the other\u2019s expense. The vine\n dresser has to cut the rank shoots from self, that all our force\n may be thrown into growing fruit. Deadwood must be cut out; living\n wood must be cut back (_John 15:2_). Sanctification is not a\n matter of course, which will go on whatever we do, or do not do.\n It requires a direct superintendence and surgery on the one hand,\n and, on the other hand a practical hatred of evil on our part that\n co\u00f6perates with the husbandry of God.\n\n\n(_b_) That the existence in the believer of these two opposing principles\ngives rise to a conflict which lasts through life.\n\n\n _Gal. 5:17_\u2014\u201c_For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the\n Spirit against the flesh; for these are contrary the one to the\n other; that ye may not do the things that ye would_\u201d\u2014not, as the\n A. V. had it, \u201c_so that ye cannot do the things that ye would_\u201d;\n the Spirit who dwells in believers is represented as enabling them\n successfully to resist those tendencies to evil which naturally\n exist within them; _James 4:5_ (the marginal and better\n reading)\u2014\u201c_That spirit which he made to dwell in us yearneth for\n us even unto jealous envy_\u201d\u2014_i. e._, God\u2019s love, like all true\n love, longs to have its objects wholly for its own. The Christian\n is two men in one; but he is to \u201c_put away the old man_\u201d and \u201c_put\n on the new man_\u201d (_Eph. 4:22, 23_). Compare Ecclesiasticus 2:1\u2014\u201cMy\n son, if thou dost set out to serve the Lord, prepare thy soul for\n temptation.\u201d\n\n _1 Tim. 6:12_\u2014\u201c_fight the good fight of the faith_\u201d\u2014\u1f00\u03b3\u03c9\u03bd\u03af\u03b6\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd\n \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u1f78\u03bd \u1f00\u03b3\u1ff6\u03bd\u03b1 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 = the beautiful, honorable, glorious\n fight; since it has a noble helper, incentive, and reward. It is\n the commonest of all struggles, but the issue determines our\n destiny. An Indian received as a gift some tobacco in which he\n found a half dollar hidden. He brought it back next day, saying\n that good Indian had fought all night with bad Indian, one telling\n him to keep, the other telling him to return.\n\n\n(_c_) That in this conflict the Holy Spirit enables the Christian, through\nincreasing faith, more fully and consciously to appropriate Christ, and\nthus progressively to make conquest of the remaining sinfulness of his\nnature.\n\n\n _Rom. 8:13, 14_\u2014\u201c_for if ye live after the flesh, ye must die; but\n if by the Spirit ye put to death the deeds of the body, ye shall\n live. For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are sons\n of God_\u201d; _1 Cor. 6:11_\u2014\u201c_but ye were washed, but ye were\n sanctified, but ye were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus\n Christ, and in the Spirit of our God_\u201d; _James 1:26_\u2014\u201c_If any man\n thinketh himself to be religious, while he bridleth not his tongue\n but deceiveth his heart, this man\u2019s religion is vain_\u201d\u2014see Com. of\n Neander, _in loco_\u2014\u201cThat religion is merely imaginary, seeming,\n unreal, which allows the continuance of the moral defects\n originally predominant in the character.\u201d The Christian is\n \u201c_crucified with Christ_\u201d (_Gal. 2:20_); but the crucified man\n does not die at once. Yet he is as good as dead. Even after the\n old man is crucified we are still to mortify him, or put him to\n death (_Rom. 8:13; Col. 3:5_). We are to cut down the old rosebush\n and cultivate only the new shoot that is grafted into it. Here is\n our probation as Christians. So \u201cdie Scene wird zum Tribunal\u201d\u2014the\n play of life becomes God\u2019s judgment.\n\n Dr. Hastings: \u201cWhen Bourdaloue was probing the conscience of Louis\n XIV, applying to him the words of St. Paul and intending to\n paraphrase them: \u2018_For the good which I would, I do not, but the\n evil which I would not, that I do,_\u2019 \u2018_I find two men in me_\u2019\u2014the\n King interrupted the great preacher with the memorable\n exclamation: \u2018Ah, these two men, I know them well!\u2019 Bourdaloue\n answered: \u2018It is already something to _know_ them, Sire; but it is\n not enough,\u2014one of the two must perish.\u2019 \u201d And, in the genuine\n believer, the old does little by little die, and the new takes its\n place, as \u201c_David waxed stronger and stronger, but the house of\n Saul waxed weaker and weaker_\u201d (_2 Sam. 3:1_). As the Welsh\n minister found himself after awhile thinking and dreaming in\n English, so the language of Canaan becomes to the Christian his\n native and only speech.\n\n\n2. Explanations and Scripture Proof.\n\n\n(_a_) Sanctification is the work of God.\n\n\n _1 Thess. 5:23_\u2014\u201c_And the God of peace himself sanctify you\n wholly._\u201d Much of our modern literature ignores man\u2019s dependence\n upon God, and some of it seems distinctly intended to teach the\n opposite doctrine. Auerbach\u2019s \u201cOn the Heights,\u201d for example,\n teaches that man can make his own atonement; and \u201cThe Villa on the\n Rhine,\u201d by the same author, teaches that man can sanctify himself.\n The proper inscription for many modern French novels is:\n \u201cEntertainment here for man and beast.\u201d The _Tendenznovelle_ of\n Germany has its imitators in the sceptical novels of England. And\n no doctrine in these novels is so common as the doctrine that man\n needs no Savior but himself.\n\n\n(_b_) It is a continuous process.\n\n\n _Phil. 1:6_\u2014\u201c_being confident of this very thing, that he who\n began a good work in you will perfect it until the day of Jesus\n Christ_\u201d; _3:15_\u2014\u201c_Let us therefore, as many as are perfect, be\n thus minded: and if in anything ye are otherwise minded, this also\n shall God reveal unto you_\u201d; _Col. 3:9, 10_\u2014\u201c_lie not one to\n another; seeing that ye have put off the old man with his doings,\n and have put on the new man, that is being renewed unto knowledge\n after the image of him that created him_\u201d; _cf._ _Acts\n 2:47_\u2014\u201c_those that were being saved_\u201d; _1 Cor. 1:18_\u2014\u201c_unto us who\n are being saved_\u201d; _2 Cor. 2:15_\u2014\u201c_in them that are being saved_\u201d;\n _1 Thess. 2:12_\u2014\u201c_God, who calleth you into his own kingdom and\n glory._\u201d\n\n C. H. Parkhurst: \u201cThe yeast does not strike through the whole lump\n of dough at a flash. We keep finding unsuspected lumps of meal\n that the yeast has not yet seized upon. We surrender to God in\n instalments. We may not mean to do it, but we do it. Conversion\n has got to be brought down to date.\u201d A student asked the President\n of Oberlin College whether he could not take a shorter course than\n the one prescribed. \u201cOh yes,\u201d replied the President, \u201cbut then it\n depends on what you want to make of yourself. When God wants to\n make an oak, he takes a hundred years, but when he wants to make a\n squash, he takes six months.\u201d\n\n\n(_c_) It is distinguished from regeneration as growth from birth, or as\nthe strengthening of a holy disposition from the original impartation of\nit.\n\n\n _Eph. 4:15_\u2014\u201c_speaking the truth in love, may grow up in all\n things into him, who is the head, even Christ_\u201d; _1 Thess.\n 3:12_\u2014\u201c_the Lord make you to increase and abound in love one\n toward another, and toward all men_\u201d; _2 Pet. 3:18_\u2014\u201c_But grow in\n the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ_\u201d;\n _cf._ _1 Pet. 1:23_\u2014\u201c_begotten again, not of corruptible seed, but\n of incorruptible, through the word of God, which liveth and\n abideth_\u201d; _1 John 3:9_\u2014\u201c_Whosoever is begotten of God doeth no\n sin, because his seed abideth in him: and he cannot sin, because\n he is begotten of God._\u201d Not sin only, but holiness also, is a\n germ whose nature is to grow. The new love in the believer\u2019s heart\n follows the law of all life, in developing and extending itself\n under God\u2019s husbandry. George Eliot: \u201cThe reward of one duty done\n is the power to do another.\u201d J. W. A. Stewart: \u201cWhen the 21st of\n March has come, we say \u2018The back of the winter is broken.\u2019 There\n will still be alternations of frost, but the progress will be\n towards heat. The coming of summer is sure,\u2014in germ the summer is\n already here.\u201d Regeneration is the crisis of a disease;\n sanctification is the progress of convalescence.\n\n Yet growth is not a uniform thing in the tree or in the Christian.\n In some single months there is more growth than in all the year\n besides. During the rest of the year, however, there is\n solidification, without which the green timber would be useless.\n The period of rapid growth, when woody fibre is actually deposited\n between the bark and the trunk, occupies but four to six weeks in\n May, June, and July. _2 Pet. 1:5_\u2014\u201c_adding on your part all\n diligence, in your faith supply virtue; and in your virtue\n knowledge_\u201d\u2014adding to the central grace all those that are\n complementary and subordinate, till they attain the harmony of a\n chorus (\u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c7\u03bf\u03c1\u03b7\u03b3\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5).\n\n\n(_d_) The operation of God reveals itself in, and is accompanied by,\nintelligent and voluntary activity of the believer in the discovery and\nmortification of sinful desires, and in the bringing of the whole being\ninto obedience to Christ and conformity to the standards of his word.\n\n\n _John 17:17_\u2014\u201c_Sanctify them in the truth: thy word is truth_\u201d; _2\n Cor. 10:5_\u2014\u201c_casting down imaginations, and every high thing that\n is exalted against the knowledge of God, and bringing every\n thought into captivity to the obedience of Christ_\u201d; _Phil. 2:12,\n 13_\u2014\u201c_work out your own salvation with fear and trembling; for it\n is God who worketh in you both to will and to work, for his good\n pleasure_\u201d; _1 Pet. 2:2_\u2014\u201c_as new\u2010born babes, long for the\n spiritual milk which is without guile, that ye may grow thereby\n unto salvation._\u201d _John 15:3_\u2014\u201c_Already ye are clean because of\n the word which I have spoken unto you._\u201d Regeneration through the\n word is followed by sanctification through the word. _Eph.\n 5:1_\u2014\u201c_Be ye therefore imitators of God, as beloved children._\u201d\n Imitation is at first a painful effort of will, as in learning the\n piano; afterwards it becomes pleasurable and even unconscious.\n Children unconsciously imitate the handwriting of their parents.\n Charles Lamb sees in the mirror, as he is shaving, the apparition\n of his dead father. So our likeness to God comes out as we advance\n in years. _Col. 3:4_\u2014\u201c_When Christ who is our life, shall be\n manifested, then shall ye also with him be manifested in glory._\u201d\n\n Horace Bushnell said that, if the stars did not move, they would\n rot in the sky. The man who rides the bicycle must either go on,\n or go off. A large part of sanctification consists in the\n formation of proper habits, such as the habit of Scripture\n reading, of secret prayer, of church going, of efforts to convert\n and benefit others. Baxter: \u201cEvery man must grow, as trees grow,\n downward and upward at once. The visible outward growth must be\n accompanied by an invisible inward growth.\u201d Drummond: \u201cThe\n spiritual man having passed from death to life, the natural man\n must pass from life to death.\u201d There must be increasing sense of\n sin: \u201cMy sins gave sharpness to the nails, And pointed every\n thorn.\u201d There must be a bringing of new and yet newer regions of\n thought, feeling, and action, under the sway of Christ and his\n truth. There is a grain of truth even in Macaulay\u2019s jest about\n \u201cessentially Christian cookery.\u201d\n\n A. J. Gordon, Ministry of the Spirit, 63, 109\u2010111\u2014\u201cThe church is\n Christian no more than as it is the organ of the continuous\n passion of Christ. We must suffer with sinning and lost humanity,\n and so \u2018_fill up ... that which is lacking of the afflictions of\n Christ_\u2019 (_Col. 1:24_). Christ\u2019s crucifixion must be prolonged\n side by side with his resurrection. There are three deaths: 1.\n death in sin, our natural condition; 2. death for sin, our\n judicial condition; 3. death to sin, our sanctified condition....\n As the ascending sap in the tree crowds off the dead leaves which\n in spite of storm and frost cling to the branches all the winter\n long, so does the Holy Spirit within us, when allowed full sway,\n subdue and expel the remnants of our sinful nature.\u201d\n\n\n(_e_) The agency through which God effects the sanctification of the\nbeliever is the indwelling Spirit of Christ.\n\n\n _John 14:17, 18_\u2014\u201c_the Spirit of truth ... he abideth with you,\n and shall be in you. I will not leave you desolate; I come unto\n you_\u201d; _15:3\u20105_\u2014\u201c_Already ye are clean.... Abide in me ... apart\n from me ye can do nothing_\u201d; _Rom. 8:9, 10_\u2014\u201c_the Spirit of God\n dwelleth in you. But if any man hath not the Spirit of Christ, he\n is none of his. And if Christ is in you, the body is dead because\n of sin; but the spirit is life because of righteousness_\u201d; _1 Cor.\n 1:2, 30_\u2014\u201c_sanctified in Christ Jesus ... Christ Jesus, who was\n made unto us ... sanctification_\u201d; _6:19_\u2014\u201c_know ye not that your\n body is a temple of the Holy Spirit which is in you, which ye have\n from God?_\u201d _Gal. 5:16_\u2014\u201c_Walk by the Spirit, and ye shall not\n fulfil the lust of the flesh_\u201d; _Eph. 5:18_\u2014\u201c_And be not drunken\n with wine, wherein is riot, but be filled with the Spirit_\u201d; _Col.\n 1:27\u201029_\u2014\u201c_the riches of the glory of this mystery among the\n Gentiles, which is Christ in you, the hope of glory: whom we\n proclaim, admonishing every man and teaching every man in all\n wisdom, that we may present every man perfect in Christ; whereunto\n I labor also, striving according to his working, which worketh in\n me mightily_\u201d; _2 Tim. 1:14_\u2014\u201c_That good thing which was committed\n unto thee guard through the Holy Spirit which dwelleth in us._\u201d\n\n Christianity substitutes for the old sources of excitement the\n power of the Holy Spirit. Here is a source of comfort, energy, and\n joy, infinitely superior to any which the sinner knows. God does\n not leave the soul to fall back upon itself. The higher up we get\n in the scale of being, the more does the new life need nursing and\n tending,\u2014compare the sapling and the babe. God gives to the\n Christian, therefore, an abiding presence and work of the Holy\n Spirit,\u2014not only regeneration, but sanctification. C. E. Smith,\n Baptism of Fire: \u201cThe soul needs the latter as well as the former\n rain, the sealing as well as the renewing of the Spirit, the\n baptism of fire as well as the baptism of water. Sealing gives\n something additional to the document, an evidence plainer than the\n writing within, both to one\u2019s self and to others.\u201d\n\n \u201cFew flowers yield more honey than serves the bee for its daily\n food.\u201d So we must first live ourselves off from our spiritual\n diet; only what is over can be given to nourish others. Thomas \u00e0\n Kempis, Imitation of Christ: \u201cHave peace in thine own heart; else\n thou wilt never be able to communicate peace to others.\u201d Godet:\n \u201cMan is a vessel destined to receive God, a vessel which must be\n enlarged in proportion as it is filled, and filled in proportion\n as it is enlarged.\u201d Matthew Arnold, Morality: \u201cWe cannot kindle\n when we will The fire which in the heart resides; The Spirit\n bloweth and is still; In mystery our soul abides. But tasks in\n hours of insight willed Can be in hours of gloom fulfilled. With\n aching hands and bleeding feet, We dig and heap, lay stone on\n stone; We bear the burden and the heat Of the long day, and wish\n \u2019t were done. Not till the hours of light return All we have built\n do we discern.\u201d\n\n\n(_f_) The mediate or instrumental cause of sanctification, as of\njustification, is faith.\n\n\n _Acts 15:9_\u2014\u201c_cleansing their hearts by faith_\u201d; _Rom. 1:17_\u2014\u201c_For\n therein is revealed a righteousness of God from faith unto faith:\n as it is written, But the righteous shall live from faith._\u201d The\n righteousness includes sanctification as well as justification;\n and the subject of the epistle to the Romans is not simply\n justification by faith, but rather righteousness by faith, or\n salvation by faith. Justification by faith is the subject of\n _chapters 1\u20107_; sanctification by faith is the subject of\n _chapters 8\u201016_. We are not sanctified by efforts of our own, any\n more than we are justified by efforts of our own.\n\n God does not share with us the glory of sanctification, any more\n than he shares with us the glory of justification. He must do all,\n or nothing. William Law: \u201cA root set in the finest soil, in the\n best climate, and blessed with all that sun and air and rain can\n do for it, is not in so sure a way of its growth to perfection, as\n every man may be whose spirit aspires after all that which God is\n ready and infinitely desirous to give him. For the sun meets not\n the springing bud that stretches toward him with half that\n certainty as God, the source of all good, communicates himself to\n the soul that longs to partake of him.\u201d\n\n\n(_g_) The object of this faith is Christ himself, as the head of a new\nhumanity and the source of truth and life to those united to him.\n\n\n _2 Cor. 3:18_\u2014\u201c_we all, with unveiled face, beholding as in a\n mirror the glory of the Lord, are transformed into the same image\n from glory to glory, even as from the Lord the Spirit_\u201d; _Eph.\n 4:13_\u2014\u201c_till we all attain unto the unity of the faith, and of the\n knowledge of the Son of God, unto a fullgrown man, unto the\n measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ._\u201d Faith here is\n of course much more than intellectual faith,\u2014it is the reception\n of Christ himself. As Christianity furnishes a new source of life\n and energy\u2014in the Holy Spirit: so it gives a new object of\n attention and regard\u2014the Lord Jesus Christ. As we get air out of a\n vessel by pouring in water, so we can drive sin out only by\n bringing Christ in. See Chalmers\u2019 Sermon on The Expulsive Power of\n a New Affection. Drummond, Nat. Law in the Spir. World,\n 123\u2010140\u2014\u201cMan does not grow by making efforts to grow, but by\n putting himself into the conditions of growth by living in\n Christ.\u201d\n\n _1 John 3:3_\u2014\u201c_every one that hath this hope set on him_ (\u1f10\u03c0\u1fbd\n \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff7) _purifieth himself, even as he is pure._\u201d Sanctification\n does not begin from within. The objective Savior must come first.\n The hope based on him must give the motive and the standard of\n self\u2010purification. Likeness comes from liking. We grow to be like\n that which we like. Hence we use the phrase \u201cI like,\u201d as a synonym\n for \u201cI love.\u201d We cannot remove frost from our window by rubbing\n the pane; we need to kindle a fire. Growth is not the product of\n effort, but of life. \u201c_Taking thought_,\u201d or \u201c_being anxious_\u201d\n (_Mat. 6:27_), is not the way to grow. Only take the hindrances\n out of the way, and we grow without care, as the tree does. The\n moon makes no effort to shine, nor has it any power of its own to\n shine. It is only a burnt out cinder in the sky. It shines only as\n it reflects the light of the sun. So we can shine \u201c_as lights in\n the world_\u201d (_Phil. 2:15_), only as we reflect Christ, who is\n \u201c_the Sun of Righteousness_\u201d (_Mal. 4:2_) and \u201c_the Light of the\n world_\u201d (_John 8:12_).\n\n\n(_h_) Though the weakest faith perfectly justifies, the degree of\nsanctification is measured by the strength of the Christian\u2019s faith, and\nthe persistence with which he apprehends Christ in the various relations\nwhich the Scriptures declare him to sustain to us.\n\n\n _Mat. 9:29_\u2014\u201c_According to your faith be it done unto you_\u201d; _Luke\n 17:5_\u2014\u201c_Lord, increase our faith_\u201d; _Rom. 12:2_\u2014\u201c_be not fashioned\n according to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of\n your mind, that ye may prove what is the good and acceptable and\n perfect will of God_\u201d; _13:14_\u2014\u201c_But put ye on the Lord Jesus\n Christ, and make not provision for the flesh, to fulfil the lusts\n thereof_\u201d; _Eph. 4:24_\u2014\u201c_put on the new man, that after God hath\n been created in righteousness and holiness of truth_\u201d; _1 Tim.\n 4:7_\u2014\u201c_exercise thyself unto godliness._\u201d Leighton: \u201cNone of the\n children of God are born dumb.\u201d Milton: \u201cGood, the more\n communicated, the more abundant grows.\u201d Faith can neither be\n stationary nor complete (Westcott, Bible Com. on _John 15:8_\u2014\u201c_so\n shall ye become my disciples_\u201d). Luther: \u201cHe who _is_ a Christian\n is _no_ Christian\u201d; \u201cChristianus non in esse, sed in fieri.\u201d In a\n Bible that belonged to Oliver Cromwell is this inscription: \u201cO. C.\n 1644. Qui cessat esse melior cessat esse bonus\u201d\u2014\u201cHe who ceases to\n be better ceases to be good.\u201d Story, the sculptor, when asked\n which of his works he valued most, replied: \u201cMy next.\u201d The\n greatest work of the Holy Spirit is the perfecting of Christian\n character.\n\n _Col. 1:10_\u2014\u201c_Increasing by the knowledge of God_\u201d\u2014here the\n instrumental dative represents the knowledge of God as the dew or\n rain which nurtures the growth of the plant (Lightfoot). Mr.\n Gladstone had the habit of reading the Bible every Sunday\n afternoon to old women on his estate. Tholuck: \u201cI have but one\n passion, and that is Christ.\u201d This is an echo of Paul\u2019s words:\n \u201c_to me to live is Christ_\u201d (_Phil. 1:21_). But Paul is far from\n thinking that he has already obtained, or is already made perfect.\n He prays \u201c_that I may gain Christ, ... that I may know him_\u201d\n (_Phil. 3:8, 10_).\n\n\n(_i_) From the lack of persistence in using the means appointed for\nChristian growth\u2014such as the word of God, prayer, association with other\nbelievers, and personal effort for the conversion of the\nungodly\u2014sanctification does not always proceed in regular and unbroken\ncourse, and it is never completed in this life.\n\n\n _Phil. 3:12_\u2014\u201c_Not that I have already obtained, or am already\n made perfect: but I press on, if so be that I may lay hold on that\n for which also I was laid hold on by Jesus Christ_\u201d; _1 John\n 1:8_\u2014\u201c_If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and\n the truth is not in us._\u201d Carlyle, in his Life of John Sterling,\n chap. 8, says of Coleridge, that \u201cwhenever natural obligation or\n voluntary undertaking made it his duty to do anything, the fact\n seemed a sufficient reason for his _not_ doing it.\u201d A regular,\n advancing sanctification is marked, on the other hand, by a\n growing habit of instant and joyful obedience. The intermittent\n spring depends upon the reservoir in the mountain cave,\u2014only when\n the rain fills the latter full, does the spring begin to flow. So\n to secure unbroken Christian activity, there must be constant\n reception of the word and Spirit of God.\n\n Galen: \u201cIf diseases take hold of the body, there is nothing so\n certain to drive them out as diligent exercise.\u201d Williams,\n Principles of Medicine: \u201cWant of exercise and sedentary habits not\n only predispose to, but actually cause, disease.\u201d The little girl\n who fell out of bed at night was asked how it happened. She\n replied that she went to sleep too near where she got in. Some\n Christians lose the joy of their religion by ceasing their\n Christian activities too soon after conversion. Yet others\n cultivate their spiritual lives from mere selfishness. Selfishness\n follows the line of least resistance. It is easier to pray in\n public and to attend meetings for prayer, than it is to go out\n into the unsympathetic world and engage in the work of winning\n souls. This is the fault of monasticism. Those grow most who\n forget themselves in their work for others. The discipline of life\n is ordained in God\u2019s providence to correct tendencies to\n indolence. Even this discipline is often received in a rebellious\n spirit. The result is delay in the process of sanctification.\n Bengel: \u201cDeus habet horas et moras\u201d\u2014\u201cGod has his hours and his\n delays.\u201d German proverb: \u201cGut Ding will Weile haben\u201d\u2014\u201cA good thing\n requires time.\u201d\n\n\n(_j_) Sanctification, both of the soul and of the body of the believer, is\ncompleted in the life to come,\u2014that of the former at death, that of the\nlatter at the resurrection.\n\n\n _Phil. 3:21_\u2014\u201c_who shall fashion anew the body of our humiliation,\n that it may be conformed to the body of his glory, according to\n the working whereby he is able even to subject all things unto\n himself_\u201d; _Col. 3:4_\u2014\u201c_When Christ, who is our life, shall be\n manifested, then shall we also with him be manifested in glory_\u201d;\n _Heb. 12:14, 23_\u2014\u201c_Follow after peace with all men, and the\n sanctification without which no man shall see the Lord ... spirits\n of just men made perfect_\u201d; _1 John 3:2_\u2014\u201c_Beloved, now are we\n children of God, and it is not yet made manifest what we shall be.\n We know that, if he shall be manifested, we shall be like him; for\n we shall see him even as he is_\u201d; _Jude 24_\u2014\u201c_able to guard you\n from stumbling, and to set you before the presence of his glory\n without blemish in exceeding joy_\u201d; _Rev. 14:5_\u2014\u201c_And in their\n mouth was found no lie: they are without blemish._\u201d\n\n A. J. Gordon, Ministry of the Spirit, 121, puts the completion of\n our sanctification, not at death, but at the appearing of the Lord\n \u201c_a second time, apart from sin, ... unto salvation_\u201d (_Heb. 9:28;\n 1 Thess. 3:13; 5:23_). When we shall see him as he is,\n instantaneous photographing of his image in our souls will take\n the place of the present slow progress from glory to glory (_2\n Cor. 3:18; 1 John 3:2_). If by sanctification we mean, not a\n sloughing off of remaining depravity, but an ever increasing\n purity and perfection, then we may hold that the process of\n sanctification goes on forever. Our relation to Christ must always\n be that of the imperfect to the perfect, of the finite to the\n infinite; and for finite spirits, progress must always be\n possible. Clarke, Christian Theology, 373\u2014\u201cNot even at death can\n sanctification end.... The goal lies far beyond deliverance from\n sin.... There is no such thing as bringing the divine life to such\n completion that no further progress is possible to it.... Indeed,\n free and unhampered progress can scarcely begin until sin is left\n behind.\u201d \u201cO snows so pure, O peaks so high! I shall not reach you\n till I die!\u201d\n\n As Jesus\u2019 resurrection was prepared by holiness of life, so the\n Christian\u2019s resurrection is prepared by sanctification. When our\n souls are freed from the last remains of sin, then it will not be\n possible for us to be holden by death (_cf._ _Acts 2:24_). See\n Gordon, The Twofold Life, or Christ\u2019s Work for us and in us; Brit.\n and For. Evang. Rev., April, 1884:205\u2010229; Van Oosterzee,\n Christian Dogmatics, 657\u2010662.\n\n\n3. Erroneous Views refuted by these Scripture Passages.\n\n\nA. The Antinomian,\u2014which holds that, since Christ\u2019s obedience and\nsufferings have satisfied the demands of the law, the believer is free\nfrom obligation to observe it.\n\n\n The Antinomian view rests upon a misinterpretation of _Rom.\n 6:14_\u2014\u201c_Ye are not under law, but under grace._\u201d Agricola and\n Amsdorf (1559) were representatives of this view. Amsdorf said\n that \u201cgood works are hurtful to salvation.\u201d But Melanchthon\u2019s\n words furnish the reply: \u201cSola fides justificat, sed fides non est\n sola.\u201d F. W. Robertson states it: \u201cFaith alone justifies, but not\n the faith that is alone.\u201d And he illustrates: \u201cLightning alone\n strikes, but not the lightning which is without thunder; for that\n is summer lightning and harmless.\u201d See Browning\u2019s poem, Johannes\n Agricola in Meditation, in Dramatis Person\u00e6, 300\u2014\u201cI have God\u2019s\n warrant, Could I blend All hideous sins as in a cup, To drink the\n mingled venoms up, Secure my nature will convert The draught to\n blossoming gladness.\u201d Agricola said that Moses ought to be hanged.\n This is Sanctification without Perseverance.\n\n Sandeman, the founder of the sect called Sandemanians, asserted as\n his fundamental principle the deadliness of all doings, the\n necessity for inactivity to let God do his work in the soul. See\n his essay, Theron and Aspasia, referred to by Allen, in his Life\n of Jonathan Edwards, 114. Anne Hutchinson was excommunicated and\n banished by the Puritans from Massachusetts, in 1637, for holding\n \u201ctwo dangerous errors: 1. The Holy Spirit personally dwells in a\n justified person; 2. No sanctification can evidence to us our\n justification.\u201d Here the latter error almost destroyed the\n influence of the former truth. There is a little Antinomianism in\n the popular hymn: \u201cLay your deadly doings down, Down at Jesus\u2019\n feet; Doing is a deadly thing; Doing ends in death.\u201d The colored\n preacher\u2019s poetry only presented the doctrine in the concrete:\n \u201cYou may rip and te\u2010yar, You may cuss and swe\u2010yar, But you\u2019re jess\n as sure of heaven, \u2019S if you\u2019d done gone de\u2010yar.\u201d Plain Andrew\n Fuller in England (1754\u20101815) did excellent service in\n overthrowing popular Antinomianism.\n\n\nTo this view we urge the following objections:\n\n(_a_) That since the law is a transcript of the holiness of God, its\ndemands as a moral rule are unchanging. Only as a system of penalty and a\nmethod of salvation is the law abolished in Christ\u2019s death.\n\n\n _Mat. 5:17\u201019_\u2014\u201c_Think not that I came to destroy the law or the\n prophets: I came not to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say\n unto you, Till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle\n shall in no wise pass away from the law, till all things be\n accomplished. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least\n commandments, and shall teach men so, shall be called least in the\n kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, he shall\n be called great in the kingdom of heaven_\u201d; _48_\u2014\u201c_Ye therefore\n shall be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect_\u201d; _1 Pet.\n 1:16_\u2014\u201c_Ye shall be holy; for I am holy_\u201d; _Rom. 10:4_\u2014\u201c_For\n Christ is the end of the law unto righteousness to every one that\n believeth_\u201d; _Gal. 2:20_\u2014\u201c_I have been crucified with Christ_\u201d;\n _3:13_\u2014\u201c_Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law, having\n become a curse for us_\u201d; _Col. 2:14_\u2014\u201c_having blotted out the bond\n written in ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to\n us: and he hath taken it out of the way, nailing it to the\n cross_\u201d; _Heb. 2:15_\u2014\u201c_deliver all them who through fear of death\n were all their lifetime subject to bondage._\u201d\n\n\n(_b_) That the union between Christ and the believer secures not only the\nbearing of the penalty of the law by Christ, but also the impartation of\nChrist\u2019s spirit of obedience to the believer,\u2014in other words, brings him\ninto communion with Christ\u2019s work, and leads him to ratify it in his own\nexperience.\n\n\n _Rom. 8:9, 10, 15_\u2014\u201c_ye are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if\n so be that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you. But if any man hath\n not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his. And if Christ is in\n you, the body is dead because of sin; but __ the spirit is life\n because of righteousness.... For ye received not the spirit of\n bondage again unto fear: but ye received the spirit of adoption,\n whereby we cry, Abba, Father_\u201d; _Gal. 5:22\u201025_\u2014\u201c_But the fruit of\n the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, kindness, goodness,\n faithfulness, meekness, self\u2010control; against such there is no\n law. And they that are of Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh\n with the passions and the lusts thereof_\u201d; _1 John 1:6_\u2014\u201c_If we\n say that we have fellowship with him and walk in the darkness, we\n lie, and do not the truth_\u201d; _3:6_\u2014\u201c_Whosoever abideth in him\n sinneth not: whosoever sinneth hath not seen him, neither knoweth\n him._\u201d\n\n\n(_c_) That the freedom from the law of which the Scriptures speak, is\ntherefore simply that freedom from the constraint and bondage of the law,\nwhich characterizes those who have become one with Christ by faith.\n\n\n _Ps. 119:97_\u2014\u201c_O how love I thy law! it is my meditation all the\n day_\u201d; _Rom. 3:8, 31_\u2014\u201c_and why not (as we are slanderously\n reported, and as some affirm that we say), Let us do evil, that\n good may come? whose condemnation is just.... Do we then make the\n law of none effect through faith? God forbid: nay, we establish\n the law_\u201d; _6:14, 15, 22_\u2014\u201c_For sin shall not have dominion over\n you: for ye are not under law, but under grace. What then? shall\n we sin, because we are not under law, but under grace? God forbid\n ... now being made free from sin and become servants to God, ye\n have your fruit unto sanctification, and the end eternal life_\u201d;\n _7:6_\u2014\u201c_But now we have been discharged from the law, having died\n to that wherein we were held; so that we serve in newness of the\n spirit, and not in oldness of the letter_\u201d; _8:4_\u2014\u201c_that the\n ordinance of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after\n the flesh, but after the Spirit_\u201d; _1 Cor. 7:22_\u2014\u201c_he that was\n called in the Lord being a bondservant, is the Lord\u2019s freedman_\u201d;\n _Gal. 5:1_\u2014\u201c_For freedom did Christ set us free: stand fast\n therefore, and be not entangled again in a yoke of bondage_\u201d; _1\n Tim. 1:9_\u2014\u201c_law is not made for a righteous man, but for the\n lawless and unruly_\u201d; _James 1:25_\u2014\u201c_the perfect law, the law of\n liberty_.\u201d\n\n\nTo sum up the doctrine of Christian freedom as opposed to Antinomianism,\nwe may say that Christ does not free us, as the Antinomian believes, from\nthe law as a rule of life. But he does free us (1) from the law as a\nsystem of curse and penalty; this he does by bearing the curse and penalty\nhimself. Christ frees us (2) from the law with its claims as a method of\nsalvation; this he does by making his obedience and merits ours. Christ\nfrees us (3) from the law as an outward and foreign compulsion; this he\ndoes by giving to us the spirit of obedience and sonship, by which the law\nis progressively realized within.\n\n\n Christ, then, does not free us, as the Antinomian believes, from\n the law as a rule of life. But he does free us (1) from the law as\n a system of curse and penalty. This he does by bearing the curse\n and penalty himself. Just as law can do nothing with a man after\n it has executed its death\u2010penalty upon him, so law can do nothing\n with us, now that its death\u2010penalty has been executed upon Christ.\n There are some insects that expire in the act of planting their\n sting; and so, when the law gathered itself up and planted its\n sting in the heart of Christ, it expended all its power as a judge\n and avenger over us who believe. In the Cross, the law as a system\n of curse and penalty exhausted itself; so we were set free.\n\n Christ frees us (2) from the law with its claims as a method of\n salvation: in other words, he frees us from the necessity of\n trusting our salvation to an impossible future obedience. As the\n sufferings of Christ, apart from any sufferings of ours, deliver\n us from eternal death, so the merits of Christ, apart from any\n merits of ours, give us a title to eternal life. By faith in what\n Christ has done and simple acceptance of his work for us, we\n secure a right to heaven. Obedience on our part is no longer\n rendered painfully, as if our salvation depended on it, but freely\n and gladly, in gratitude for what Christ has done for us.\n Illustrate by the English nobleman\u2019s invitation to his park, and\n the regulations he causes to be posted up.\n\n Christ frees us (3) from the law as an outward and foreign\n compulsion. In putting an end to legalism, he provides against\n license. This he does by giving the spirit of obedience and\n sonship. He puts love in the place of fear; and this secures an\n obedience more intelligent, more thorough, and more hearty, than\n could have been secured by mere law. So he frees us from the\n burden and compulsion of the law, by realizing the law within us\n by his Spirit. The freedom of the Christian is freedom _in_ the\n law, such as the musician experiences when the scales and\n exercises have become easy, and work has turned to play. See John\n Owen, Works, 3:366\u2010651; 6:1\u2010313; Campbell, The Indwelling Christ,\n 73\u201081.\n\n Gould, Bib. Theol. N. T., 195\u2014\u201cThe supremacy of those books which\n contain the words of Jesus himself [_i. e._, the Synoptic Gospels]\n is that they incorporate, with the other elements of the religious\n life, the regulative will. Here for instance [in John] is the\n gospel of the contemplative life, which, \u2018_beholding as in a\n mirror the glory of the Lord is changed into the same image from\n glory to glory, as by the Spirit of the Lord_\u2019 (_2 Cor. 3:18_).\n The belief is that, with this beholding, life will take care of\n itself. Life will never take care of itself. Among other things,\n after the most perfect vision, it has to ask what aspirations,\n principles, affections, belong to life, and then to cultivate the\n will to embody these things. Here is the common defect of all\n religions. They fail to marry religion to the common life. Christ\n did not stop short of this final word; but if we leave him for\n even the greatest of his disciples, we are in danger of missing\n it.\u201d This utterance of Gould is surprising in several ways. It\n attributes to John alone the contemplative attitude of mind, which\n the quotation given shows to belong also to Paul. It ignores the\n constant appeals in John to the will: \u201c_He that hath my\n commandments and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me_\u201d (_John\n 14:21_). It also forgets that \u201c_life_\u201d in John is the whole being,\n including intellect, affection, and will, and that to have Christ\n for one\u2019s life is absolutely to exclude Antinomianism.\n\n\nB. The Perfectionist,\u2014which holds that the Christian may, in this life,\nbecome perfectly free from sin. This view was held by John Wesley in\nEngland, and by Mahan and Finney in America.\n\n\n Finney, Syst. Theol., 500, declares regeneration to be \u201can\n instantaneous change from entire sinfulness to entire holiness.\u201d\n The claims of Perfectionists, however, have been modified from\n \u201cfreedom from all sin,\u201d to \u201cfreedom from all known sin,\u201d then to\n \u201centire consecration,\u201d and finally to \u201cChristian assurance.\u201d H. W.\n Webb\u2010Peploe, in S. S. Times, June 25, 1898\u2014\u201cThe Keswick teaching\n is that no true Christian need wilfully or knowingly sin. Yet this\n is not sinless perfection. It is simply according to our faith\n that we receive, and faith only draws from God according to our\n present possibilities. These are limited by the presence of\n indwelling corruption; and, while never needing to sin within the\n sphere of the light we possess, there are to the last hour of our\n life upon the earth powers of corruption within every man, which\n defile his best deeds and give to even his holiest efforts that\n \u2018nature of sin\u2019 of which the 9th Article in the Church of England\n Prayerbook speaks so strongly.\u201d Yet it is evident that this\n corruption is not regarded as real sin, and is called \u201cnature of\n sin\u201d only in some non\u2010natural sense.\n\n Dr. George Peck says: \u201cIn the life of the most perfect Christian\n there is every day renewed occasion for self\u2010abhorrence, for\n repentance, for renewed application of the blood of Christ, for\n application of the rekindling of the Holy Spirit.\u201d But why call\n this a state of perfection? F. B. Meyer: \u201cWe never say that self\n is dead; were we to do so, self would be laughing at us round the\n corner. The teaching of _Romans 6_ is, not that self is dead, but\n that the renewed will is dead to self, the man\u2019s will saying Yes\n to Christ, and No to self; through the Spirit\u2019s grace it\n constantly repudiates and mortifies the power of the flesh.\u201d For\n statements of the Perfectionist view, see John Wesley\u2019s Christian\n Theology, edited by Thornley Smith, 265\u2010273; Mahan, Christian\n Perfection, and art. in Bib. Repos. 2d Series, vol. IV, Oct.\n 1840:408\u2010428; Finney, Systematic Theology, 586\u2010766; Peck,\n Christian Perfection; Ritschl, Bib. Sac., Oct. 1878:656; A. T.\n Pierson, The Keswick Movement.\n\n\nIn reply, it will be sufficient to observe:\n\n(_a_) That the theory rests upon false conceptions: first, of the law,\u2014as\na sliding\u2010scale of requirement graduated to the moral condition of\ncreatures, instead of being the unchangeable reflection of God\u2019s holiness;\nsecondly, of sin,\u2014as consisting only in voluntary acts instead of\nembracing also those dispositions and states of the soul which are not\nconformed to the divine holiness; thirdly, of the human will,\u2014as able to\nchoose God supremely and persistently at every moment of life, and to\nfulfil at every moment the obligations resting upon it, instead of being\ncorrupted and enslaved by the Fall.\n\n\n This view reduces the debt to the debtor\u2019s ability to pay,\u2014a short\n and easy method of discharging obligations. I can leap over a\n church steeple, if I am only permitted to make the church steeple\n low enough; and I can touch the stars, if the stars will only come\n down to my hand. The Philistines are quite equal to Samson, if\n they may only cut off Samson\u2019s locks. So I can obey God\u2019s law, if\n I may only make God\u2019s law what I want it to be. The fundamental\n error of perfectionism is its low view of God\u2019s law; the second is\n its narrow conception of sin. John Wesley: \u201cI believe a person\n filled with love of God is still liable to involuntary\n transgressions. Such transgressions you may call sins, if you\n please; I do not.\u201d The third error of perfectionism is its\n exaggerated estimate of man\u2019s power of contrary choice. To say\n that, whatever may have been the habits of the past and whatever\n may be the evil affections of the present, a man is perfectly able\n at any moment to obey the whole law of God, is to deny that there\n are such things as character and depravity. Finney, Gospel Themes,\n 383, indeed, disclaimed \u201call expectations of attaining this state\n ourselves, and by our own independent, unaided efforts.\u201d On the\n Law of God, see pages 537\u2010544.\n\n Augustine: \u201cEvery lesser good has an essential element of sin.\u201d\n Anything less than the perfection that belongs normally to my\n present stage of development is a coming short of the law\u2019s\n demand. R. W. Dale, Fellowship with Christ, 359\u2014\u201cFor us and in\n this world, the divine is always the impossible. Give me a law for\n individual conduct which requires a perfection that is within my\n reach, and I am sure that the law does not represent the divine\n thought. \u2018_Not that I have already obtained, or am already made\n perfect: but I press on, if so be that I may lay hold on that for\n which also I was laid hold on by Christ Jesus_\u2019 (_Phil.\n 3:12_)\u2014this, from the beginning, has been the confession of\n saints.\u201d The Perfectionist is apt to say that we must \u201ctake Christ\n twice, once for justification and once for sanctification.\u201d But no\n one can take Christ for justification without at the same time\n taking him for sanctification. Dr. A. A. Hodge calls this doctrine\n \u201cNeonomianism,\u201d because it holds not to one unchanging, ideal, and\n perfect law of God, but to a second law given to human weakness\n when the first law has failed to secure obedience.\n\n (1) The law of God demands perfection. It is a transcript of God\u2019s\n nature. Its object is to reveal God. Anything less than the demand\n of perfection would misrepresent God. God could not give a law\n which a sinner could obey. In the very nature of the case there\n can be no sinlessness in this life for those who have once sinned.\n Sin brings incapacity as well as guilt. All men have squandered a\n part of the talent intrusted to them by God, and therefore no man\n can come up to the demands of that law which requires all that God\n gave to humanity at its creation together with interest on the\n investment. (2) Even the best Christian comes short of perfection.\n Regeneration makes only the dominant disposition holy. Many\n affections still remain unholy and require to be cleansed. Only by\n lowering the demands of the law, making shallow our conceptions of\n sin, and mistaking temporary volition for permanent bent of the\n will, can we count ourselves to be perfect. (3) Absolute\n perfection is attained not in this world but in the world to come.\n The best Christians count themselves still sinners, strive most\n earnestly for holiness, have imputed but not inherent\n sanctification, are saved by hope.\n\n\n(_b_) That the theory finds no support in, but rather is distinctly\ncontradicted by, Scripture.\n\nFirst, the Scriptures never assert or imply that the Christian may in this\nlife live without sin; passages like 1 John 3:6, 9, if interpreted\nconsistently with the context, set forth either the ideal standard of\nChristian living or the actual state of the believer so far as respects\nhis new nature.\n\n\n _1 John 3:6_\u2014\u201c_Whosoever abideth in him sinneth not; whosoever\n sinneth hath not seen him, neither knoweth him_\u201d; _9_\u2014\u201c_Whosoever\n is begotten of God doeth no sin, because his seed abideth in him:\n and he cannot sin, because he is begotten of God._\u201d Ann. Par.\n Bible, _in loco_:\u2014\u201cJohn is contrasting the states in which sin and\n grace severally predominate, without reference to degrees in\n either, showing that all men are in one or the other.\u201d Neander:\n \u201cJohn recognizes no intermediate state, no gradations. He seizes\n upon the radical point of difference. He contrasts the two states\n in their essential nature and principle. It is either love or\n hate, light or darkness, truth or a lie. The Christian life in its\n essential nature is the opposite of all sin. If there be sin, it\n must be the afterworking of the old nature.\u201d Yet all Christians\n are required in Scripture to advance, to confess sin, to ask\n forgiveness, to maintain warfare, to assume the attitude of ill\n desert in prayer, to receive chastisement for the removal of\n imperfections, to regard full salvation as matter of hope, not of\n present experience.\n\n John paints only in black and white; there are no intermediate\n tints or colors. Take the words in _1 John 3:6_ literally, and\n there never was and never can be a regenerate person. The words\n are hyperbolical, as Paul\u2019s words in _Rom. 6:2_\u2014\u201c_We who died to\n sin, how shall we any longer live therein_\u201d\u2014are metaphorical; see\n E. H. Johnson, in Bib. Sac., 1892:375, note. The Emperor William\n refused the request for an audience prepared by a German\u2010American,\n saying that Germans born in Germany but naturalized in America\n became Americans: \u201cIch kenne Amerikaner, Ich kenne Deutsche, aber\n Deutsch\u2010Amerikaner kenne Ich nicht\u201d\u2014\u201cI know Americans, I know\n Germans, but German\u2010Americans I do not know.\u201d\n\n Lowrie, Doctrine of St. John, 110\u2014\u201cSt. John uses the noun _sin_\n and the verb _to sin_ in two senses: to denote the power or\n principle of sin, or to denote concrete acts of sin. The latter\n sense he generally expresses by the plural _sins_.... The\n Christian is guilty of particular acts of sin for which confession\n and forgiveness are required, but as he has been freed from the\n bondage of sin he cannot habitually practise it nor abide in it,\n still less can he be guilty of sin in its superlative form, by\n denial of Christ.\u201d\n\n\nSecondly, the apostolic admonitions to the Christians and Hebrews show\nthat no such state of complete sanctification had been generally attained\nby the Christians of the first century.\n\n\n _Rom. 8:24_\u2014\u201c_For in hope were we saved: but hope that is seen is\n not hope: for who hopeth for that which he seeth?_\u201d The party\n feeling, selfishness, and immorality found among the members of\n the Corinthian church are evidence that they were far from a state\n of entire sanctification.\n\n\nThirdly, there is express record of sin committed by the most perfect\ncharacters of Scripture\u2014as Noah, Abraham, Job, David, Peter.\n\n\n We are urged by perfectionists \u201cto keep up the standard.\u201d We do\n this, not by calling certain men perfect, but by calling Jesus\n Christ perfect. In proportion to our sanctification, we are\n absorbed in Christ, not in ourselves. Self\u2010consciousness and\n display are a poor evidence of sanctification. The best characters\n of Scripture put their trust in a standard higher than they have\n ever realized in their own persons, even in the righteousness of\n God.\n\n\nFourthly, the word \u03c4\u03ad\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2, as applied to spiritual conditions already\nattained, can fairly be held to signify only a relative perfection,\nequivalent to sincere piety or maturity of Christian judgment.\n\n\n _1 Cor. 2:6_\u2014\u201c_We speak wisdom, however, among the perfect,_\u201d or,\n as the Am. Revisers have it, \u201c_among them that are fullgrown_\u201d;\n _Phil. 3:15_\u2014\u201c_Let us therefore, as many as are perfect, be thus\n minded._\u201d Men are often called perfect, when free from any fault\n which strikes the eyes of the world. See _Gen. 6:9_\u2014\u201c_Noah was a\n righteous man, and perfect_\u201d; _Job 1:1_\u2014\u201c_that man was perfect and\n upright._\u201d On \u03c4\u03ad\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2, see Trench, Syn. N. T., 1:110.\n\n The \u03c4\u03ad\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03bf\u03b9 are described in _Heb. 5:14_\u2014\u201c_Solid food is for the\n mature_ (\u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03c9\u03bd) _who on account of habit have their perceptions\n disciplined for the discriminating of good and evil_\u201d (Dr.\n Kendrick\u2019s translation). The same word \u201c_perfect_\u201d is used of\n Jacob in _Gen. 25:27_\u2014\u201c_Jacob was a quiet man, dwelling in tents_\u201d\n = a harmless man, exemplary and well\u2010balanced, as a man of\n business. Genung, Epic of the Inner Life, 132\u2014\u201c_\u2019Perfect\u2019_ in Job\n = Horace\u2019s \u2018integer vit\u00e6,\u2019 being the adjective of which\n \u2018integrity\u2019 is the substantive.\u201d\n\n\nFifthly, the Scriptures distinctly deny that any man on earth lives\nwithout sin.\n\n\n _1 K. 8:46_\u2014\u201c_there is no man that sinneth not_\u201d; _Eccl.\n 7:20_\u2014\u201c_Surely there is not a righteous man upon earth, that doeth\n good, and sinneth not_\u201d; _James 3:2_\u2014\u201c_For in many things we all\n stumble. If any stumbleth not in word, the same is a perfect man,\n able to bridle the whole body also_\u201d; _1 John 1:8_\u2014\u201c_If we say\n that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in\n us._\u201d\n\n T. T. Eaton, Sanctification: \u201c1. Some mistake regeneration for\n sanctification. They have been unconverted church members. When\n led to faith in Christ, and finding peace and joy, they think they\n are sanctified, when they are simply converted. 2. Some mistake\n assurance of faith for sanctification. But joy is not\n sanctification. 3. Some mistake the baptism of the Holy Spirit for\n sanctification. But Peter sinned grievously at Antioch, after he\n had received that baptism. 4. Some think that doing the best one\n can is sanctification. But he who measures by inches, for feet,\n can measure up well. Some regard sin as only a voluntary act,\n whereas the sinful nature is the fountain. Stripping off the\n leaves of the Upas tree does not answer. 6. Some mistake the power\n of the human will, and fancy that an act of will can free a man\n from sin. They ignore the settled bent of the will, which the act\n of will does not change.\u201d\n\n\nSixthly, the declaration: \u201cye were sanctified\u201d (1 Cor. 6:11), and the\ndesignation: \u201csaints\u201d (1 Cor. 1:2), applied to early believers, are, as\nthe whole epistle shows, expressive of a holiness existing in germ and\nanticipation; the expressions deriving their meaning not so much from what\nthese early believers were, as from what Christ was, to whom they were\nunited by faith.\n\n\n When N. T. believers are said to be \u201c_sanctified_,\u201d we must\n remember the O. T. use of the word. \u201cSanctify\u201d may have either the\n meaning \u201cto make holy outwardly,\u201d or \u201cto make holy inwardly.\u201d The\n people of Israel and the vessels of the tabernacle were made holy\n in the former sense; their sanctification was a setting apart to\n the sacred use. _Num. 8:17_\u2014\u201c_all the firstborn among the children\n of Israel are mine.... I sanctified them for myself_\u201d; _Deut.\n 33:3_\u2014\u201c_Yea, he loveth the people; all his saints are in thy\n hand_\u201d; _2 Chron. 29:19_\u2014\u201c_all the vessels ... have we prepared\n and sanctified._\u201d The vessels mentioned were first immersed, and\n then sprinkled from day to day according to need. So the Christian\n by his regeneration is set apart for God\u2019s service, and in this\n sense is a \u201c_saint_\u201d and \u201c_sanctified_.\u201d More than this, he has in\n him the beginnings of purity,\u2014he is \u201c_clean as a whole_,\u201d though\n he yet needs \u201c_to wash his feet_\u201d (_John 13:10_)\u2014that is, to be\n cleansed from the recurring defilements of his daily life. Shedd,\n Dogm. Theol., 2:551\u2014\u201cThe error of the Perfectionist is that of\n confounding _imputed_ sanctification with _inherent_\n sanctification. It is the latter which is mentioned in _1 Cor.\n 1:30_\u2014\u2018_Christ Jesus, who was made unto us ... sanctification._\u2019 \u201d\n\n Water from the Jordan is turbid, but it settles in the bottle and\n seems pure\u2014until it is shaken. Some Christians seem very free from\n sin, until you shake them,\u2014then they get \u201criled.\u201d Clarke,\n Christian Theology, 871\u2014\u201cIs there not a higher Christian life?\n Yes, and a higher life beyond it, and a higher still beyond. The\n Christian life is ever higher and higher. It must pass through all\n stages between its beginning and its perfection.\u201d C. D. Case: \u201cThe\n great objection to [this theory of] complete sanctification is\n that, if possessed at all, it is not a development of our own\n character.\u201d\n\n\n(_c_) That the theory is disapproved by the testimony of Christian\nexperience.\u2014In exact proportion to the soul\u2019s advance in holiness does it\nshrink from claiming that holiness has been already attained, and humble\nitself before God for its remaining apathy, ingratitude, and unbelief.\n\n\n _Phil. 3:12\u201014_\u2014\u201c_Not that I have already obtained, or am already\n made perfect: but I press on, if so be that I may lay hold on that\n for which also I was laid hold on by Christ Jesus._\u201d Some of the\n greatest advocates of perfectionism have been furthest from\n claiming any such perfection; although many of their less\n instructed followers claimed it for them, and even professed to\n have attained it themselves.\n\n In _Luke 7:1\u201010_, the centurion does not think himself worthy to\n go to Jesus, or to have him come under his roof, yet the elders of\n the Jews say: \u201c_He is worthy that thou shouldest do this_\u201d; and\n Jesus himself says of him: \u201c_I have not found so great faith, no,\n not in Israel_.\u201d \u201c_Holy to Jehovah_\u201d was inscribed upon the mitre\n of the high priest (_Ex. 28:36_). Others saw it, but he saw it\n not. Moses knew not that his face shone (_Ex. 34:29_). The truest\n holiness is that of which the possessor is least conscious; yet it\n is his real diadem and beauty (A. J. Gordon). \u201cThe nearer men are\n to being sinless, the less they talk about it\u201d (Dwight L. Moody).\n \u201cAlways strive for perfection: never believe you have reached it\u201d\n (Arnold of Rugby). Compare with this, Ernest Renan\u2019s declaration\n that he had nothing to alter in his life. \u201cI have not sinned for\n some time,\u201d said a woman to Mr. Spurgeon. \u201cThen you must be very\n proud of it,\u201d he replied. \u201cIndeed I am!\u201d said she. A pastor says:\n \u201cNo one can attain the \u2018Higher Life,\u2019 and escape making mischief.\u201d\n John Wesley lamented that not one in thirty retained the blessing.\n\n\nPerfectionism is best met by proper statements of the nature of the law\nand of sin (Ps. 119:96). While we thus rebuke spiritual pride, however, we\nshould be equally careful to point out the inseparable connection between\njustification and sanctification, and their equal importance as together\nmaking up the Biblical idea of salvation. While we show no favor to those\nwho would make sanctification a sudden and paroxysmal act of the human\nwill, we should hold forth the holiness of God as the standard of\nattainment, and the faith in a Christ of infinite fulness as the medium\nthrough which that standard is to be gradually but certainly realized in\nus (2 Cor. 3:18).\n\n\n We should imitate Lyman Beecher\u2019s method of opposing\n perfectionism\u2014by searching expositions of God\u2019s law. When men know\n what the law is, they will say with the Psalmist: \u201c_I have seen an\n end of all perfection; thy commandment is exceeding broad_\u201d (_Ps.\n 119:96_). And yet we are earnestly and hopefully to seek in Christ\n for a continually increasing measure of sanctification: _1 Cor.\n 1:30_\u2014\u201c_Christ Jesus, who was made unto us ... sanctification_\u201d;\n _2 Cor. 3:18_\u2014\u201c_But we all, with unveiled face beholding as in a\n mirror the glory of the Lord, are transformed into the same image\n from glory to glory, even as from the Lord the Spirit_.\u201d Arnold of\n Rugby: \u201cAlways expect to succeed, and never think you have\n succeeded.\u201d\n\n Mr. Finney meant by entire sanctification only that it is possible\n for Christians in this life by the grace of God to consecrate\n themselves so unreservedly to his service as to live without\n conscious and wilful disobedience to the divine commands. He did\n not claim himself to have reached this point; he made at times\n very impressive confessions of his own sinfulness; he did not\n encourage others to make for themselves the claim to have lived\n without conscious fault. He held however that such a state is\n attainable, and therefore that its pursuit is rational. He also\n admitted that such a state is one, not of absolute, but only of\n relative, sinlessness. His error was in calling it a state of\n entire sanctification. See A. H. Strong, Christ in Creation,\n 377\u2010384.\n\n A. J. Gordon, Ministry of the Spirit, 116\u2014\u201cIt is possible that one\n may experience a great crisis in his spiritual life, in which\n there is such a total surrender of self to God and such an\n infilling of the Holy Spirit, that he is freed from the bondage of\n sinful appetites and habits, and enabled to have constant victory\n over self instead of suffering constant defeat.... If the doctrine\n of sinless perfection is a heresy, the doctrine of contentment\n with sinful imperfection is a greater heresy.... It is not an\n edifying spectacle to see a Christian worldling throwing stones at\n a Christian perfectionist.\u201d Caird, Evolution of Religion,\n 1:138\u2014\u201cIf, according to the German proverb, it is provided that\n the trees shall not grow into the sky, it is equally provided that\n they shall always grow toward it; and the sinking of the roots\n into the soil is inevitably accompanied by a further expansion of\n the branches.\u201d\n\n See Hovey, Doctrine of the Higher Christian Life, Compared with\n Scripture, also Hovey, Higher Christian Life Examined, in Studies\n in Ethics and Theology, 344\u2010427; Snodgrass, Scriptural Doctrine of\n Sanctification; Princeton Essays, 1:335\u2010365; Hodge, Syst. Theol.,\n 3:213\u2010258; Calvin, Institutes, III, 11:6; Bib. Repos., 2d Series,\n 1:44\u201058; 2:143\u2010166; Woods, Works, 4:465\u2010523; H. A. Boardman, The\n \u201cHigher Life\u201d Doctrine of Sanctification; William Law, Practical\n Treatise on Christian Perfection; E. H. Johnson, The Highest Life.\n\n\nII. Perseverance.\n\n\nThe Scriptures declare that, in virtue of the original purpose and\ncontinuous operation of God, all who are united to Christ by faith will\ninfallibly continue in a state of grace and will finally attain to\neverlasting life. This voluntary continuance, on the part of the\nChristian, in faith and well\u2010doing we call perseverance. Perseverance is,\ntherefore, the human side or aspect of that spiritual process which, as\nviewed from the divine side, we call sanctification. It is not a mere\nnatural consequence of conversion, but involves a constant activity of the\nhuman will from the moment of conversion to the end of life.\n\n\n Adam\u2019s holiness was mutable; God did not determine to keep him. It\n is otherwise with believers in Christ; God has determined to give\n them the kingdom (_Luke 12:32_). Yet this keeping by God, which we\n call sanctification, is accompanied and followed by a keeping of\n himself on the part of the believer, which we call perseverance.\n The former is alluded to in _John 17:11, 12_\u2014\u201c_keep them in thy\n name.... I kept them in thy name.... I guarded them, and not one\n of them perished, but the son of perdition_\u201d; the latter is\n alluded to in _1 John 5:18_\u2014\u201c_he that was __ begotten of God\n keepeth himself._\u201d Both are expressed in _Jude 21, 24_\u2014\u201c_Keep\n yourselves in the love of God.... Now unto him that is able to\n guard you from stumbling..._\u201d\n\n A German treatise on Pastoral Theology is entitled: \u201cKeep What\n Thou Hast\u201d\u2014an allusion to _2 Tim. 1:14_\u2014\u201c_That good thing which\n was committed unto thee guard through the Holy Spirit which\n dwelleth in us._\u201d Not only the pastor, but every believer, has a\n charge to keep; and the keeping of ourselves is as important a\n point of Christian doctrine as is the keeping of God. Both are\n expressed in the motto: _Teneo, Teneor_\u2014the motto on the front of\n the Y. M. C. A. building in Boston, underneath a stone cross,\n firmly clasped by two hands. The colored preacher said that\n \u201cPerseverance means: 1. Take hold; 2. Hold on; 3. Never let go.\u201d\n\n Physically, intellectually, morally, spiritually, there is need\n that we persevere. Paul, in _1 Cor. 9:27_, declares that he smites\n his body under the eye and makes a slave of it, lest after having\n preached to others he himself should be rejected; and in _2 Tim.\n 4:7_, at the end of his career, he rejoices that he has \u201c_kept the\n faith_.\u201d A. J. Gordon, Ministry of the Spirit, 115\u2014\u201cThe Christian\n is as \u2018_a tree planted by the streams of water, that bringeth\n forth its fruit in its season_\u2019 (_Ps. 1:3_), but to conclude that\n his growth will be as irresistible as that of the tree, coming as\n a matter of course simply because he has by regeneration been\n planted in Christ, is a grave mistake. The disciple is required to\n be consciously and intelligently active in his own growth, as the\n tree is not, \u2018_to give all diligence to make his calling and\n election sure_\u2019 (_2 Pet. 1:10_) by surrendering himself to the\n divine action.\u201d Clarke, Christian Theology, 379\u2014\u201cMan is able to\n fall, and God is able to keep him from falling; and through the\n various experiences of life God will so save his child out of all\n evil that he will be morally incapable of falling.\u201d\n\n\n1. Proof of the Doctrine of Perseverance.\n\n\nA. From Scripture.\n\n\n _John 10:28, 29_\u2014\u201c_they shall never perish, and no one shall\n snatch them out of my hand. My Father, who hath given them unto\n me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of\n the Father\u2019s hand_\u201d; _Rom. 11:29_\u2014\u201c_For the gifts and the calling\n of God are without repentance_\u201d; _1 Cor. 13:7_\u2014\u201c_endureth all\n things_\u201d; _cf._ _13_\u2014\u201c_But now abideth faith, hope, love_\u201d; _Phil.\n 1:6_\u2014\u201c_being confident of this very thing, that he who began a\n good work in you will perfect it until the day of Jesus Christ_\u201d;\n _2 Thess. 3:3_\u2014\u201c_But the Lord is faithful, who shall establish\n you, and guard you from the evil one_\u201d; _2 Tim. 1:12_\u2014\u201c_I know him\n whom I have believed, and I am persuaded that he is able to guard\n that which I have committed unto him against that day_\u201d; _1 Pet.\n 1:5_\u2014\u201c_who by the power of God are guarded through faith unto a\n salvation ready to be revealed in the last time_\u201d; _Rev.\n 3:10_\u2014\u201c_Because thou didst keep the word of my patience, I also\n will keep thee from the hour of trial, that hour which is to come\n upon the whole world, to try them that dwell upon the earth._\u201d\n\n _2 Tim. 1:12_\u2014\u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03b8\u03ae\u03ba\u03b7\u03bd \u03bc\u03bf\u03c5\u2014Ellicott translates: \u201c_the trust\n committed to me_,\u201d or \u201c_my deposit_\u201d = the office of preaching the\n gospel, the stewardship entrusted to the apostle; _cf._ _1 Tim.\n 6:20_\u2014\u201c_O Timothy, keep thy deposit_\u201d\u2014\u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03b8\u03ae\u03ba\u03b7\u03bd; and _2 Tim.\n 1:14_\u2014\u201c_Keep the good deposit_\u201d\u2014where the deposit seems to be the\n faith or doctrine delivered to him to preach. Nicoll, The Church\u2019s\n One Foundation, 211\u2014\u201cSome Christians waken each morning with a\n creed of fewer articles, and those that remain they are ready to\n surrender to a process of argument that convinces them. But it is\n a duty to _keep_. \u2018_Ye have an anointing from the Holy One, and ye\n know_\u2019 (_1 John 2:20_).... Ezra gave to his men a treasure of gold\n and silver and sacrificial vessels, and he charged them: \u2018_Watch\n ye, and keep them, until ye weigh them ... in thy chambers of the\n house of Jehovah_\u2019 (_Ezra 8:29_).\u201d See in the Autobiography of C.\n H. Spurgeon, 1:225, 256, the outline of a sermon on _John\n 6:37_\u2014\u201c_All that which the Father giveth me shall come unto me;\n and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out._\u201d Mr.\n Spurgeon remarks that this text can give us no comfort unless we\n see: 1. that God has given us his Holy Spirit; 2. that we have\n given ourselves to him. Christ will not cast us out because of our\n great sins, our long delays, our trying other saviors, our\n hardness of heart, our little faith, our poor dull prayers, our\n unbelief, our inveterate corruptions, our frequent backslidings,\n nor finally because every one else passes us by.\n\n\nB. From Reason.\n\n(_a_) It is a necessary inference from other doctrines,\u2014such as election,\nunion with Christ, regeneration, justification, sanctification.\n\n\n Election of certain individuals to salvation is election to bestow\n upon them such influences of the Spirit as will lead them not only\n to accept Christ, but to persevere and be saved. Union with Christ\n is indissoluble; regeneration is the beginning of a work of new\n creation, which is declared in justification, and completed in\n sanctification. All these doctrines are parts of a general scheme,\n which would come to naught if any single Christian were permitted\n to fall away.\n\n\n(_b_) It accords with analogy,\u2014God\u2019s preserving care being needed by, and\nbeing granted to, his spiritual, as well as his natural, creation.\n\n\n As natural life cannot uphold itself, but we \u201c_live, and move, and\n have our being_\u201d in God (_Acts 17:28_), so spiritual life cannot\n uphold itself, and God maintains the faith, love, and holy\n activity which he has originated. If he preserves our natural\n life, much more may we expect him to preserve the spiritual. _1\n Tim. 6:13_\u2014\u201c_I charge thee before God who preserveth all things\n alive_\u201d (R. V. marg.)\u2014\u03b6\u03c9\u03bf\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 = the great Preserver\n of all enables us to persist in our Christian course.\n\n\n(_c_) It is implied in all assurance of salvation,\u2014since this assurance is\ngiven by the Holy Spirit, and is based not upon the known strength of\nhuman resolution, but upon the purpose and operation of God.\n\n\n S. R. Mason: \u201cIf Satan and Adam both fell away from perfect\n holiness, it is a million to one that, in a world full of\n temptations and with all appetites and habits against me, I shall\n fall away from imperfect holiness, unless God by his almighty\n power keep me.\u201d It is in the power and purpose of God, then, that\n the believer puts his trust. But since this trust is awakened by\n the Holy Spirit, it must be that there is a divine fact\n corresponding to it; namely, God\u2019s purpose to exert his power in\n such a way that the Christian shall persevere. See Wardlaw, Syst.\n Theol., 2:550\u2010578; N. W. Taylor, Revealed Theology, 445\u2010460.\n\n _Job 6:11_\u2014\u201c_What is my strength, that I should wait? And what is\n mine end, that I should be patient?_\u201d \u201cHere is a note of self\u2010\n distrust. To be patient without any outlook, to endure without\n divine support\u2014Job does not promise it, and he trembles at the\n prospect; but none the less he sets his feet on the toilsome way\u201d\n (Genung). Dr. Lyman Beecher was asked whether he believed in the\n perseverance of the saints. He replied: \u201cI do, except when the\n wind is from the East.\u201d But the value of the doctrine is that we\n can believe it even when the wind _is_ from the East. It is well\n to hold on to God\u2019s hand, but it is better to have God\u2019s hand hold\n on to us. When we are weak, and forgetful and asleep, we need to\n be sure of God\u2019s care. Like the child who thought he was driving,\n but who found, after the trouble was over, that his father after\n all had been holding the reins, we too find when danger comes that\n behind our hands are the hands of God. The Perseverance of the\n Saints, looked at from the divine side, is the Preservation of the\n Saints, and the hymn that expresses the Christian\u2019s faith is the\n hymn: \u201cHow firm a foundation, ye saints of the Lord, Is laid for\n your faith in his excellent word!\u201d\n\n\n2. Objections to the Doctrine of Perseverance.\n\n\nThese objections are urged chiefly by Arminians and by Romanists.\n\nA. That it is inconsistent with human freedom.\u2014Answer: It is no more so\nthan is the doctrine of Election or the doctrine of Decrees.\n\n\n The doctrine is simply this, that God will bring to bear such\n influences upon all true believers, that they will freely\n persevere. Moule, Outlines of Christian Doctrine, 47\u2014\u201cIs grace, in\n any sense of the word, ever finally withdrawn? Yes, if by grace is\n meant any free gift of God tending to salvation; or, more\n specially, any action of the Holy Spirit tending in its nature\n thither.... But if by grace be meant the dwelling and working of\n Christ in the truly regenerate, there is no indication in\n Scripture of the withdrawal of it.\u201d\n\n\nB. That it tends to immorality.\u2014Answer: This cannot be, since the doctrine\ndeclares that God will save men by securing their perseverance in\nholiness.\n\n\n _2 Tim. 2:19_\u2014\u201c_Howbeit the firm foundation of God standeth,\n having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his: and, Let\n every one that nameth the name of the Lord depart from\n unrighteousness_\u201d; that is, the temple of Christian character has\n upon its foundation two significant inscriptions, the one\n declaring God\u2019s power, wisdom, and purpose of salvation; the other\n declaring the purity and holy activity, on the part of the\n believer, through which God\u2019s purpose is to be fulfilled; _1 Pet.\n 1:1, 2_\u2014\u201c_elect ... according to the foreknowledge of God the\n Father, in sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and\n sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ_\u201d; _2 Pet. 1:10,\n 11_\u2014\u201c_Wherefore, brethren, give the more diligence to make your\n calling and election sure: for if ye do these things, ye shall\n never stumble: for thus shall be richly supplied unto you the\n entrance into the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus\n Christ_.\u201d\n\n\nC. That it leads to indolence.\u2014Answer: This is a perversion of the\ndoctrine, continuously possible only to the unregenerate; since, to the\nregenerate, certainty of success is the strongest incentive to activity in\nthe conflict with sin.\n\n\n _1 John 5:4_\u2014\u201c_For whatsoever is begotten of God overcometh the\n world; and this is the victory that hath overcome the world, even\n our faith_.\u201d It is notoriously untrue that confidence of success\n inspires timidity or indolence. Thomas Fuller: \u201cYour salvation is\n his business; his service your business.\u201d The only prayers God\n will answer are those we ourselves cannot answer. For the very\n reason that \u201c_it is God who worketh in you both to will and to\n work, for his good pleasure_,\u201d the apostle exhorts: \u201c_work out\n your own salvation with fear and trembling_\u201d (_Phil. 2:12, 13_).\n\n\nD. That the Scripture commands to persevere and warnings against apostasy\nshow that certain, even of the regenerate, will fall away.\u2014Answer:\n\n(_a_) They show that some, who are apparently regenerate, will fall away.\n\n\n _Mat. 18:7_\u2014\u201c_Woe unto the world because of occasions of\n stumbling! for it must needs be that the occasions come; but woe\n to that man through whom the occasion cometh_\u201d; _1 Cor.\n 11:19_\u2014\u201c_For there must be also factions_ [lit. \u2018_heresies_\u2019]\n _among you, that they that are approved may be made manifest among\n you_\u201d; _1 John 2:19_\u2014\u201c_They went out from us, but they were not of\n us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us:\n but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they all\n are not of us_.\u201d Judas probably experienced strong emotions, and\n received strong impulses toward good, under the influence of\n Christ. The only falling from grace which is recognized in\n Scripture is not the falling of the regenerate, but the falling of\n the unregenerate, from influences tending to lead them to Christ.\n The Rabbins said that a drop of water will suffice to purify a man\n who has accidentally touched a creeping thing, but an ocean will\n not suffice for his cleansing so long as he purposely keeps the\n creeping thing in his hand.\n\n\n(_b_) They show that the truly regenerate, and those who are only\napparently so, are not certainly distinguishable in this life.\n\n\n _Mal. 3:18_\u2014\u201c_Then shall ye return and discern between the\n righteous and the wicked, between him that serveth God and him\n that serveth him not_\u201d; _Mat. 13:25, 47_\u2014\u201c_while men slept, his\n enemy came and sowed tares also among the wheat, and went away....\n Again, the kingdom of heaven is like unto a net, that was cast\n into the sea, and gathered of every kind_\u201d; _Rom. 9:6, 7_\u2014\u201c_For\n they are not all Israel, that are of Israel: neither, because they\n are Abraham\u2019s seed, are they all children_\u201d; _Rev. 3:1_\u2014\u201c_I know\n thy works, that thou hast a name that thou livest, and thou art\n dead_.\u201d The tares were never wheat, and the bad fish never were\n good, in spite of the fact that their true nature was not for a\n while recognized.\n\n\n(_c_) They show the fearful consequences of rejecting Christ, to those who\nhave enjoyed special divine influences, but who are only apparently\nregenerate.\n\n\n _Heb. 10:26\u201029_\u2014\u201c_For if we sin wilfully after that we have\n received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more a\n sacrifice for sins, but a certain fearful expectation of judgment,\n and a fierceness of fire which shall devour the adversaries. A man\n that hath set at nought Moses\u2019 law dieth without compassion on the\n word of two or three witnesses: of how much sorer punishment,\n think ye, shall he be judged worthy, who hath trodden under foot\n the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant\n wherewith he was sanctified an unholy thing, and hath done despite\n unto the Spirit of grace?_\u201d Here \u201c_sanctified_\u201d = external\n sanctification, like that of the ancient Israelites, by outward\n connection with God\u2019s people; _cf._ _1 Cor. 7:14_\u2014\u201c_the\n unbelieving husband is sanctified in the wife_.\u201d\n\n In considering these and the following Scripture passages, much\n will depend upon our view of inspiration. If we hold that Christ\u2019s\n promise was fulfilled and that his apostles were led into all the\n truth, we shall assume that there is unity in their teaching, and\n shall recognize in their variations only aspects and applications\n of the teaching of our Lord; in other words, Christ\u2019s doctrine in\n _John 10:28, 29_ will be the norm for the interpretation of\n seemingly diverse and at first sight inconsistent passages. There\n was a \u201c_faith which was once for all delivered unto the saints_,\u201d\n and for this primitive faith we are exhorted \u201c_to contend\n earnestly_\u201d (_Jude 3_).\n\n\n(_d_) They show what the fate of the truly regenerate would be, in case\nthey should not persevere.\n\n\n _Heb. 6:4\u20106_\u2014\u201c_For as touching those who were once enlightened and\n tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy\n Spirit, and tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the\n world to come, and then fell away, it is impossible to renew them\n again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son\n of God afresh, and put him to an open shame._\u201d This is to be\n understood as a hypothetical case,\u2014as is clear from _verse 9_\n which follows: \u201c_But, beloved, we are persuaded better things of\n you, and things which accompany salvation, though we thus speak_.\u201d\n Dr. A. C. Kendrick, Com. _in loco_: \u201cIn the phrase \u2018_once\n enlightened_,\u2019 the \u2018_once_\u2019 is \u1f05\u03c0\u03b1\u03be = once for all. The text\n describes a condition subjectively possible, and therefore needing\n to be held up in earnest warning to the believer, while\n objectively and in the absolute purpose of God, it never\n occurs.... If passages like this teach the possibility of falling\n from grace, they teach also the impossibility of restoration to\n it. The saint who once apostatizes has apostatized forever.\u201d So\n _Ez. 18:24_\u2014\u201c_when the righteous turneth away from his\n righteousness, and committeth iniquity ... in them shall he die_\u201d;\n _2 Pet. 2:20_\u2014\u201c_For if, after they have escaped the defilements of\n the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus\n Christ, they are again entangled therein and overcome, the last\n state is become worse with them than the first_.\u201d So, in _Mat.\n 5:13_\u2014\u201c_if the salt have lost its savor, wherewith shall it be\n salted?_\u201d\u2014if this teaches that the regenerate may lose their\n religion, it also teaches that they can never recover it. It\n really shows only that Christians who do not perform their proper\n functions as Christians become harmful and contemptible (Broadus,\n _in loco_).\n\n\n(_e_) They show that the perseverance of the truly regenerate may be\nsecured by these very commands and warnings.\n\n\n _1 Cor. 9:27_\u2014\u201c_I buffet my body, and bring it into bondage: lest\n by any means, after that I have preached to others, I myself\n should be rejected_\u201d\u2014or, to bring out the meaning more fully: \u201c_I\n beat my body blue_ [or, \u2018strike it under the eye\u2019], _and make it a\n slave, lest after having been a herald to others, I myself should\n be rejected_\u201d (\u201cunapproved,\u201d \u201ccounted unworthy of the prize\u201d);\n _10:12_\u2014\u201c_Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed\n lest he fall_.\u201d Quarles, Emblems: \u201cThe way to be safe is never to\n be secure.\u201d Wrightnour: \u201cWarning a traveler to keep a certain\n path, and by this means keeping him in that path, is no evidence\n that he will ever fall into a pit by the side of the path simply\n because he is warned of it.\u201d\n\n\n(_f_) They do not show that it is certain, or possible, that any truly\nregenerate person will fall away.\n\n\n The Christian is like a man making his way up\u2010hill, who\n occasionally slips back, yet always has his face set toward the\n summit. The unregenerate man has his face turned downwards, and he\n is slipping all the way. C. H. Spurgeon: \u201cThe believer, like a man\n on shipboard, may fall again and again on the deck, but he will\n never fall overboard.\u201d\n\n\nE. That we have actual examples of such apostasy.\u2014We answer:\n\n(_a_) Such are either men once outwardly reformed, like Judas and Ananias,\nbut never renewed in heart;\n\n\n But, _per contra_, instance the experience of a man in typhoid\n fever, who apparently repented, but who never remembered it when\n he was restored to health. Sick\u2010bed and death\u2010bed conversions are\n not the best. There was one penitent thief, that none might\n despair; there was but one penitent thief, that none might\n presume. The hypocrite is like the wire that gets a second\u2010hand\n electricity from the live wire running parallel with it. This\n second\u2010hand electricity is effective only within narrow limits,\n and its efficacy is soon exhausted. The live wire has connection\n with the source of power in the dynamo.\n\n\n(_b_) Or they are regenerate men, who, like David and Peter, have fallen\ninto temporary sin, from which they will, before death, be reclaimed by\nGod\u2019s discipline.\n\n\n Instance the young profligate who, in a moment of apparent\n drowning, repented, was then rescued, and afterward lived a long\n life as a Christian. If he had not been rescued, his repentance\n would never have been known, nor the answer to his mother\u2019s\n prayers. So, in the moment of a backslider\u2019s death, God can renew\n repentance and faith. Cromwell on his death\u2010bed questioned his\n Chaplain as to the doctrine of final perseverance, and, on being\n assured that it was a certain truth, said: \u201cThen I am happy, for I\n am sure that I was once in a state of grace.\u201d But reliance upon a\n past experience is like trusting in the value of a policy of life\n insurance upon which several years\u2019 premiums have been unpaid. If\n the policy has not lapsed, it is because of extreme grace. The\n only conclusive evidence of perseverance is a present experience\n of Christ\u2019s presence and indwelling, corroborated by active\n service and purity of life.\n\n On the general subject, see Edwards, Works, 3:509\u2010532, and 4:104;\n Ridgeley, Body of Divinity, 2:164\u2010194; John Owen, Works, vol. 11;\n Woods, Works, 3:221\u2010246; Van Oosterzee, Christian Dogmatics,\n 662\u2010666.\n\n\n\n\n\nPART VII. ECCLESIOLOGY, OR THE DOCTRINE OF THE CHURCH.\n\n\n\n\nChapter I. The Constitution Of The Church. Or Church Polity.\n\n\n\nI. Definition of the Church.\n\n\n(_a_) The church of Christ, in its largest signification, is the whole\ncompany of regenerate persons in all times and ages, in heaven and on\nearth (Mat. 16:18; Eph. 1:22, 23; 3:10; 5:24, 25; Col. 1:18; Heb. 12:23).\nIn this sense, the church is identical with the spiritual kingdom of God;\nboth signify that redeemed humanity in which God in Christ exercises\nactual spiritual dominion (John 3:3, 5).\n\n\n _Mat. 16:18_\u2014\u201c_thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my\n church; and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it_\u201d;\n _Eph. 1:22, 23_\u2014\u201c_and he put all things in subjection under his\n feet, and gave him to be head over all things to the church, which\n is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all_\u201d;\n _3:10_\u2014\u201c_to the intent that now unto the principalities and the\n powers in the heavenly places might be made known through the\n church the manifold wisdom of God_\u201d; _5:24, 25_\u2014\u201c_But as the\n church is subject to Christ, so let the wives also be to their\n husbands in everything. Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ\n also loved the church, and gave himself up for it_\u201d; _Col.\n 1:18_\u2014\u201c_And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the\n beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he\n might have the preeminence_\u201d; _Heb. 12:23_\u2014\u201c_the general assembly\n and church of the firstborn who are enrolled in heaven_\u201d; _John\n 3:3, 5_\u2014\u201c_Except one be born anew, he cannot see the kingdom of\n God. ... Except one be born of water and the Spirit, he cannot\n enter into the kingdom of God._\u201d\n\n Cicero\u2019s words apply here: \u201cUna navis est jam bonorum omnium\u201d\u2014all\n good men are in one boat. Cicero speaks of the state, but it is\n still more true of the church invisible. Andrews, in Bib. Sac.,\n Jan. 1883:14, mentions the following differences between the\n church and kingdom, or, as we prefer to say, between the visible\n church and the invisible church: (1) the church began with\n Christ,\u2014the kingdom began earlier; (2) the church is confined to\n believers in the historic Christ,\u2014the kingdom includes all God\u2019s\n children; (3) the church belongs wholly to this world\u2014not so the\n kingdom; (4) the church is visible,\u2014not so the kingdom; (5) the\n church has _quasi_ organic character, and leads out into local\n churches,\u2014this is not so with the kingdom. On the universal or\n invisible church, see Cremer, Lexicon N. T., transl., 113, 114,\n 331; Jacob, Eccl. Polity of N. T., 12.\n\n H. C. Vedder: \u201cThe church is a spiritual body, consisting only of\n those regenerated by the Spirit of God.\u201d Yet the Westminster\n Confession affirms that the church \u201cconsists of all those\n throughout the world that profess the true religion, together with\n their children.\u201d This definition includes in the church a\n multitude who not only give no evidence of regeneration, but who\n plainly show themselves to be unregenerate. In many lands it\n practically identifies the church with the world. Augustine indeed\n thought that \u201c_the field_,\u201d in _Mat. 13:38_, is the church,\n whereas Jesus says very distinctly that it \u201c_is the world_.\u201d\n Augustine held that good and bad alike were to be permitted to\n dwell together in the church, without attempt to separate them;\n see Broadus, Com. _in loco_. But the parable gives a reason, not\n why we should not try to put the wicked out of the church, but why\n God does not immediately put them out of the world, the tares\n being separated from the wheat only at the final judgment of\n mankind.\n\n Yet the universal church includes all true believers. It fulfils\n the promise of God to Abraham in _Gen. 15:5_\u2014\u201c_Look now toward\n heaven, and number the stars, if thou be able to number them: and\n he said into him, So shall thy seed be_.\u201d The church shall be\n immortal, since it draws its life from Christ: _Is. 65:22_\u2014\u201c_as\n the days of a tree shall be the days of my people_\u201d; _Zech. 4:2,\n 3_\u2014\u201c_a candlestick all of gold ... and two olive\u2010trees by it_.\u201d\n Dean Stanley, Life and Letters, 2:242, 243\u2014\u201cA Spanish Roman\n Catholic, Cervantes, said: \u2018Many are the roads by which God\n carries his own to heaven.\u2019 D\u00f6llinger: \u2018Theology must become a\n science not, as heretofore, for making war, but for making peace,\n and thus bringing about that reconciliation of churches for which\n the whole civilized world is longing.\u2019 In their loftiest moods of\n inspiration, the Catholic Thomas \u00e0 Kempis, the Puritan Milton, the\n Anglican Keble, rose above their peculiar tenets, and above the\n limits that divide denominations, into the higher regions of a\n common Christianity. It was the Baptist Bunyan who taught the\n world that there was \u2018a common ground of communion which no\n difference of external rites could efface.\u2019 It was the Moravian\n Gambold who wrote: \u2018The man That could surround the sum of things,\n and spy The heart of God and secrets of his empire, Would speak\n but love. With love, the bright result Would change the hue of\n intermediate things, And make one thing of all theology.\u2019 \u201d\n\n\n(_b_) The church, in this large sense, is nothing less than the body of\nChrist\u2014the organism to which he gives spiritual life, and through which he\nmanifests the fulness of his power and grace. The church therefore cannot\nbe defined in merely human terms, as an aggregate of individuals\nassociated for social, benevolent, or even spiritual purposes. There is a\ntranscendent element in the church. It is the great company of persons\nwhom Christ has saved, in whom he dwells, to whom and through whom he\nreveals God (Eph. 1:22, 23).\n\n\n _Eph. 1:22, 23_\u2014\u201c_the church, which is his body, the fulness of\n him that filleth all in all._\u201d He who is the life of nature and of\n humanity reveals himself most fully in the great company of those\n who have joined themselves to him by faith. Union with Christ is\n the presupposition of the church. This alone transforms the sinner\n into a Christian, and this alone makes possible that vital and\n spiritual fellowship between individuals which constitutes the\n organizing principle of the church. The same divine life which\n ensures the pardon and the perseverance of the believer unites him\n to all other believers. The indwelling Christ makes the church\n superior to and more permanent than all humanitarian\n organizations; they die, but because Christ lives, the church\n lives also. Without a proper conception of this sublime relation\n of the church to Christ, we cannot properly appreciate our dignity\n as church members, or our high calling as shepherds of the flock.\n Not \u201cubi ecclesia, ibi Christus,\u201d but \u201cubi Christus, ibi\n ecclesia,\u201d should be our motto. Because Christ is omnipresent and\n omnipotent, \u201c_the same yesterday, and to\u2010day, yea and forever_\u201d\n (_Heb. 13:8_), what Burke said of the nation is true of the\n church: It is \u201cindeed a partnership, but a partnership not only\n between those who are living, but between those who are living,\n those who are dead, and those who are yet to be born.\u201d\n\n McGiffert, Apostolic Church, 501\u2014\u201cPaul\u2019s conception of the church\n as the body of Christ was first emphasized and developed by\n Ignatius. He reproduces in his writings the substance of all the\n Paulinism that the church at large made permanently its own: the\n pre\u00ebxistence and deity of Christ, the union of the believer with\n Christ without which the Christian life is impossible, the\n importance of Christ\u2019s death, the church the body of Christ. Rome\n never fully recognized Paul\u2019s teachings, but her system rests upon\n his doctrine of the church the body of Christ. The modern doctrine\n however makes the kingdom to be not spiritual or future, but a\n reality of this world.\u201d The redemption of the body, the redemption\n of institutions, the redemption of nations, are indeed all\n purposed by Christ. Christians should not only strive to rescue\n individual men from the slough of vice, but they should devise\n measures for draining that slough and making that vice impossible;\n in other words, they should labor for the coming of the kingdom of\n God in society. But this is not to identify the church with\n politics, prohibition, libraries, athletics. The spiritual\n fellowship is to be the fountain from which all these activities\n spring, while at the same time Christ\u2019s \u201c_kingdom is not of this\n world_\u201d (_John 18:36_).\n\n A. J. Gordon, Ministry of the Spirit, 24, 25, 207\u2014\u201cAs Christ is\n the temple of God, so the church is the temple of the Holy Spirit.\n As God could be seen only through Christ, so the Holy Spirit can\n be seen only through the church. As Christ was the image of the\n invisible God, so the church is appointed to be the image of the\n invisible Christ, and the members of Christ, when they are\n glorified with him, shall be the express image of his person....\n The church and the kingdom are not identical terms, if we mean by\n the kingdom the visible reign and government of Jesus Christ on\n earth. In another sense they are identical. As is the king, so is\n the kingdom. The king is present now in the world, only invisibly\n and by the Holy Spirit; so the kingdom is now present invisibly\n and spiritually in the hearts of believers. The king is to come\n again visibly and gloriously; so shall the kingdom appear visibly\n and gloriously. In other words, the kingdom is already here in\n mystery: it is to be here to manifestation. Now the spiritual\n kingdom is administered by the Holy Spirit, and it extends from\n Pentecost to Parousia. At the Parousia\u2014the appearing of the Son of\n man in glory\u2014when he shall take unto himself his great power and\n reign (_Rev. 11:17_), when he who has now gone into a far country\n to be invested with a kingdom shall return and enter upon his\n government (_Luke 19:15_), then the invisible shall give way to\n the visible, the kingdom in mystery shall emerge into the kingdom\n in manifestation, and the Holy Spirit\u2019s administration shall yield\n to that of Christ.\u201d\n\n\n(_c_) The Scriptures, however, distinguish between this invisible or\nuniversal church, and the individual church, in which the universal church\ntakes local and temporal form, and in which the idea of the church as a\nwhole is concretely exhibited.\n\n\n _Mat. 10:32_\u2014\u201c_Every one therefore, who shall confess me before\n men, him will I also confess before my Father who is in heaven_\u201d;\n _12:34, 35_\u2014\u201c_out of the abundance of the heart the mouth\n speaketh. The good man out of his good treasure bringeth forth\n good things_\u201d; _Rom. 10:9, 10_\u2014\u201c_if thou shalt confess with thy\n month Jesus as Lord, and shalt believe in thy heart that God\n raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved: for with the heart\n man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is\n made unto salvation_\u201d; _James 1:18_\u2014\u201c_Of his own will he brought\n us forth by the word of truth, that we should be a kind of\n firstfruits of his creatures_\u201d\u2014we were saved, not for ourselves\n only, but as parts and beginnings of an organic kingdom of God;\n believers are called \u201c_firstfruits_,\u201d because from them the\n blessing shall spread, until the whole world shall be pervaded\n with the new life; Pentecost, as the feast of first\u2010fruits, was\n but the beginning of a stream that shall continue to flow until\n the whole race of man is gathered in.\n\n R. S. Storrs: \u201cWhen any truth becomes central and vital, there\n comes the desire to utter it,\u201d\u2014and we may add, not only in words,\n but in organization. So beliefs crystallize into institutions. But\n Christian faith is something more vital than the common beliefs of\n the world. Linking the soul to Christ, it brings Christians into\n living fellowship with one another before any bonds of outward\n organization exist; outward organization, indeed, only expresses\n and symbolizes this inward union of spirit to Christ and to one\n another. Horatius Bonar: \u201cThou must be true thyself, If thou the\n truth wouldst teach; Thy soul must overflow, if thou Another\u2019s\n soul wouldst reach; It needs the overflow of heart To give the\n lips full speech. Think truly, and thy thoughts Shall the world\u2019s\n famine feed; Speak truly, and each word of thine Shall be a\n fruitful seed; Live truly, and thy life shall be A great and noble\n creed.\u201d\n\n Contentio Veritatis, 128, 129\u2014\u201cThe kingdom of God is first a state\n of the individual soul, and then, secondly, a society made up of\n those who enjoy that state.\u201d Dr. F. L. Patton: \u201cThe best way for a\n man to serve the church at large is to serve the church to which\n he belongs.\u201d Herbert Stead: \u201cThe kingdom is not to be narrowed\n down to the church, nor the church evaporated into the kingdom.\u201d\n To do the first is to set up a monstrous ecclesiasticism; to do\n the second is to destroy the organism through which the kingdom\n manifests itself and does its work in the world (W. R. Taylor).\n Prof. Dalman, in his work on The Words of Jesus in the Light of\n Postbiblical Writing and the Aramaic Language, contends that the\n Greek phrase translated \u201ckingdom of God\u201d should be rendered \u201cthe\n sovereignty of God.\u201d He thinks that it points to the reign of God,\n rather than to the realm over which he reigns. This rendering, if\n accepted, takes away entirely the support from the Ritschlian\n conception of the kingdom of God as an earthly and outward\n organization.\n\n\n(_d_) The individual church may be defined as that smaller company of\nregenerate persons, who, in any given community, unite themselves\nvoluntarily together, in accordance with Christ\u2019s laws, for the purpose of\nsecuring the complete establishment of his kingdom in themselves and in\nthe world.\n\n\n _Mat. 18:17_\u2014\u201c_And if he refuse to hear them, tell it unto the\n church: and if he refuse to hear the church also, let him be unto\n thee as the Gentile and the publican_\u201d; _Acts 14:23_\u2014\u201c_appointed\n for them elders in every church_\u201d; _Rom. 16:5_\u2014\u201c_salute the church\n that is in their house_\u201d; _1 Cor. 1:2_\u2014\u201c_the church of God which\n is at Corinth_\u201d; _4:17_\u2014\u201c_even as I teach everywhere in every\n church_\u201d; _1 Thess. 2:14_\u2014\u201c_the churches of God which are in Jud\u00e6a\n in Christ Jesus._\u201d\n\n We do not define the church as a body of \u201cbaptized believers,\u201d\n because baptism is but one of \u201cChrist\u2019s laws,\u201d in accordance with\n which believers unite themselves. Since these laws are the laws of\n church\u2010organization contained in the New Testament, no Sunday\n School, Temperance Society, or Young Men\u2019s Christian Association,\n is properly a church. These organizations 1. lack the transcendent\n element\u2014they are instituted and managed by man only; 2. they are\n not confined to the regenerate, or to those alone who give\n credible evidence of regeneration; 3. they presuppose and require\n no particular form of doctrine; 4. they observe no ordinances; 5.\n they are at best mere adjuncts and instruments of the church, but\n are not themselves churches; 6. their decisions therefore are\n devoid of the divine authority and obligation which belong to the\n decisions of the church.\n\n The laws of Christ, in accordance with which believers unite\n themselves into churches, may be summarized as follows: 1. the\n sufficiency and sole authority of Scripture as the rule both of\n doctrine and polity; (2) credible evidence of regeneration and\n conversion as prerequisite to church\u2010membership; (3) immersion\n only, as answering to Christ\u2019s command of baptism, and to the\n symbolic meaning of the ordinance; (4) the order of the ordinance,\n Baptism, and the Lord\u2019s Supper, as of divine appointment, as well\n as the ordinances themselves; (5) the right of each member of the\n church to a voice in its government and discipline; (6) each\n church, while holding fellowship with other churches, solely\n responsible to Christ; (7) the freedom of the individual\n conscience, and the total independence of church and state. Hovey\n in his Restatement of Denominational Principles (Am. Bap. Pub.\n Society) gives these principles as follows: 1. the supreme\n authority of the Scriptures in matters of religion; 2. personal\n accountability to God in religion; 3. union with Christ essential\n to salvation; 4. a new life the only evidence of that union; 5.\n the new life one of unqualified obedience to Christ. The most\n concise statement of Baptist doctrine and history is that of\n Vedder, in Jackson\u2019s Dictionary of Religious Knowledge, 1:74\u201085.\n\n With the lax views of Scripture which are becoming common among us\n there is a tendency in our day to lose sight of the transcendent\n element in the church. Let us remember that the church is not a\n humanitarian organization resting upon common human brotherhood,\n but a supernatural body, which traces its descent from the second,\n not the first, Adam, and which manifests the power of the divine\n Christ. Mazzini in Italy claimed Jesus, but repudiated his church.\n So modern socialists cry: \u201cLiberty, Equality, Fraternity,\u201d and\n deny that there is need of anything more than human unity,\n development, and culture. But God has made the church to sit with\n Christ \u201c_in the heavenly places_\u201d (_Eph. 2:6_). It is the\n regeneration which comes about through union with Christ which\n constitutes the primary and most essential element in\n ecclesiology. \u201cWe do not stand, first of all, for restricted\n communion, nor for immersion as the only valid form of baptism,\n nor for any particular theory of Scripture, but rather for a\n regenerate church membership. The essence of the gospel is a new\n life in Christ, of which Christian experience is the outworking\n and Christian consciousness is the witness. Christian life is as\n important as conversion. Faith must show itself by works. We must\n seek the temporal as well as spiritual salvation of men, and the\n salvation of society also\u201d (Leighton Williams).\n\n E. G. Robinson: \u201cChrist founded a church only proleptically. In\n _Mat. 18:17_, \u1f10\u03ba\u03ba\u03bb\u03b7\u03c3\u03af\u03b1 is not used technically. The church is an\n outgrowth of the Jewish synagogue, though its method and economy\n are different. There was little or no organization at first.\n Christ himself did not organize the church. This was the work of\n the apostles after Pentecost. The germ however existed before.\n Three persons may constitute a church, and may administer the\n ordinances. Councils have only advisory authority. Diocesan\n episcopacy is antiscriptural and antichristian.\u201d\n\n The principles mentioned above are the essential principles of\n Baptist churches, although other bodies of Christians have come to\n recognise a portion of them. Bodies of Christians which refuse to\n accept these principles we may, in a somewhat loose and modified\n sense, call churches; but we cannot regard them as churches\n organized in all respects according to Christ\u2019s laws, or as\n completely answering to the New Testament model of church\n organization. We follow common usage when we address a Lieutenant\n Colonel as \u201cColonel,\u201d and a Lieutenant Governor as \u201cGovernor.\u201d It\n is only courtesy to speak of pedobaptist organizations as\n \u201cchurches,\u201d although we do not regard these churches as organized\n in full accordance with Christ\u2019s laws as they are indicated to us\n in the New Testament. To refuse thus to recognize them would be a\n discourtesy like that of the British Commander in Chief, when he\n addressed General Washington as \u201cMr. Washington.\u201d\n\n As Luther, having found the doctrine of justification by faith,\n could not recognize that doctrine as Christian which taught\n justification by works, but denounced the church which held it as\n Antichrist, saying, \u201cHere I stand; I cannot do otherwise, God help\n me,\u201d so we, in matters not indifferent, as feet\u2010washing, but\n vitally affecting the existence of the church, as regenerate\n church\u2010membership, must stand by the New Testament, and refuse to\n call any other body of Christians a regular church, that is not\n organized according to Christ\u2019s laws. The English word \u201cchurch\u201d\n like the Scotch \u201ckirk\u201d and the German \u201c_Kirche_,\u201d is derived from\n the Greek \u03ba\u03c5\u03c1\u03b9\u03b1\u03ba\u03ae, and means \u201cbelonging to the Lord.\u201d The term\n itself should teach us to regard only Christ\u2019s laws as our rule of\n organization.\n\n\n(_e_) Besides these two significations of the term \u201cchurch,\u201d there are\nproperly in the New Testament no others. The word \u1f10\u03ba\u03ba\u03bb\u03b7\u03c3\u03af\u03b1 is indeed used\nin Acts 7:38; 19:32, 39; Heb. 2:12, to designate a popular assembly; but\nsince this is a secular use of the term, it does not here concern us. In\ncertain passages, as for example Acts 9:31 (\u1f10\u03ba\u03ba\u03bb\u03b7\u03c3\u03af\u03b1, sing., \u05d0 A B C), 1\nCor. 12:28, Phil. 3:6, and 1 Tim. 3:15, \u1f10\u03ba\u03ba\u03bb\u03b7\u03c3\u03af\u03b1 appears to be used either\nas a generic or as a collective term, to denote simply the body of\nindependent local churches existing in a given region or at a given epoch.\nBut since there is no evidence that these churches were bound together in\nany outward organization, this use of the term \u1f10\u03ba\u03ba\u03bb\u03b7\u03c3\u03af\u03b1 cannot be regarded\nas adding any new sense to those of \u201cthe universal church\u201d and \u201cthe local\nchurch\u201d already mentioned.\n\n\n _Acts 7:38_\u2014\u201c_the church_ [marg. \u2018_congregation_\u2019] _in the\n wilderness_\u201d = the whole body of the people of Israel;\n _19:32_\u2014\u201c_the assembly was in confusion_\u201d\u2014the tumultuous mob in\n the theatre at Ephesus; _39_\u2014\u201c_the regular assembly_\u201d; _9:31_\u2014\u201c_So\n the church throughout all Jud\u00e6a and Galilee and Samaria had peace,\n being edified_\u201d; _1 Cor. 12:28_\u2014\u201c_And God hath set some in the\n church, first apostles, secondly prophets, thirdly teachers_\u201d;\n _Phil. 3:6_\u2014\u201c_as touching zeal, persecuting the church_\u201d; _1 Tim.\n 3:15_\u2014\u201c_that thou mayest know how men ought to behave themselves\n in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the\n pillar and ground of the truth._\u201d\n\n In the original use of the word \u1f10\u03ba\u03ba\u03bb\u03b7\u03c3\u03af\u03b1, as a popular assembly,\n there was doubtless an allusion to the derivation from \u1f10\u03ba and\n \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03ad\u03c9, to call out by herald. Some have held that the N. T. term\n contains an allusion to the fact that the members of Christ\u2019s\n church are called, chosen, elected by God. This, however, is more\n than doubtful. In common use, the term had lost its etymological\n meaning, and signified merely an assembly, however gathered or\n summoned. The church was never so large that it could not\n assemble. The church of Jerusalem gathered for the choice of\n deacons (_Acts 6:2, 5_), and the church of Antioch gathered to\n hear Paul\u2019s account of his missionary journey (_Acts 14:27_).\n\n It is only by a common figure of rhetoric that many churches are\n spoken of together in the singular number, in such passages as\n _Acts 9:31_. We speak generically of \u201cman,\u201d meaning the whole race\n of men; and of \u201cthe horse,\u201d meaning all horses. Gibbon, speaking\n of the successive tribes that swept down upon the Roman Empire,\n uses a noun in the singular number, and describes them as \u201cthe\n several detachments of that immense army of northern\n barbarians,\u201d\u2014yet he does not mean to intimate that these tribes\n had any common government. So we may speak of \u201cthe American\n college\u201d or \u201cthe American theological seminary,\u201d but we do not\n thereby mean that the colleges or the seminaries are bound\n together by any tie of outward organization.\n\n So Paul says that God has set in the church apostles, prophets,\n and teachers (_1 Cor. 12:28_), but the word \u201cchurch\u201d is only a\n collective term for the many independent churches. In this same\n sense, we may speak of \u201cthe Baptist church\u201d of New York, or of\n America; but it must be remembered that we use the term without\n any such implication of common government as is involved in the\n phrases \u201cthe Presbyterian church,\u201d or \u201cthe Protestant Episcopal\n church,\u201d or \u201cthe Roman Catholic church\u201d; with us, in this\n connection, the term \u201cchurch\u201d means simply \u201cchurches.\u201d\n\n Broadus, in his Com. on Mat., page 359, suggests that the word\n \u1f10\u03ba\u03ba\u03bb\u03b7\u03c3\u03af\u03b1 in _Acts 9:31_, \u201cdenotes the original church at\n Jerusalem, whose members were by the persecution widely scattered\n throughout Judea and Galilee and Samaria, and held meetings\n wherever they were, but still belonged to the one original\n organization.... When Paul wrote to the Galatians, nearly twenty\n years later, these separate meetings had been organized into\n distinct churches, and so he speaks (_Gal. 1:22_) in reference to\n that same period, of \u2018_the churches of Jud\u00e6a which were in\n Christ_.\u2019 \u201d On the meaning of \u1f10\u03ba\u03ba\u03bb\u03b7\u03c3\u03af\u03b1, see Cremer, Lex. N. T.,\n 329; Trench, Syn. N. T., 1:18; Girdlestone, Syn. O. T., 367;\n Curtis, Progress of Baptist Principles, 301; Dexter,\n Congregationalism, 25; Dagg, Church Order, 100\u2010120; Robinson, N.\n T. Lex., _sub voce_.\n\n\nThe prevailing usage of the N. T. gives to the term \u1f10\u03ba\u03ba\u03bb\u03b7\u03c3\u03af\u03b1 the second of\nthese two significations. It is this local church only which has definite\nand temporal existence, and of this alone we henceforth treat. Our\ndefinition of the individual church implies the two following particulars:\n\n\nA. The church, like the family and the state, is an institution of divine\nappointment.\n\n\nThis is plain: (_a_) from its relation to the church universal, as its\nconcrete embodiment; (_b_) from the fact that its necessity is grounded in\nthe social and religious nature of man; (_c_) from the Scripture,\u2014as for\nexample, Christ\u2019s command in Mat. 18:17, and the designation \u201cchurch of\nGod,\u201d applied to individual churches (1 Cor. 1:2).\n\n\n President Wayland: \u201cThe universal church comes before the\n particular church. The society which Christ has established is the\n foundation of every particular association calling itself a church\n of Christ.\u201d Andrews, in Bib. Sac., Jan. 1883:35\u201058, on the\n conception \u1f10\u03ba\u03ba\u03bb\u03b7\u03c3\u03af\u03b1 in the N. T., says that \u201cthe \u2018church\u2019 is the\n _prius_ of all local \u2018churches.\u2019 \u1f10\u03ba\u03ba\u03bb\u03b7\u03c3\u03af\u03b1 in _Acts 9:31_ = the\n church, so far as represented in those provinces. It is\n ecumenical\u2010local, as in _1 Cor. 10:33_. The local church is a\n microcosm, a specialized localization of the universal body. \u05e7\u05d4\u05dc,\n in the O. T. and in the Targums, means the whole congregation of\n Israel, and then secondarily those local bodies which were parts\n and representations of the whole. Christ, using Aramaic, probably\n used \u05e7\u05d4\u05dc in _Mat. 18:17_. He took his idea of the church from it,\n not from the heathen use of the word \u1f10\u03ba\u03ba\u03bb\u03b7\u03c3\u03af\u03b1, which expresses the\n notion of locality and state much more than \u05e7\u05d4\u05dc. The larger sense\n of \u1f10\u03ba\u03ba\u03bb\u03b7\u03c3\u03af\u03b1 is the primary. Local churches are points of\n consciousness and activity for the great all\u2010inclusive unit, and\n they are not themselves the units for an ecclesiastical aggregate.\n They are faces, not parts of the one church.\u201d\n\n Christ, in _Mat. 18:17_, delegates authority to the whole\n congregation of believers, and at the same time limits authority\n to the local church. The local church is not an end in itself, but\n exists for the sake of the kingdom. Unity is not to be that of\n merely local churches, but that of the kingdom, and that kingdom\n is internal, \u201c_cometh not with observation_\u201d (_Luke 17:20_), but\n consists in \u201c_righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit_\u201d\n (_Rom. 14:17_). The word \u201cchurch,\u201d in the universal sense, is not\n employed by any other N. T. writer before Paul. Paul was\n interested, not simply in individual conversions, but in the\n growth of the church of God, as the body of Christ. He held to the\n unity of all local churches with the mother church at Jerusalem.\n The church in a city or in a house is merely a local manifestation\n of the one universal church and derived its dignity therefrom.\n Teaching of the Twelve Apostles: \u201cAs this broken bread was\n scattered upon the mountains, and being gathered became one, so\n may thy church be gathered together from the ends of the earth\n into thy kingdom.\u201d\n\n Sabatier, Philos. Religion, 92\u2014\u201cThe social action of religion\n springs from its very essence. Men of the same religion have no\n more imperious need than that of praying and worshiping together.\n State police have always failed to confine growing religious sects\n within the sanctuary or the home ... God, it is said, is the place\n where spirits blend. In rising toward him, man necessarily passes\n beyond the limits of his own individuality. He feels instinctively\n that the principle of his being is the principle of the life of\n his brethren also, that that which gives him safety must give it\n to all.\u201d Rothe held that, as men reach the full development of\n their nature and appropriate the perfection of the Savior, the\n separation between the religious and the moral life will vanish,\n and the Christian state, as the highest sphere of human life\n representing all human functions, will displace the church. \u201cIn\n proportion as the Savior Christianizes the state by means of the\n church, must the progressive completion of the structure of the\n church prove the cause of its abolition. The decline of the church\n is not therefore to be deplored, but is to be recognized as the\n consequence of the independence and completeness of the religious\n life\u201d (Encyc. Brit., 21:2). But it might equally be maintained\n that the state, as well as the church, will pass away, when the\n kingdom of God is fully come; see _John 4:21_\u2014\u201c_the hour cometh,\n when neither in this mountain, nor in Jerusalem, shall ye worship\n the Father_\u201d; _1 Cor. 15:24_\u2014\u201c_Then cometh the end, when he shall\n deliver up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have\n abolished all rule and all authority and power_\u201d; _Rev.\n 21:22_\u2014\u201c_And I saw no temple therein: for the Lord God the\n Almighty, and the Lamb, are the temple thereof._\u201d\n\n\nB. The church, unlike the family and the state, is a voluntary society.\n\n\n(_a_) This results from the fact that the local church is the outward\nexpression of that rational and free life in Christ which characterizes\nthe church as a whole. In this it differs from those other organizations\nof divine appointment, entrance into which is not optional. Membership in\nthe church is not hereditary or compulsory. (_b_) The doctrine of the\nchurch, as thus defined, is a necessary outgrowth of the doctrine of\nregeneration. As this fundamental spiritual change is mediated not by\noutward appliances, but by inward and conscious reception of Christ and\nhis truth, union with the church logically follows, not precedes, the\nsoul\u2019s spiritual union with Christ.\n\n\n We have seen that the church is the body of Christ. We now\n perceive that the church is, by the impartation to it of Christ\u2019s\n life, made a living body, with duties and powers of its own. A. J.\n Gordon, Ministry of the Spirit, 53, emphasizes the preliminary\n truth. He shows that the definition: The church a voluntary\n association of believers, united together for the purposes of\n worship and edification, is most inadequate, not to say incorrect.\n It is no more true than that hands and feet are voluntarily united\n in the human body for the purposes of locomotion and work. The\n church is formed from within. Christ, present by the Holy Ghost,\n regenerating men by the sovereign action of the Spirit, and\n organizing them into himself as the living centre, is the only\n principle that can explain the existence of the church. The Head\n and the body are therefore one\u2014one in fact, and one in name. He\n whom God anointed and filled with the Holy Ghost is called \u201c_the\n Christ_\u201d (_1 John 5:1_\u2014\u201c_Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the\n Christ is begotten of God_\u201d); and the church which is his body and\n fulness is also called \u201c_the Christ_\u201d (_1 Cor. 12:12_\u2014\u201c_all the\n members of the body, being many, are one body; so also is the\n Christ_\u201d).\n\n Dorner includes under his doctrine of the church: (1) the genesis\n of the church, through the new birth of the Spirit, or\n Regeneration; (2) the growth and persistence of the church through\n the continuous operation of the Spirit in the means of grace, or\n Ecclesiology proper, as others call it; (3) the completion of the\n church, or Eschatology. While this scheme seems designed to favor\n a theory of baptismal regeneration, we must commend its\n recognition of the fact that the doctrine of the church grows out\n of the doctrine of regeneration and is determined in its nature by\n it. If regeneration has always conversion for its obverse side,\n and if conversion always includes faith in Christ, it is vain to\n speak of regeneration without faith. And if union with the church\n is but the outward expression of a preceding union with Christ\n which involves regeneration and conversion, then involuntary\n church\u2010membership is an absurdity, and a misrepresentation of the\n whole method of salvation.\n\n The value of compulsory religion may be illustrated from David\n Hume\u2019s experience. A godly matron of the Canongate, so runs the\n story, when Hume sank in the mud in her vicinity, and on account\n of his obesity could not get out, compelled the sceptic to say the\n Lord\u2019s Prayer before she would help him. Amos Kendall, on the\n other hand, concluded in his old age that he had not been acting\n on Christ\u2019s plan for saving the world, and so, of his own accord,\n connected himself with the church. Martineau, Study, 1:319\u2014\u201cTill\n we come to the State and the Church, we do not reach the highest\n organism of human life, into the perfect working of which all the\n disinterested affections and moral enthusiasms and noble ambitions\n flow.\u201d\n\n Socialism abolishes freedom, which the church cultivates and\n insists upon as the principle of its life. Tertullian: \u201cNec\n religionis est cogere religionem\u201d\u2014\u201cIt is not the business of\n religion to compel religion.\u201d Vedder, History of the Baptists:\n \u201cThe community of goods in the church at Jerusalem was a purely\n voluntary matter; see _Acts 5:4_\u2014\u2018_While it remained, did it not\n remain thine own? and after it was sold, was it not in thy\n power?_\u2019 The community of goods does not seem to have continued in\n the church at Jerusalem after the temporary stress had been\n relieved, and there is no reason to believe that any other church\n in the apostolic age practised anything of the kind.\u201d By\n abolishing freedom, socialism destroys all possibility of\n economical progress. The economical principle of socialism is\n that, relatively to the enjoyment of commodities, the individual\n shall be taken care of by the community, to the effect of his\n being relieved of the care of himself. The communism in the Acts\n was: 1. not for the community of mankind in general, but only for\n the church within itself; 2. not obligatory, but left to the\n discretion of individuals; 3. not permanent, but devised for a\n temporary crisis. On socialism, see James MacGregor, in Presb. and\n Ref. Rev., Jan. 1892:35\u201068.\n\n Schurman, Agnosticism, 166\u2014\u201cFew things are of more practical\n consequence for the future of religion in America than the duty of\n all good men to become identified with the visible church. Liberal\n thinkers have, as a rule, underestimated the value of the church.\n Their point of view is individualistic, \u2018as though a man were\n author of himself, and knew no other kin.\u2019 \u2018The old is for slaves\u2019\n they declare. But it is also true that the old is for freedmen who\n know its true uses. It is the bane of the religion of dogma that\n it has driven many of the choicest religious souls out of the\n churches. In its purification of the temple, it has lost sight of\n the object of the temple. The church, as an institution, is an\n organism and embodiment such as the religion of spirit necessarily\n creates. Spiritual religion is not the enemy, it is the essence,\n of institutional religion.\u201d\n\n\n\nII. Organization of the Church.\n\n\n1. The fact of organization.\n\n\nOrganization may exist without knowledge of writing, without written\nrecords, lists of members, or formal choice of officers. These last are\nthe proofs, reminders, and helps of organization, but they are not\nessential to it. It is however not merely informal, but formal,\norganization in the church, to which the New Testament bears witness.\n\nThat there was such organization is abundantly shown from (_a_) its stated\nmeetings, (_b_) elections, and (_c_) officers; (_d_) from the designations\nof its ministers, together with (_e_) the recognized authority of the\nminister and of the church; (_f_) from its discipline, (_g_)\ncontributions, (_h_) letters of commendation, (_i_) registers of widows,\n(_j_) uniform customs, and (_k_) ordinances; (_l_) from the order enjoined\nand observed, (_m_) the qualifications for membership, and (_n_) the\ncommon work of the whole body.\n\n\n (_a_) _Acts 20:7_\u2014\u201c_upon the first day of the week, when we were\n gathered together to break bread, Paul discoursed with them_\u201d;\n _Heb. 10:25_\u2014\u201c_not forsaking our own assembling together, as the\n custom of some is, but exhorting one another._\u201d\n\n (_b_) _Acts 1:23\u201026_\u2014the election of Matthias; 6:5, 6\u2014the election\n of deacons.\n\n (_c_) _Phil. 1:1_\u2014\u201c_the saints in Christ Jesus that are at\n Philippi, with the bishops and deacons._\u201d\n\n (_d_) _Acts 20:17, 28_\u2014\u201c_the elders of the church ... the flock,\n in which the Holy Spirit hath made you bishops_ [marg.:\n \u2018_overseers_\u2019].\u201d\n\n (_e_) _Mat. 18:17_\u2014\u201c_And if he refuse to hear them, tell it unto\n the church: and if he refuse to hear the church also, let him be\n unto thee as the Gentile and the publican_\u201d; _1 Pet. 5:2_\u2014\u201c_Tend\n the flock of God which is among you, exercising the oversight, not\n of constraint, but willingly, according to the will of God._\u201d\n\n (_f_) _1 Cor. 5:4, 5, 13_\u2014\u201c_in the name of our Lord Jesus, ye\n being gathered together, and my spirit, with the power of our Lord\n Jesus, to deliver such a one unto Satan for the destruction of the\n flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord\n Jesus.... Put away the wicked man from among yourselves._\u201d\n\n (_g_) _Rom. 15:26_\u2014\u201c_For it hath been the good pleasure of\n Macedonia and Achaia to make a certain contribution for the poor\n among the saints that are at Jerusalem_\u201d; _1 Cor. 16:1, 2_\u2014\u201c_Now\n concerning the collection for the saints, as I __ gave order to\n the churches of Galatia, so also do ye. Upon the first day of the\n week let each one of you lay by him in store, as he may prosper,\n that no collection be made when I come._\u201d\n\n (_h_) _Acts 18:27_\u2014\u201c_And when he was minded to pass over into\n Achaia, the brethren encouraged him, and wrote to the disciples to\n receive him_\u201d; _2 Cor. 3:1_\u2014\u201c_Are we beginning again to commend\n ourselves? or need we, as do some, epistles of commendation to you\n or from you?_\u201d\n\n (_i_) _1 Tim. 5:9_\u2014\u201c_Let none be enrolled as a widow under\n threescore years old_\u201d; _cf._ _Acts 6:1_\u2014\u201c_there arose a murmuring\n of the Grecian Jews against the Hebrews, because their widows were\n neglected in the daily ministration._\u201d\n\n (_j_) _1 Cor. 11:16_\u2014\u201c_But if any man seemeth to be contentious,\n we have no such custom, neither the churches of God._\u201d\n\n (_k_) _Acts 2:41_\u2014\u201c_They then that received his word were\n baptized_\u201d; _1 Cor. 11:23\u201026_\u2014\u201c_For I received of the Lord that\n which also I delivered unto you_\u201d\u2014the institution of the Lord\u2019s\n Supper.\n\n (_l_) _1 Cor. 14:40_\u2014\u201c_let all things be done decently and in\n order_\u201d; _Col. 2:5_\u2014\u201c_For though I am absent in the flesh, yet am\n I with you in the spirit, joying and beholding your order, and the\n stedfastness of your faith in Christ._\u201d\n\n (_m_) _Mat. 28:19_\u2014\u201c_Go ye therefore, and make disciples of all\n the nations, baptizing them into the name of the Father and of the\n Son and of the Holy Spirit_\u201d; _Acts 2:47_\u2014\u201c_And the Lord added to\n them day by day those that were being saved._\u201d\n\n (_n_) _Phil. 2:30_\u2014\u201c_because for the work of Christ he came nigh\n unto death, hazarding his life to supply that which was lacking in\n your service toward me._\u201d\n\n\nAs indicative of a developed organization in the N. T. church, of which\nonly the germ existed before Christ\u2019s death, it is important to notice the\nprogress in names from the Gospels to the Epistles. In the Gospels, the\nword \u201cdisciples\u201d is the common designation of Christ\u2019s followers, but it\nis not once found in the Epistles. In the Epistles, there are only\n\u201csaints,\u201d \u201cbrethren,\u201d \u201cchurches.\u201d A consideration of the facts here\nreferred to is sufficient to evince the unscriptural nature of two modern\ntheories of the church:\n\nA. The theory that the church is an exclusively spiritual body, destitute\nof all formal organization, and bound together only by the mutual relation\nof each believer to his indwelling Lord.\n\nThe church, upon this view, so far as outward bonds are concerned, is only\nan aggregation of isolated units. Those believers who chance to gather at\na particular place, or to live at a particular time, constitute the church\nof that place or time. This view is held by the Friends and by the\nPlymouth Brethren. It ignores the tendencies to organization inherent in\nhuman nature; confounds the visible with the invisible church; and is\ndirectly opposed to the Scripture representations of the visible church as\ncomprehending some who are not true believers.\n\n\n _Acts 5:1\u201011_\u2014Ananias and Sapphira show that the visible church\n comprehended some who were not true believers; _1 Cor. 14:23_\u2014\u201c_If\n therefore the whole church be assembled together and all speak\n with tongues, and there come in men unlearned or unbelieving, will\n they not say that ye are mad?_\u201d\u2014here, if the church had been an\n unorganized assembly, the unlearned visitors who came in would\n have formed a part of it; _Phil. 3:18_\u2014\u201c_For many walk, of whom I\n told you often, and now tell you even weeping, that they are the\n enemies of the cross of Christ._\u201d\n\n Some years ago a book was placed upon the Index, at Rome,\n entitled: \u201cThe Priesthood a Chronic Disorder of the Human Race.\u201d\n The Plymouth Brethren dislike church organizations, for fear they\n will become machines; they dislike ordained ministers, for fear\n they will become bishops. They object to praying for the Holy\n Spirit, because he was given on Pentecost, ignoring the fact that\n the church after Pentecost so prayed: see _Acts 4:31_\u2014\u201c_And when\n they had prayed, the place was shaken wherein they were gathered\n together; and they were all filled with the Holy Spirit, and they\n spake the word of God with boldness._\u201d What we call a giving or\n descent of the Holy Spirit is, since the Holy Spirit is\n omnipresent, only a manifestation of the power of the Holy Spirit,\n and this certainly may be prayed for; see _Luke 11:13_\u2014\u201c_If ye\n then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children,\n how much more shall your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to\n them that ask him?_\u201d\n\n The Plymouth Brethren would \u201cunite Christendom by its\n dismemberment, and do away with all sects by the creation of a new\n sect, more narrow and bitter in its hostility to existing sects\n than any other.\u201d Yet the tendency to organize is so strong in\n human nature, that even Plymouth Brethren, when they meet\n regularly together, fall into an informal, if not a formal,\n organization; certain teachers and leaders are tacitly recognized\n as officers of the body; committees and rules are unconsciously\n used for facilitating business. Even one of their own writers, C.\n H. M., speaks of the \u201cnatural tendency to association without\n God,\u2014as in the Shinar Association or Babel Confederacy of _Gen.\n 11_, which aimed at building up a name upon the earth. The\n Christian church is God\u2019s appointed association to take the place\n of all these. Hence God confounds the tongues in Gen. 11\n (judgment); gives tongues in _Acts 2_ (grace); but only one tongue\n is spoken in _Rev. 7_ (glory).\u201d\n\n The Nation, Oct. 16, 1890:303\u2014\u201cEvery body of men must have one or\n more leaders. If these are not provided, they will make them for\n themselves. You cannot get fifty men together, at least of the\n Anglo\u2010Saxon race, without their choosing a presiding officer and\n giving him power to enforce rules and order.\u201d Even socialists and\n anarchists have their leaders, who often exercise arbitrary power\n and oppress their followers. Lyman Abbott says nobly of the\n community of true believers: \u201cThe grandest river in the world has\n no banks; it rises in the Gulf of Mexico; it sweeps up through the\n Atlantic Ocean along our coast; it crosses the Atlantic, and\n spreads out in great broad fanlike form along the coast of Europe;\n and whatever land it kisses blooms and blossoms with the fruit of\n its love. The apricot and the fig are the witness of its\n fertilizing power. It is bound together by the warmth of its own\n particles, and by nothing else.\u201d This is a good illustration of\n the invisible church, and of its course through the world. But the\n visible church is bound to be distinguishable from unregenerate\n humanity, and its inner principle of association inevitably leads\n to organization.\n\n Dr. Wm. Reid, Plymouth Brethrenism Unveiled, 79\u2010143, attributes to\n the sect the following Church\u2010principles: (1) the church did not\n exist before Pentecost; (2) the visible and the invisible church\n identical; (3) the one assembly of God; (4) the presidency of the\n Holy Spirit; (5) rejection of a one\u2010man and man\u2010made ministry; (6)\n the church is without government. Also the following heresies: (1)\n Christ\u2019s heavenly humanity; (2) denial of Christ\u2019s righteousness,\n as being obedience to law; (3) denial that Christ\u2019s righteousness\n is imputed; (4) justification in the risen Christ; (5) Christ\u2019s\n non\u2010atoning sufferings; (6) denial of moral law as rule of life;\n (7) the Lord\u2019s day is not the Sabbath; (8) perfectionism; (9)\n secret rapture of the saints,\u2014caught up to be with Christ. To\n these we may add; (10) premillennial advent of Christ.\n\n On the Plymouth Brethren and their doctrine, see British Quar.,\n Oct. 1873:202; Princeton Rev., 1872:48\u201077; H. M. King, in Baptist\n Review, 1881:438\u2010465; Fish, Ecclesiology, 314\u2010316; Dagg, Church\n Order, 80\u201083; R. H. Carson, The Brethren, 8\u201014; J. C. L. Carson,\n The Heresies of the Plymouth Brethren; Croskery, Plymouth\n Brethrenism; Teulon, Hist. and Teachings of Plymouth Brethren.\n\n\nB. The theory that the form of church organization is not definitely\nprescribed in the New Testament, but is a matter of expediency, each body\nof believers being permitted to adopt that method of organization which\nbest suits its circumstances and condition.\n\nThe view under consideration seems in some respects to be favored by\nNeander, and is often regarded as incidental to his larger conception of\nchurch history as a progressive development. But a proper theory of\ndevelopment does not exclude the idea of a church organization already\ncomplete in all essential particulars before the close of the inspired\ncanon, so that the record of it may constitute a providential example of\nbinding authority upon all subsequent ages. The view mentioned exaggerates\nthe differences of practice among the N. T. churches; underestimates the\nneed of divine direction as to methods of church union; and admits a\nprinciple of \u2019church powers,\u2019 which may be historically shown to be\nsubversive of the very existence of the church as a spiritual body.\n\n\n Dr. Galusha Anderson finds the theory of optional church\n government in Hooker\u2019s Ecclesiastical Polity, and says that not\n until Bishop Bancroft was there claimed a divine right of\n Episcopacy. Hunt, also, in his Religious Thought in England, 1:57,\n says that Hooker gives up the divine origin of Episcopacy. So\n Jacob, Eccl. Polity of the N. T., and Hatch, Organization of Early\n Christian Churches,\u2014both Jacob and Hatch belonging to the Church\n of England. Hooker identified the church with the nation; see\n Eccl. Polity, book viii, chap. 1:7; 4:6; 8:9. He held that the\n state has committed itself to the church, and that therefore the\n church has no right to commit itself to the state. The assumption,\n however, that the state has committed itself to the church is\n entirely unwarranted; see Gore, Incarnation, 209, 210. Hooker\n declares that, even if the Episcopalian order were laid down in\n Scripture, which he denies, it would still not be unalterable,\n since neither \u201cGod\u2019s being the author of laws for the government\n of his church, nor his committing them unto Scripture, is any\n reason sufficient wherefore all churches should forever be bound\n to keep them without change.\u201d\n\n T. M. Lindsay, in Contemp. Rev., Oct. 1895:548\u2010563, asserts that\n there were at least five different forms of church government in\n apostolic times: 1. derived from the seven wise men of the Hebrew\n village community, representing the political side of the\n synagogue system; 2. derived from the \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03ba\u03cc\u03c0\u03bf\u03c2, the director of\n the religious or social club among the heathen Greeks; 3. derived\n from the patronate (\u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03c4\u03ac\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2, \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c3\u03c4\u03ac\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2) known among the\n Romans, the churches of Rome, Corinth, Thessalonica, being of this\n sort; 4. derived from the personal pre\u00ebminence of one man, nearest\n in family to our Lord, James being president of the church at\n Jerusalem; 5. derived from temporary superintendents (\u1f21\u03b3\u03bf\u03cd\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9),\n or leaders of the band of missionaries, as in Crete and Ephesus.\n Between all these churches of different polities, there was\n intercommunication and fellowship. Lindsay holds that the unity\n was wholly spiritual. It seems to us that he has succeeded merely\n in proving five different varieties of one generic type\u2014the\n generic type being only democratic, with two orders of officials,\n and two ordinances\u2014in other words, in showing that the simple N.\n T. model adopts itself to many changing conditions, while the main\n outlines do not change. Upon any other theory, church polity is a\n matter of individual taste or of temporary fashion. Shall\n missionaries conform church order to the degraded ideas of the\n nations among which they labor? Shall church government be\n despotic in Turkey, a limited monarchy in England, a democracy in\n the United States of America, and two\u2010headed in Japan? For the\n development theory of Neander, see his Church History, 1:179\u2010190.\n On the general subject, see Hitchcock, in Am. Theol. Rev.,\n 1860:28\u201054; Davidson, Eccl. Polity, 1\u201042; Harvey, The Church.\n\n\n2. The nature of this organization.\n\n\nThe nature of any organization may be determined by asking, first: who\nconstitute its members? secondly: for what object has it been formed? and,\nthirdly: what are the laws which regulate its operations?\n\n\n The three questions with which our treatment of the nature of this\n organization begins are furnished us by Pres. Wayland, in his\n Principles and Practices of Baptists.\n\n\nA. They only can properly be members of the local church, who have\npreviously become members of the church universal,\u2014or, in other words,\nhave become regenerate persons.\n\n\n Only those who have been previously united to Christ are, in the\n New Testament, permitted to unite with his church. See _Acts\n 2:47_\u2014\u201c_And the Lord added to them day by day those that were\n being saved_ [Am. Rev.: \u2018_those that were saved_\u2019]\u201d; _5:14_\u2014\u201c_and\n believers were the more added to the Lord_\u201d; _1 Cor. 1:2_\u2014\u201c_the\n church of God which is at Corinth, even them that are sanctified\n in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all that call upon the\n name of our Lord Jesus Christ in every place, their Lord and\n ours._\u201d\n\n\nFrom this limitation of membership to regenerate persons, certain results\nfollow:\n\n(_a_) Since each member bears supreme allegiance to Christ, the church as\na body must recognize Christ as the only lawgiver. The relation of the\nindividual Christian to the church does not supersede, but furthers and\nexpresses, his relation to Christ.\n\n\n _1 John 2:20_\u2014\u201c_And ye have an anointing from the Holy One, and ye\n know all things_\u201d\u2014see Neander, Com., _in loco_\u2014\u201cNo believer is at\n liberty to forego this maturity and personal independence,\n bestowed in that inward anointing [of the Holy Spirit], or to\n place himself in a dependent relation, inconsistent with this\n birthright, to any teacher whatever among men..... This inward\n anointing furnishes an element of resistance to such arrogated\n authority.\u201d Here we have reproved the tendency on the part of\n ministers to take the place of the church, in Christian work and\n worship, instead of leading it forward in work and worship of its\n own. The missionary who keeps his converts in prolonged and\n unnecessary tutelage is also untrue to the church organization of\n the New Testament and untrue to Christ whose aim in church\n training is to educate his followers to the bearing of\n responsibility and the use of liberty. Macaulay: \u201cThe only remedy\n for the evils of liberty is liberty.\u201d \u201cMalo periculosam\n libertatem\u201d\u2014\u201cLiberty is to be preferred with all its dangers.\u201d\n Edwin Burritt Smith: \u201cThere is one thing better than good\n government, and that is self\u2010government.\u201d By their own mistakes, a\n self\u2010governing people and a self\u2010governing church will finally\n secure good government, whereas the \u201cgood government\u201d which keeps\n them in perpetual tutelage will make good government forever\n impossible.\n\n _Ps. 144:12_\u2014\u201c_our sons shall be as plants grown up in their\n youth._\u201d Archdeacon Hare: \u201cIf a gentleman is to grow up, it must\n be like a tree: there must be nothing between him and heaven.\u201d\n What is true of the gentleman is true of the Christian. There need\n to be encouraged and cultivated in him an independence of human\n authority and a sole dependence upon Christ. The most sacred duty\n of the minister is to make his church self\u2010governing and self\u2010\n supporting, and the best test of his success is the ability of the\n church to live and prosper after he has left it or after he is\n dead. Such ministerial work requires self\u2010sacrifice and self\u2010\n effacement. The natural tendency of every minister is to usurp\n authority and to become a bishop. He has in him an undeveloped\n pope. Dependence on his people for support curbs this arrogant\n spirit. A church establishment fosters it. The remedy both for\n slavishness and for arrogance lies in constant recognition of\n Christ as the only Lord.\n\n\n(_b_) Since each regenerate man recognizes in every other a brother in\nChrist, the several members are upon a footing of absolute equality (Mat.\n23:8\u201010).\n\n\n _Mat. 23:8\u201010_\u2014\u201c_But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your\n teacher, and all ye are brethren. And call no man your father on\n the earth: for one is your Father, even he who is in heaven_\u201d;\n _John 15:5_\u2014\u201c_I am the vine, ye are the branches_\u201d\u2014no one branch\n of the vine outranks another; one may be more advantageously\n situated, more ample in size, more fruitful; but all are alike in\n kind, draw vitality from one source. Among the planets \u201c_one star\n differeth from another star in glory_\u201d (_1 Cor. 15:41_), yet all\n shine in the same heaven, and draw their light from the same sun.\n \u201cThe serving\u2010man may know more of the mind of God than the\n scholar.\u201d Christianity has therefore been the foe to heathen\n castes. The Japanese noble objected to it, \u201cbecause the\n brotherhood of man was incompatible with proper reverence for\n rank\u201d. There can be no rightful human lordship over God\u2019s heritage\n (_1 Pet. 5:3_\u2014\u201c_neither as lording it over the charge allotted to\n you, but making yourselves ensamples to the flock_\u201d).\n\n Constantine thought more highly of his position as member of\n Christ\u2019s church than of his position as head of the Roman Empire.\n Neither the church nor its pastor should be dependent upon the\n unregenerate members of the congregation. Many a pastor is in the\n position of a lion tamer with his head in the lion\u2019s mouth. So\n long as he strokes the fur the right way, all goes well; but, if\n by accident he strokes the wrong way, off goes his head.\n Dependence upon the spiritual body which he instructs is\n compatible with the pastor\u2019s dignity and faithfulness. But\n dependence upon those who are not Christians and who seek to\n manage the church with worldly motives and in a worldly way, may\n utterly destroy the spiritual effect of his ministry. The pastor\n is bound to be the impartial preacher of the truth, and to treat\n each member of his church as of equal importance with every other.\n\n\n(_c_) Since each local church is directly subject to Christ, there is no\njurisdiction of one church over another, but all are on an equal footing,\nand all are independent of interference or control by the civil power.\n\n\n _Mat. 22:21_\u2014\u201c_Render therefore unto C\u00e6sar the things that are\n C\u00e6sar\u2019s; and unto God the things that are God\u2019s_\u201d; _Acts\n 5:29_\u2014\u201c_We must obey God rather than men._\u201d As each believer has\n personal dealings with Christ and for even the pastor to come\n between him and his Lord is treachery to Christ and harmful to his\n soul, so much more does the New Testament condemn any attempt to\n bring the church into subjection to any other church or\n combination of churches, or to make the church the creature of the\n state. Absolute liberty of conscience under Christ has always been\n a distinguishing tenet of Baptists, as it is of the New Testament\n (_cf._ _Rom. 14:4_\u2014\u201c_Who art thou that judgest the servant of\n another? to his own lord he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be\n made to stand; for the Lord hath power to make him stand_\u201d). John\n Locke, 100 years before American independence: \u201cThe Baptists were\n the first and only propounders of absolute liberty, just and true\n liberty, equal and impartial liberty.\u201d George Bancroft says of\n Roger Williams: \u201cHe was the first person in modern Christendom to\n assert the doctrine of liberty of conscience in religion....\n Freedom of conscience was from the first a trophy of the\n Baptists.... Their history is written in blood.\u201d\n\n On Roger Williams, see John Fiske, The Beginnings of New England:\n \u201cSuch views are to\u2010day quite generally adopted by the more\n civilized portions of the Protestant world; but it is needless to\n say that they were not the views of the sixteenth century, in\n Massachusetts or elsewhere.\u201d Cotton Mather said that Roger\n Williams \u201ccarried a windmill in his head,\u201d and even John Quincy\n Adams called him \u201cconscientiously contentious.\u201d Cotton Mather\u2019s\n windmill was one that he remembered or had heard of in Holland. It\n had run so fast in a gale as to set itself and a whole town on\n fire. Leonard Bacon, Genesis of the New England Churches, vii,\n says of Baptist churches: \u201cIt has been claimed for these churches\n that from the age of the Reformation onward they have been always\n foremost and always consistent in maintaining the doctrine of\n religious liberty. Let me not be understood as calling in question\n their right to so great an honor.\u201d\n\n Baptists hold that the province of the state is purely secular and\n civil,\u2014religious matters are beyond its jurisdiction. Yet for\n economic reasons and to ensure its own preservation, it may\n guarantee to its citizens their religious rights, and may exempt\n all churches equally from burdens of taxation, in the same way in\n which it exempts schools and hospitals. The state has holidays,\n but no holy days. Hall Caine, in The Christian, calls the state,\n not the pillar of the church, but the caterpillar, that eats the\n vitals out of it. It is this, when it transcends its sphere and\n compels or forbids any particular form of religious teaching. On\n the charge that Roman Catholics were deprived of equal rights in\n Rhode Island, see Am. Cath. Quar. Rev., Jan. 1894:169\u2010177. This\n restriction was not in the original law, but was a note added by\n revisers, to bring the state law into conformity with the law of\n the mother country. _Ezra 8:22_\u2014\u201c_I was ashamed to ask of the king\n a band of soldiers and horsemen ... because ... The hand of our\n God is upon all them that seek him, for good_\u201d\u2014is a model for the\n churches of every age. The church as an organized body should be\n ashamed to depend for revenue upon the state, although its members\n as citizens may justly demand that the state protect them in their\n rights of worship. On State and Church in 1492 and 1892, see A. H.\n Strong, Christ in Creation, 209\u2010246, esp. 239\u2010241. On taxation of\n church property, and opposing it, see H. C. Vedder, in Magazine of\n Christian Literature, Feb. 1890: 265\u2010272.\n\n\nB. The sole object of the local church is the glory of God, in the\ncomplete establishment of his kingdom, both in the hearts of believers and\nin the world. This object is to be promoted:\n\n(_a_) By united worship,\u2014including prayer and religious instruction; (_b_)\nby mutual watchcare and exhortation; (_c_) by common labors for the\nreclamation of the impenitent world.\n\n\n (_a_) _Heb. 10:25_\u2014\u201c_not forsaking our own assembling together, as\n the custom of some is, but exhorting one another._\u201d One burning\n coal by itself will soon grow dull and go out, but a hundred\n together will give a fury of flame that will set fire to others.\n Notice the value of \u201cthe crowd\u201d in politics and in religion. One\n may get an education without going to school or college, and may\n cultivate religion apart from the church; but the number of such\n people will be small, and they do not choose the best way to\n become intelligent or religious.\n\n (_b_) _1 Thess. 5:11_\u2014\u201c_Wherefore exhort one another, and build\n each other up, even as also ye do_\u201d; _Heb. 3:13_\u2014\u201c_Exhort one\n another day by day, so long as it is called To\u2010day; lest any one\n of you be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin._\u201d Churches exist\n in order to: 1. create ideals; 2. supply motives; 3. direct\n energies. They are the leaven hidden in the three measures of\n meal. But there must be life in the leaven, or no good will come\n of it. There is no use of taking to China a lamp that will not\n burn in America. The light that shines the furthest shines\n brightest nearest home.\n\n (_c_) _Mat. 28:19_\u2014\u201c_Go ye therefore, and make disciples of all\n the nations_\u201d; _Acts 8:4_\u2014\u201c_They therefore that were scattered\n abroad went about preaching the word_\u201d; _2 Cor. 8:5_\u2014\u201c_and this,\n not as we had hoped, but first they gave their own selves to the\n Lord, and to us through the will of God_\u201d; _Jude 23_\u2014\u201c_And on some\n have mercy, who are in __ doubt; and some save, snatching them out\n of the fire._\u201d Inscribed upon a mural tablet of a Christian\n church, in Aneityum in the South Seas, to the memory of Dr. John\n Geddie, the pioneer missionary in that field, are the words: \u201cWhen\n he came here, there were no Christians; when he went away, there\n were no heathen.\u201d Inscription over the grave of David Livingstone\n in Westminster Abbey: \u201cFor thirty years his life was spent in an\n unwearied effort to evangelize the native races, to explore the\n undiscovered secrets, to abolish the desolating slave trade of\n Central Africa, where with his last words he wrote: \u2018All I can add\n in my solitude is, May Heaven\u2019s richest blessing come down on\n everyone, American, English or Turk, who will help to heal this\n open sore of the world.\u2019 \u201d\n\n\nC. The law of the church is simply the will of Christ, as expressed in the\nScriptures and interpreted by the Holy Spirit. This law respects:\n\n(_a_) The qualifications for membership.\u2014These are regeneration and\nbaptism, _i. e._, spiritual new birth and ritual new birth; the surrender\nof the inward and of the outward life to Christ; the spiritual entrance\ninto communion with Christ\u2019s death and resurrection, and the formal\nprofession of this to the world by being buried with Christ and rising\nwith him in baptism.\n\n(_b_) The duties imposed on members.\u2014In discovering the will of Christ\nfrom the Scriptures, each member has the right of private judgment, being\ndirectly responsible to Christ for his use of the means of knowledge, and\nfor his obedience to Christ\u2019s commands when these are known.\n\n\n How far does the authority of the church extend? It certainly has\n no right to say what its members shall eat and drink; to what\n societies they shall belong; what alliances in marriage or in\n business they shall contract. It has no right, as an organized\n body, to suppress vice in the community, or to regenerate society\n by taking sides in a political canvass. The members of the church,\n as citizens, have duties in all these lines of activity. The\n function of the church is to give them religious preparation and\n stimulus for their work. In this sense, however, the church is to\n influence all human relations. It follows the model of the Jewish\n commonwealth rather than that of the Greek state. The Greek \u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b9\u03c2\n was limited, because it was the affirmation of only personal\n rights. The Jewish commonwealth was universal, because it was the\n embodiment of the one divine will. The Jewish state was the most\n comprehensive of the ancient world, admitting freely the\n incorporation of new members, and looking forward to a worldwide\n religious communion in one faith. So the Romans gave to conquered\n lands the protection and the rights of Rome. But the Christian\n church is the best example of incorporation in conquest. See\n Westcott, Hebrews, 386, 387; John Fiske, Beginnings of New\n England, 1\u201020; Dagg, Church Order, 74\u201099; Curtis on Communion,\n 1\u201061.\n\n Abraham Lincoln: \u201cThis country cannot be half slave and half free\u201d\n = the one part will pull the other over; there is an irrepressible\n conflict between them. So with the forces of Christ and of\n Antichrist in the world at large. Alexander Duff: \u201cThe church that\n ceases to be evangelistic will soon cease to be evangelical.\u201d We\n may add that the church that ceases to be evangelical will soon\n cease to exist. The Fathers of New England proposed \u201cto advance\n the gospel in these remote parts of the world, even if they should\n be but as stepping\u2010stones to those who were to follow them.\u201d They\n little foresaw how their faith and learning would give character\n to the great West. Church and school went together. Christ alone\n is the Savior of the world, but Christ alone cannot save the\n world. Zinzendorf called his society \u201cThe Mustard\u2010seed Society\u201d\n because it should remove mountains (_Mat. 17:20_). Hermann, Faith\n and Morals, 91, 238\u2014\u201cIt is not by means of things that pretend to\n be imperishable that Christianity continues to live on; but by the\n fact that there are always persons to be found who, by their\n contact with the Bible traditions, become witnesses to the\n personality of Jesus and follow him as their guide, and therefore\n acquire sufficient courage to sacrifice themselves for others.\u201d\n\n\n3. The genesis of this organization.\n\n\n(_a_) The church existed in germ before the day of Pentecost,\u2014otherwise\nthere would have been nothing to which those converted upon that day could\nhave been \u201cadded\u201d (Acts 2:47). Among the apostles, regenerate as they\nwere, united to Christ by faith and in that faith baptized (Acts 19:4),\nunder Christ\u2019s instruction and engaged in common work for him, there were\nalready the beginnings of organization. There was a treasurer of the body\n(John 13:29), and as a body they celebrated for the first time the Lord\u2019s\nSupper (Mat. 26:26\u201029). To all intents and purposes they constituted a\nchurch, although the church was not yet fully equipped for its work by the\noutpouring of the Spirit (Acts 2), and by the appointment of pastors and\ndeacons. The church existed without officers, as in the first days\nsucceeding Pentecost.\n\n\n _Acts 2:47_\u2014\u201c_And the Lord added to them_ [marg.: \u2018_together_\u2019]\n _day by day those that were being saved_\u201d; _19:4_\u2014\u201c_And Paul said,\n John baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the\n people that they should believe on him that should come after him,\n that is, on Jesus_\u201d; _John 13:29_\u2014\u201c_For some thought, because\n Judas had the bag, that Jesus said unto him, Buy what things we\n have need of for the feast; or, that he should give something to\n the poor_\u201d; _Mat. 26:26\u201029_\u2014\u201c_And as they were eating, Jesus took\n bread ... and he gave to the disciples, and said, Take, eat....\n And he took a cup, and gave thanks, and gave to them, saying,\n Drink ye all of it_\u201d; _Acts 2_\u2014the Holy Spirit is poured out. It\n is to be remembered that Christ himself is the embodied union\n between God and man, the true temple of God\u2019s indwelling. So soon\n as the first believer joined himself to Christ, the church existed\n in miniature and germ.\n\n A. J. Gordon, Ministry of the Spirit, 55, quotes _Acts 2:41_\u2014\u201c_and\n there were added,_\u201d not to them, or to the church, but, as in\n _Acts 5:14_, and _11:24_\u2014\u201c_to the Lord._\u201d This, Dr. Gordon\n declares, means not a mutual union of believers, but their divine\n co\u00fcniting with Christ; not voluntary association of Christians,\n but their sovereign incorporation into the Head, and this\n incorporation effected by the Head, through the Holy Spirit. The\n old proverb, \u201cTres faciunt ecclesiam,\u201d is always true when one of\n the three is Jesus (Dr. Deems). Cyprian was wrong when he said\n that \u201che who has not the church for his mother, has not God for\n his Father\u201d; for this could not account for the conversion of the\n first Christian, and it makes salvation dependent upon the church\n rather than upon Christ. The Cambridge Platform, 1648, chapter 6,\n makes officers essential, not to the being, but only to the well\n being, of churches, and declares that elders and deacons are the\n only ordinary officers; see Dexter, Congregationalism, 439.\n\n Fish, Ecclesiology, 14\u201011, by a striking analogy, distinguishes\n three periods of the church\u2019s life: (1) the pre\u2010natal period, in\n which the church is not separated from Christ\u2019s bodily presence;\n (2) the period of childhood, in which the church is under\n tutelage, preparing for an independent life; (3) the period of\n maturity, in which the church, equipped with doctrines and\n officers, is ready for self\u2010government. The three periods may be\n likened to bud, blossom, and fruit. Before Christ\u2019s death, the\n church existed in bud only.\n\n\n(_b_) That provision for these offices was made gradually as exigencies\narose, is natural when we consider that the church immediately after\nChrist\u2019s ascension was under the tutelage of inspired apostles, and was to\nbe prepared, by a process of education, for independence and self\u2010\ngovernment. As doctrine was communicated gradually yet infallibly, through\nthe oral and written teaching of the apostles, so we are warranted in\nbelieving that the church was gradually but infallibly guided to the\nadoption of Christ\u2019s own plan of church organization and of Christian\nwork. The same promise of the Spirit which renders the New Testament an\nunerring and sufficient rule of faith, renders it also an unerring and\nsufficient rule of practice, for the church in all places and times.\n\n\n _John 16:12\u201026_ is to be interpreted as a promise of gradual\n leading by the Spirit into all the truth; _1 Cor. 14:37_\u2014\u201c_the\n things which I write unto you ... they are the commandments of the\n Lord._\u201d An examination of Paul\u2019s epistles in their chronological\n order shows a progress in definiteness of teaching with regard to\n church polity, as well as with regard to doctrine in general. In\n this matter, as in other matters, apostolic instruction was given\n as providential exigencies demanded it. In the earliest days of\n the church, attention was paid to preaching rather than to\n organization. Like Luther, Paul thought more of church order in\n his later days than at the beginning of his work. Yet even in his\n first epistle we find the germ which is afterwards continuously\n developed. See:\n\n (1) _1 Thess. 5:12, 13_ (A. D. 52)\u2014\u201c_But we beseech you, brethren,\n to know them that labor among you, and are over you_\n (\u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2) _in the Lord, and admonish you; and to esteem them\n exceeding highly in love for their work\u2019s sake._\u201d\n\n (2) _1 Cor. 12:28_ (A. D. 57)\u2014\u201c_And God hath set some in the\n church, first apostles, secondly prophets, thirdly teachers, then\n miracles, then gifts of healings, helps_ [\u1f00\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03bb\u03ae\u03c8\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2 = gifts\n needed by deacons], _governments_ [\u03ba\u03c5\u03b2\u03b5\u03c1\u03bd\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2 = gifts needed by\n pastors], _divers kinds of tongues_.\u201d\n\n (3) _Rom. 12:6\u20108_ (A. D. 58)\u2014\u201c_And having gifts differing\n according to the grace that is given to us, whether prophecy, let\n us prophesy according to the proportion of our faith; or ministry_\n [\u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03ba\u03bf\u03bd\u03af\u03b1\u03bd], _let us give ourselves to our ministry; or he that\n teacheth, to his teaching; or he that exhorteth, to his exhorting:\n he that giveth, let him do it with liberality; he that ruleth_ [\u1f41\n \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2], _with diligence; he that showeth mercy, with\n cheerfulness_.\u201d\n\n (4) _Phil. 1:1_ (A. D. 62)\u2014\u201c_Paul and Timothy, servants of Jesus\n Christ, to all the saints in Christ Jesus that are at Philippi,\n with the bishops_ [\u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03ba\u03cc\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2, marg.: \u2018_overseers_\u2019] _and deacons_\n [\u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03ba\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2].\u201d\n\n (5) _Eph. 4:11_ (A. D. 63)\u2014\u201c_And he gave some to be apostles; and\n some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and\n teachers_ [\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b4\u03b1\u03c3\u03ba\u03ac\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2].\u201d\n\n (6) _1 Tim. 3:1, 2_ (A. D. 66)\u2014\u201c_If a man seeketh the office of a\n bishop, he desireth a good work. The bishop_ [\u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd]\n _therefore must be without reproach_.\u201d On this last passage,\n Huther in Meyer\u2019s Com. remarks: \u201cPaul in the beginning looked at\n the church in its unity,\u2014only gradually does he make prominent its\n leaders. We must not infer that the churches in earlier time were\n without leadership, but only that in the later time circumstances\n were such as to require him to lay emphasis upon the pastor\u2019s\n office and work.\u201d See also Schaff, Teaching of the Twelve\n Apostles, 62\u201075.\n\n McGiffert, in his Apostolic Church, puts the dates of Paul\u2019s\n Epistles considerably earlier, as for example: _1 Thess._, circ.\n 48; _1 Cor._, c. 51, 52; _Rom._, 52, 53; _Phil._, 56\u201058; _Eph._,\n 52, 53, or 56\u201058; _1 Tim._, 56\u201058. But even before the earliest\n Epistles of Paul comes _James 5:14_\u2014\u201c_Is any among you sick? let\n him call for the elders of the church_\u201d\u2014written about 48 A. D.,\n and showing that within twenty years after the death of our Lord\n there had grown up a very definite form of church organization.\n\n On the question how far our Lord and his apostles, in the\n organization of the church, availed themselves of the synagogue as\n a model, see Neander, Planting and Training, 28\u201034. The ministry\n of the church is without doubt an outgrowth and adaptation of the\n eldership of the synagogue. In the synagogue, there were elders\n who gave themselves to the study and expounding of the Scriptures.\n The synagogues held united prayer, and exercised discipline. They\n were democratic in government, and independent of each other. It\n has sometimes been said that election of officers by the\n membership of the church came from the Greek \u1f10\u03ba\u03ba\u03bb\u03b7\u03c3\u03af\u03b1, or popular\n assembly. But Edersheim, Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah,\n 1:438, says of the elders of the synagogue that \u201ctheir election\n depended on the choice of the congregation.\u201d Talmud, Berachob, 55\n _a_: \u201cNo ruler is appointed over a congregation, unless the\n congregation is consulted.\u201d\n\n\n(_c_) Any number of believers, therefore, may constitute themselves into a\nChristian church, by adopting for their rule of faith and practice\nChrist\u2019s law as laid down in the New Testament, and by associating\nthemselves together, in accordance with it, for his worship and service.\nIt is important, where practicable, that a council of churches be\npreviously called, to advise the brethren proposing this union as to the\ndesirableness of constituting a new and distinct local body; and, if it be\nfound desirable, to recognize them, after its formation, as being a church\nof Christ. But such action of a council, however valuable as affording\nground for the fellowship of other churches, is not constitutive, but is\nsimply declaratory; and, without such action, the body of believers\nalluded to, if formed after the N. T. example, may notwithstanding be a\ntrue church of Christ. Still further, a band of converts, among the\nheathen or providentially precluded from access to existing churches,\nmight rightfully appoint one of their number to baptize the rest, and then\nmight organize, _de novo_, a New Testament church.\n\n\n The church at Antioch was apparently self\u2010created and self\u2010\n directed. There is no evidence that any human authority, outside\n of the converts there, was invoked to constitute or to organize\n the church. As John Spillsbury put it about 1640: \u201cWhere there is\n a beginning, some must be first.\u201d The initiative lies in the\n individual convert, and in his duty to obey the commands of\n Christ. No body of Christians can excuse itself for disobedience\n upon the plea that it has no officers. It can elect its own\n officers. Councils have no authority to constitute churches. Their\n work is simply that of recognizing the already existing\n organization and of pledging the fellowship of the churches which\n they represent. If God can of the stones raise up children unto\n Abraham, he can also raise up pastors and teachers from within the\n company of believers whom he has converted and saved.\n\n Hagenbach, Hist. Doct., 2:294, quotes from Luther, as follows: \u201cIf\n a company of pious Christian laymen were captured and sent to a\n desert place, and had not among them an ordained priest, and were\n all agreed in the matter, and elected one and told him to baptize,\n administer the Mass, absolve, and preach, such a one would be as\n true a priest as if all the bishops and popes had ordained him.\u201d\n Dexter, Congregationalism, 51\u2014\u201cLuther came near discovering and\n reproducing Congregationalism. Three things checked him: 1. he\n undervalued polity as compared with doctrine; 2. he reacted from\n Anabaptist fanaticisms; 3. he thought Providence indicated that\n princes should lead and people should follow. So, while he and\n Zwingle alike held the Bible to teach that all ecclesiastical\n power inheres under Christ in the congregation of believers, the\n matter ended in an organization of superintendents and\n consistories, which gradually became fatally mixed up with the\n state.\u201d\n\n\n\nIII. Government of the Church.\n\n\n1. Nature of this government in general.\n\n\nIt is evident from the direct relation of each member of the church, and\nso of the church as a whole, to Christ as sovereign and lawgiver, that the\ngovernment of the church, so far as regards the source of authority, is an\nabsolute monarchy.\n\nIn ascertaining the will of Christ, however, and in applying his commands\nto providential exigencies, the Holy Spirit enlightens one member through\nthe counsel of another, and as the result of combined deliberation, guides\nthe whole body to right conclusions. This work of the Spirit is the\nfoundation of the Scripture injunctions to unity. This unity, since it is\na unity of the Spirit, is not an enforced, but an intelligent and willing,\nunity. While Christ is sole king, therefore, the government of the church,\nso far as regards the interpretation and execution of his will by the\nbody, is an absolute democracy, in which the whole body of members is\nintrusted with the duty and responsibility of carrying out the laws of\nChrist as expressed in his word.\n\n\n The seceders from the established church of Scotland, on the\n memorable 18th of May, 1843, embodied in their protest the\n following words: We go out \u201cfrom an establishment which we loved\n and prized, through interference with conscience, the dishonor\n done to Christ\u2019s crown, and the rejection of his sole and supreme\n authority as King in his church.\u201d The church should be rightly\n ordered, since it is the representative and guardian of God\u2019s\n truth\u2014its \u201c_pillar and ground_\u201d (_1 Tim. 3:15_)\u2014the Holy Spirit\n working in and through it.\n\n But it is this very relation of the church to Christ and his truth\n which renders it needful to insist upon the right of each member\n of the church to his private judgment as to the meaning of\n Scripture; in other words, absolute monarchy, in this case,\n requires for its complement an absolute democracy. President\n Wayland: \u201cNo individual Christian or number of individual\n Christians, no individual church or number of individual churches,\n has original authority, or has power over the whole. None can add\n to or subtract from the laws of Christ, or interfere with his\n direct and absolute sovereignty over the hearts and lives of his\n subjects.\u201d Each member, as equal to every other, has right to a\n voice in the decisions of the whole body; and no action of the\n majority can bind him against his conviction of duty to Christ.\n\n John Cotton of Massachusetts Bay, 1643, Questions and Answers:\n \u201cThe royal government of the churches is in Christ, the stewardly\n or ministerial in the churches themselves.\u201d Cambridge Platform,\n 1648, 10th chapter\u2014\u201cSo far as Christ is concerned, church\n government is a monarchy; so far as the brotherhood of the church\n is concerned, it resembles a democracy.\u201d Unfortunately the\n Platform goes further and declares that, in respect of the\n Presbytery and the Elders\u2019 power, it is also an aristocracy.\n\n Herbert Spencer and John Stuart Mill, who held diverse views in\n philosophy, were once engaged in controversy. While the discussion\n was running through the press, Mr. Spencer, forced by lack of\n funds, announced that he would be obliged to discontinue the\n publication of his promised books on science and philosophy. Mr.\n Mill wrote him at once, saying that, while he could not agree with\n him in some things, he realized that Mr. Spencer\u2019s investigations\n on the whole made for the advance of truth, and so he himself\n would be glad to bear the expense of the remaining volumes. Here\n in the philosophical world is an example which may well be taken\n to heart by theologians. All Christians indeed are bound to\n respect in others the right of private judgment while stedfastly\n adhering themselves to the truth as Christ has made it known to\n them.\n\n Loyola, founder of the Society of Jesus, dug for each neophyte a\n grave, and buried him all but the head, asking him: \u201cArt thou\n dead?\u201d When he said: \u201cYes!\u201d the General added: \u201cRise then, and\n begin to serve, for I want only dead men to serve me.\u201d Jesus, on\n the other hand, wants only living men to serve him, for he gives\n life and gives it abundantly (_John 10:10_). The Salvation Army,\n in like manner, violates the principle of sole allegiance to\n Christ, and like the Jesuits puts the individual conscience and\n will under bonds to a human master. Good intentions may at first\n prevent evil results; but, since no man can be trusted with\n absolute power, the ultimate consequence, as in the case of the\n Jesuits, will be the enslavement of the subordinate members. Such\n autocracy does not find congenial soil in America,\u2014hence the\n rebellion of Mr. and Mrs. Ballington Booth.\n\n\nA. Proof that the government of the church is democratic or\ncongregational.\n\n\n(_a_) From the duty of the whole church to preserve unity in its action.\n\n\n _Rom. 12:16_\u2014\u201c_Be of the same mind one toward another_\u201d; _1 Cor.\n 1:10_\u2014\u201c_Now I beseech you ... that ye all speak the same thing,\n and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfected\n together in the same mind and in the same judgment_\u201d; _2 Cor.\n 13:11_\u2014\u201c_be of the same mind_\u201d; _Eph. 4:3_\u2014\u201c_giving diligence to\n keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace_\u201d; _Phil.\n 1:27_\u2014\u201c_that ye stand fast in one spirit, with one soul striving\n for the faith of the gospel_\u201d; _1 Pet. 3:8_\u2014\u201c_be ye all\n likeminded._\u201d\n\n These exhortations to unity are not mere counsels to passive\n submission, such as might be given under a hierarchy, or to the\n members of a society of Jesuits; they are counsels to co\u00f6peration\n and to harmonious judgment. Each member, while forming his own\n opinions under the guidance of the Spirit, is to remember that the\n other members have the Spirit also, and that a final conclusion as\n to the will of God is to be reached only through comparison of\n views. The exhortation to unity is therefore an exhortation to be\n open\u2010minded, docile, ready to subject our opinions to discussion,\n to welcome new light with regard to them, and to give up any\n opinion when we find it to be in the wrong. The church is in\n general to secure unanimity by moral suasion only; though, in case\n of wilful and perverse opposition to its decisions, it may be\n necessary to secure unity by excluding an obstructive member, for\n schism.\n\n A quiet and peaceful unity is the result of the Holy Spirit\u2019s work\n in the hearts of Christians. New Testament church government\n proceeds upon the supposition that Christ dwells in all believers.\n Baptist polity is the best possible polity for good people. Christ\n has made no provision for an unregenerate church\u2010membership, and\n for Satanic possession of Christians. It is best that a church in\n which Christ does not dwell should by dissension reveal its\n weakness, and fall to pieces; and any outward organization that\n conceals inward disintegration, and compels a merely formal union\n after the Holy Spirit has departed, is a hindrance instead of a\n help to true religion.\n\n Congregationalism is not a strong government to look at. Neither\n is the solar system. Its enemies call it a rope of sand. It is\n rather a rope of iron filings held together by a magnetic current.\n Wordsworth: \u201cMightier far Than strength of nerve or sinew, or the\n sway Of magic portent over sun and star, Is love.\u201d President\n Wayland: \u201cWe do not need any hoops of iron or steel to hold us\n together.\u201d At high tide all the little pools along the sea shore\n are fused together. The unity produced by the inflowing of the\n Spirit of Christ is better than any mere external unity, whether\n of organization or of creed, whether of Romanism or of\n Protestantism. The times of the greatest external unity, as under\n Hildebrand, were times of the church\u2019s deepest moral corruption. A\n revival of religion is a better cure for church quarrels than any\n change in church organization could effect. In the early church,\n though there was no common government, unity was promoted by\n active intercourse. Hospitality, regular delegates, itinerant\n apostles and prophets, apostolic and other epistles, still later\n the gospels, persecution, and even heresy, promoted unity\u2014heresy\n compelling the exclusion of the unworthy and factious elements in\n the Christian community.\n\n Dr. F. J. A. Hort, The Christian Ecclesia: \u201cNot a word in the\n Epistle to the Ephesians exhibits the one _ecclesia_ as made up of\n many _ecclesi\u00e6_.... The members which make up the one _ecclesia_\n are not communities, but individual men.... The unity of the\n universal _ecclesia_ ... is a truth of theology and religion, not\n a fact of what we call ecclesiastical politics.... The _ecclesia_\n itself, _i. e._, the sum of all its male members, is the primary\n body, and, it would seem, even the primary authority.... Of\n officers higher than elders we find nothing that points to an\n institution or system, nothing like the Episcopal system of later\n times.... The monarchical principle receives practical though\n limited recognition in the position ultimately held by St. James\n at Jerusalem, and in the temporary functions entrusted by St. Paul\n to Timothy and Titus.\u201d On this last statement Bartlett, in\n Contemp. Rev., July, 1897, says that James held an unique position\n as brother of our Lord, while Paul left the communities organized\n by Timothy and Titus to govern themselves, when once their\n organization was set agoing. There was no permanent diocesan\n episcopate, in which one man presided over many churches. The\n _ecclesi\u00e6_ had for their officers only bishops and deacons.\n\n Should not the majority rule in a Baptist church? No, not a bare\n majority, when there are opposing convictions on the part of a\n large minority. What should rule is the mind of the Spirit. What\n indicates his mind is the gradual unification of conviction and\n opinion on the part of the whole body in support of some definite\n plan, so that the whole church moves together. The large church\n has the advantage over the small church in that the single\n crotchety member cannot do so much harm. One man in a small boat\n can easily upset it, but not so in the great ship. Patient\n waiting, persuasion, and prayer, will ordinarily win over the\n recalcitrant. It is not to be denied, however, that patience may\n have its limits, and that unity may sometimes need to be purchased\n by secession and the forming of a new local church whose members\n can work harmoniously together.\n\n\n(_b_) From the responsibility of the whole church for maintaining pure\ndoctrine and practice.\n\n\n _1 Tim. 3:15_\u2014\u201c_the church of the living God, the pillar and\n ground of the truth_\u201d; _Jude 3_\u2014\u201c_exhorting you to contend\n earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered unto the\n saints_\u201d; _Rev. 2_ and _3_\u2014exhortations to the seven churches of\n Asia to maintain pure doctrine and practice. In all these\n passages, pastoral charges are given, not by a so\u2010called bishop to\n his subordinate priests, but by an apostle to the whole church and\n to all its members.\n\n In _1 Tim. 3:15_, Dr. Hort would translate \u201c_a pillar and ground\n of the truth_\u201d\u2014apparently referring to the local church as one of\n many. _Eph. 3:18_\u2014\u201c_strong to apprehend with all saints what is\n the breadth and length and height and depth._\u201d Edith Wharton,\n Vesalius in Zante, in N. A. Rev., Nov. 1892\u2014\u201cTruth is many\u2010\n tongued. What one man failed to speak, another finds Another word\n for. May not all converge, In some vast utterance of which you and\n I, Fallopius, were but the halting syllables?\u201d Bruce, Training of\n the Twelve, shows that the Twelve probably knew the whole O. T. by\n heart. Pandita Ramabai, at Oxford, when visiting Max M\u00fcller,\n recited from the Rig Veda _passim_, and showed that she knew more\n of it by heart than the whole contents of the O. T.\n\n\n(_c_) From the committing of the ordinances to the charge of the whole\nchurch to observe and guard. As the church expresses truth in her\nteaching, so she is to express it in symbol through the ordinances.\n\n\n _Mat. 28:19, 20_\u2014\u201c_Go ye therefore, and make disciples of all the\n nations, baptizing them ... teaching them_\u201d; _cf._ _Luke\n 24:33_\u2014\u201c_And they rose up that very hour ... found the eleven\n gathered together, and them that were with __ them_\u201d; _Acts\n 1:15_\u2014\u201c_And in these days Peter stood up in the midst of the\n brethren, and said (and there was a multitude of persons gathered\n together, about a hundred and twenty)_\u201d; _1 Cor. 15:6_\u2014\u201c_then he\n appeared to above five hundred brethren at once_\u201d\u2014these passages\n show that it was not to the eleven apostles alone that Jesus\n committed the ordinances.\n\n _1 Cor. 11:2_\u2014\u201c_Now I praise you that ye remember me in all\n things, and hold fast the traditions, even as I delivered them to\n you_\u201d; _cf._ _23, 24_\u2014\u201c_for I received of the Lord that which also\n I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus in the night in which he\n was betrayed took bread; and when he had given thanks, he brake\n it, and said, This is my body, which is for you: this do in\n remembrance of me_\u201d\u2014here Paul commits the Lord\u2019s Supper into the\n charge, not of the body of officials, but of the whole church.\n Baptism and the Lord\u2019s Supper, therefore, are not to be\n administered at the discretion of the individual minister. He is\n simply the organ of the church; and pocket baptismal and communion\n services are without warrant. See Curtis, Progress of Baptist\n Principles, 299; Robinson, Harmony of Gospels, notes, \u00a7 170.\n\n\n(_d_) From the election by the whole church, of its own officers and\ndelegates. In Acts 14:23, the literal interpretation of \u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u03bf\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 is\nnot to be pressed. In Titus 1:5, \u201cwhen Paul empowers Titus to set\npresiding officers over the communities, this circumstance decides nothing\nas to the mode of choice, nor is a choice by the community itself thereby\nnecessarily excluded.\u201d\n\n\n _Acts 1:23, 26_\u2014\u201c_And they put forward two ... and they gave lots\n for them; and the lot fell upon Matthias; and he was numbered with\n the eleven apostles_\u201d; _6:3, 5_\u2014\u201c_Look ye out therefore, brethren,\n from among you seven men of good report ... And the saying pleased\n the whole multitude: and they chose Stephen, ... and Philip, and\n Prochorus, and Nicanor, and Timon, and Parmenas, and Nicolaus_\u201d\u2014as\n deacons; _Acts 13:2, 3_\u2014\u201c_And as they ministered to the Lord, and\n fasted, the Holy Spirit said, Separate me Barnabas and Saul for\n the work whereunto I have called them. Then, when they had fasted\n and prayed and laid their hands on them, they sent them away._\u201d\n\n On this passage, see Meyer\u2019s comment: \u201c \u2018_Ministered_\u2019 here\n expresses the act of celebrating divine service on the part of the\n whole church. To refer \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd to the \u2018_prophets and teachers_\u2019 is\n forbidden by the \u1f00\u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u03af\u03c3\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u2014and by _verse 3_. This interpretation\n would confine this most important mission\u2010act to five persons, of\n whom two were the missionaries sent; and the church would have had\n no part in it, even through its presbyters. This agrees, neither\n with the common possession of the Spirit in the apostolic church,\n nor with the concrete cases of the choice of an apostle (_ch. 1_)\n and of deacons (_ch. 6_). Compare _14:27_, where the returned\n missionaries report to the church. The imposition of hands (_verse\n 3_) is by the presbyters, as representatives of the whole church.\n The subject in _verses 2_ and _3_ is \u2018_the church_\u2019\u2014(represented\n by the presbyters in this case). The church sends the missionaries\n to the heathen, and consecrates them through its elders.\u201d\n\n _Acts 15:2, 4, 22, 30_\u2014\u201c_the brethren appointed that Paul and\n Barnabas, and certain other of them, should go up to Jerusalem....\n And when they were come to Jerusalem, they were received of the\n church and the apostles and the elders.... Then it seemed good to\n the apostles and the elders, with the whole church, to choose men\n out of their company, and send them to Antioch with Paul and\n Barnabas.... So they ... came down to Antioch; and having gathered\n the multitude together, they delivered the epistle_\u201d; _2 Cor.\n 8:19_\u2014\u201c_who was also appointed by the churches to travel with us\n in the matter of this grace_\u201d\u2014the contribution for the poor in\n Jerusalem; _Acts 14:23_\u2014\u201c_And when they had appointed_\n (\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u03bf\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2) _for them elders in every church_\u201d\u2014the apostles\n announced the election of the church, as a College President\n confers degrees, _i. e._, by announcing degrees conferred by the\n Board of Trustees. To this same effect witnesses the newly\n discovered Teaching of the Twelve Apostles, chapter 15: \u201cAppoint\n therefore for yourselves bishops and deacons.\u201d\n\n The derivation of \u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u03bf\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2, holding up of hands, as in a\n popular vote, is not to be pressed, any more than is the\n derivation of \u1f10\u03ba\u03ba\u03bb\u03b7\u03c3\u03af\u03b1 from \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03ad\u03c9. The former had come to mean\n simply \u201cto appoint,\u201d without reference to the manner of\n appointment, as the latter had come to mean an \u201cassembly,\u201d without\n reference to the calling of its members by God. That the church at\n Antioch \u201c_separated_\u201d Paul and Barnabas, and that this was not\n done simply by the five persons mentioned, is shown by the fact\n that, when Paul and Barnabas returned from the missionary journey,\n they reported not to these five, but to the whole church. So when\n the church at Antioch sent delegates to Jerusalem, the letter of\n the Jerusalem church is thus addressed: \u201c_The apostles and the\n elders, brethren, unto the brethren who are of the Gentiles in\n Antioch and Syria and Cilicia_\u201d (_Acts 15:23_). The Twelve had\n only spiritual authority. They could advise, but they did not\n command. Hence they could not transmit government, since they had\n it not. They could demand obedience, only as they convinced their\n hearers that their word was truth. It was not they who commanded,\n but their Master.\n\n Hackett, Com. on Acts\u2014\u201c\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u03bf\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd\u03b7\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 is not to be pressed, since\n Paul and Barnabas constitute the persons ordaining. It may\n possibly indicate a concurrent appointment, in accordance with the\n usual practice of universal suffrage; but the burden of proof lies\n on those who would so modify the meaning of the verb. The word is\n frequently used in the sense of choosing, appointing, with\n reference to the formality of raising the hand.\u201d _Per contra_, see\n Meyer, _in loco_: \u201cThe church officers were elective. As appears\n from analogy of _6:2\u20106_ (election of deacons), the word\n \u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u03bf\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 retains its etymological sense, and does not mean\n \u2018constituted\u2019 or \u2018created.\u2019 Their choice was a recognition of a\n gift already bestowed,\u2014not the ground of the office and source of\n authority, but merely the means by which the gift becomes [known,\n recognized, and] an actual office in the church.\u201d\n\n Baumgarten, Apostolic History, 1:456\u2014\u201cThey\u2014the two apostles\u2014allow\n presbyters to be chosen for the community by voting.\u201d Alexander,\n Com. on Acts\u2014\u201cThe method of election here, as the expression\n \u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u03bf\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 indicates, was the same as that in _Acts 6:5, 6_,\n where the people chose the seven, and the twelve ordained them.\u201d\n Barnes, Com. on Acts: \u201cThe apostles presided in the assembly where\n the choice was made,\u2014appointed them in the usual way by the\n suffrage of the people.\u201d Dexter, Congregationalism,\n 138\u2014\u201c \u2018_Ordained_\u2019 means here \u2018prompted and secured the election\u2019\n of elders in every church.\u201d So in _Titus 1:5_\u2014\u201c_appoint elders in\n every city._\u201d Compare the Latin: \u201cdictator consules creavit\u201d =\n prompted and secured the election of consuls by the people. See\n Neander, Church History, 1:189; Guericke, Church History, 1:110;\n Meyer, on _Acts 13:2_.\n\n The Watchman, Nov. 7, 1901\u2014\u201cThe root\u2010difficulty with many schemes\n of statecraft is to be found in deep\u2010seated distrust of the\n capacities and possibilities of men. Wendell Phillips once said\n that nothing so impressed him with the power of the gospel to\n solve our problems as the sight of a prince and a peasant kneeling\n side by side in a European Cathedral.\u201d Dr. W. R. Huntington makes\n the strong points of Congregationalism to be: 1. a lofty estimate\n of the value of trained intelligence in the Christian ministry; 2.\n a clear recognition of the duty of every lay member of a church to\n take an active interest in its affairs, temporal as well as\n spiritual. He regards the weaknesses of Congregationalism to be:\n 1. a certain incapacity for expansion beyond the territorial\n limits within which it is indigenous; 2. an undervaluation of the\n mystical or sacramental, as contrasted with the doctrinal and\n practical sides of religion. He argues for the object\u2010symbolism as\n well as the verbal\u2010symbolism of the real presence and grace of our\n Lord Jesus Christ. Dread of idolatry, he thinks, should not make\n us indifferent to the value of sacraments. Baptists, we reply, may\n fairly claim that they escape both of these charges against\n ordinary Congregationalism, in that they have shown unlimited\n capacity of expansion, and in that they make very much of the\n symbolism of the ordinances.\n\n\n(_e_) From the power of the whole church to exercise discipline. Passages\nwhich show the right of the whole body to exclude, show also the right of\nthe whole body to admit, members.\n\n\n _Mat. 18:17_\u2014\u201c_And if he refuse to hear them, tell it unto the\n church: and if he refuse to hear the church also, let him be unto\n thee as the Gentile and the publican. Verily I say unto you, What\n things soever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and\n what things soever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in\n heaven_\u201d\u2014words often inscribed over Roman Catholic confessionals,\n but improperly, since they refer not to the decisions of a single\n priest, but to the decisions of the whole body of believers guided\n by the Holy Spirit. In _Mat. 18:17_, quoted above, we see that the\n church has authority, that it is bound to take cognizance of\n offences, and that its action is final. If there had been in the\n mind of our Lord any other than a democratic form of government,\n he would have referred the aggrieved party to pastor, priest, or\n presbytery, and, in case of a wrong decision by the church, would\n have mentioned some synod or assembly to which the aggrieved\n person might appeal. But he throws all the responsibility upon the\n whole body of believers. _Cf._ _Num. 15:35_\u2014\u201c_all the congregation\n shall stone him with stones_\u201d\u2014the man who gathered sticks on the\n Sabbath day. Every Israelite was to have part in the execution of\n the penalty.\n\n _1 Cor. 5:4, 5, 13_\u2014\u201c_ye being gathered together ... to deliver\n such a one unto Satan.... Put away the wicked man from among\n yourselves_\u201d; _2 Cor. 2:6, 7_\u2014\u201c_Sufficient to such a one is this\n punishment which was inflicted by the many; so that contrariwise\n ye should rather forgive him and comfort him_\u201d; _7:11_\u2014\u201c_For\n behold, this selfsame thing ... what earnest care it wrought in\n you, yea, what clearing of yourselves.... In every thing ye\n approved yourselves to be pure in the matter_\u201d; _2 Thess. 3:6, 14,\n 15_\u2014\u201c_withdraw yourselves from every brother that __ walketh\n disorderly ... if any man obeyeth not our word by this epistle,\n note that man, that ye have no company with him, to the end that\n he may be ashamed. And yet count him not as an enemy, but admonish\n him as a brother._\u201d The evils in the church at Corinth were such\n as could exist only in a democratic body, and Paul does not enjoin\n upon the church a change of government, but a change of heart.\n Paul does not himself excommunicate the incestuous man, but he\n urges the church to excommunicate him.\n\n The educational influence upon the whole church of this election\n of pastors and deacons, choosing of delegates, admission and\n exclusion of members, management of church finance and general\n conduct of business, carrying on of missionary operations and\n raising of contributions, together with responsibility for correct\n doctrine and practice, cannot be overestimated. The whole body can\n know those who apply for admission, better than pastors or elders\n can. To put the whole government of the church into the hands of a\n few is to deprive the membership of one great means of Christian\n training and progress. Hence the pastor\u2019s duty is to develop the\n self\u2010government of the church. The missionary should not command,\n but advise. That minister is most successful who gets the whole\n body to move, and who renders the church independent of himself.\n The test of his work is not while he is with them, but after he\n leaves them. Then it can be seen whether he has taught them to\n follow him, or to follow Christ; whether he has led them to the\n formation of habits of independent Christian activity, or whether\n he has made them passively dependent upon himself.\n\n It should be the ambition of the pastor not \u201cto run the church,\u201d\n but to teach the church intelligently and Scripturally to manage\n its own affairs. The word \u201cminister\u201d means, not master, but\n servant. The true pastor inspires, but he does not drive. He is\n like the trusty mountain guide, who carries a load thrice as heavy\n as that of the man he serves, who leads in safe paths and points\n out dangers, but who neither shouts nor compels obedience. The\n individual Christian should be taught: 1. to realize the privilege\n of church membership; 2. to fit himself to use his privilege; 3.\n to exercise his rights as a church member; 4. to glory in the New\n Testament system of church government, and to defend and propagate\n it.\n\n A Christian pastor can either rule, or he can have the reputation\n of ruling; but he can not do both. Real ruling involves a sinking\n of self, a working through others, a doing of nothing that some\n one else can be got to do. The reputation of ruling leads sooner\n or later to the loss of real influence, and to the decline of the\n activities of the church itself. See Coleman, Manual of Prelacy\n and Ritualism, 87\u2010125; and on the advantages of Congregationalism\n over every other form of church\u2010polity, see Dexter,\n Congregationalism, 236\u2010296. Dexter, 290, note, quotes from\n Belcher\u2019s Religious Denominations of the U. S., 184, as follows:\n \u201cJefferson said that he considered Baptist church government the\n only form of pure democracy which then existed in the world, and\n had concluded that it would be the best plan of government for the\n American Colonies. This was eight or ten years before the American\n Revolution.\u201d On Baptist democracy, see Thomas Armitage, in N.\n Amer. Rev., March, 1887:232\u2010243.\n\n John Fiske, Beginnings of New England: \u201cIn a church based upon\n such a theology [that of Calvin], there was no room for prelacy.\n Each single church tended to become an independent congregation of\n worshipers, constituting one of the most effective schools that\n has ever existed for training men in local self\u2010government.\u201d\n Schurman, Agnosticism, 160\u2014\u201cThe Baptists, who are nominally\n Calvinists, are now, as they were at the beginning of the century,\n second in numerical rank [in America]; but their fundamental\n principle\u2014the Bible, the Bible only\u2014taken in connection with their\n polity, has enabled them silently to drop the old theology and\n unconsciously to adjust themselves to the new spiritual\n environment.\u201d We prefer to say that Baptists have not dropped the\n old theology, but have given it new interpretation and\n application; see A. H. Strong, Our Denominational Outlook, Sermon\n in Cleveland, 1904.\n\n\nB. Erroneous views as to church government refuted by the foregoing\npassages.\n\n\n(_a_) The world\u2010church theory, or the Romanist view.\u2014This holds that all\nlocal churches are subject to the supreme authority of the bishop of Rome,\nas the successor of Peter and the infallible vicegerent of Christ, and, as\nthus united, constitute the one and only church of Christ on earth. We\nreply:\n\nFirst,\u2014Christ gave no such supreme authority to Peter. Mat. 16:18, 19,\nsimply refers to the personal position of Peter as first confessor of\nChrist and preacher of his name to Jews and Gentiles. Hence other apostles\nalso constituted the foundation (Eph. 2:20; Rev. 21:14). On one occasion,\nthe counsel of James was regarded as of equal weight with that of Peter\n(Acts 15:7\u201030), while on another occasion Peter was rebuked by Paul (Gal.\n2:11), and Peter calls himself only a fellow\u2010elder (1 Pet. 5:1).\n\n\n _Mat. 16:18, 19_\u2014\u201c_And I also say unto thee, that thou art Peter,\n and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of Hades\n shall not prevail against it. I will give unto thee the keys of\n the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth\n shall be bound in heaven; and whatsoever thou shall loose on earth\n shall be loosed in heaven._\u201d Peter exercised this power of the\n keys for both Jews and Gentiles, by being the first to preach\n Christ to them, and so admit them to the kingdom of heaven. The\n \u201c_rock_\u201d is a confessing heart. The confession of Christ makes\n Peter a rock upon which the church can be built. Plumptre on\n Epistles of Peter, Introd., 14\u2014\u201cHe was a stone\u2014one with that rock\n with which he was now joined by an indissoluble union.\u201d But others\n come to be associated with him: _Eph. 2:20_\u2014\u201c_built upon the\n foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself\n being the chief corner stone_\u201d; _Rev. 21:14_\u2014\u201c_And the wall of the\n city had twelve foundations, and on them twelve names of the\n twelve apostles of the Lamb._\u201d _Acts 15:7\u201030_\u2014the Council of\n Jerusalem. _Gal. 2:11_\u2014\u201c_But when Cephas came to Antioch, I\n resisted him to the face, because he stood condemned_\u201d; _1 Pet.\n 5:1_\u2014\u201c_The elders therefore among you I exhort, who am a fellow\u2010\n elder._\u201d\n\n Here it should be remembered that three things were necessary to\n constitute an apostle: (1) he must have seen Christ after his\n resurrection, so as to be a witness to the fact that Christ had\n risen from the dead; (2) he must be a worker of miracles, to\n certify that he was Christ\u2019s messenger; (3) he must be an inspired\n teacher of Christ\u2019s truth, so that his final utterances are the\n very word of God. In _Rom. 16:7_\u2014\u201c_Salute Andronicus and Junias,\n my kinsmen, and my fellow\u2010prisoners, who are of note among the\n apostles_\u201d means simply: \u201cwho are highly esteemed among, or by,\n the apostles.\u201d Barnabas is called an apostle, in the etymological\n sense of a messenger: _Acts 13:2, 3_\u2014\u201c_Separate me Barnabas and\n Saul for the work whereunto I have called them. Then, when they\n had fasted and prayed and laid their hands on them, they sent them\n away_\u201d; _Heb. 3:1_\u2014\u201c_consider the Apostle and High Priest of our\n confession, even Jesus._\u201d In this latter sense, the number of the\n apostles was not limited to twelve.\n\n Protestants err in denying the reference in _Mat. 16:18_ to Peter;\n Christ recognizes Peter\u2019s _personality_ in the founding of his\n kingdom. But Romanists equally err in ignoring Peter\u2019s\n _confession_ as constituting him the \u201c_rock_.\u201d Creeds and\n confessions alone will never convert the world; they need to be\n embodied in living personalities in order to save; this is the\n grain of correct doctrine in Romanism. On the other hand, men\n without a faith, which they are willing to confess at every cost,\n will never convert the world; there must be a substance of\n doctrine with regard to sin, and with regard to Christ as the\n divine Savior from sin; this is the just contention of\n Protestantism. Baptist doctrine combines the merits of both\n systems. It has both personality and confession. It is not\n hierarchical, but experiential. It insists, not upon abstractions,\n but upon life. Truth without a body is as powerless as a body\n without truth. A flag without an army is even worse than an army\n without a flag. Phillips Brooks: \u201cThe truth of God working through\n the personality of man has been the salvation of the world.\u201d\n Pascal: \u201cCatholicism is a church without a religion; Protestantism\n is a religion without a church.\u201d Yes, we reply, if church means\n hierarchy.\n\n\nSecondly,\u2014If Peter had such authority given him, there is no evidence that\nhe had power to transmit it to others.\n\n\n Fisher, Hist. Christian Church, 247\u2014\u201cWilliam of Occam (1280\u20101347)\n composed a treatise on the power of the pope. He went beyond his\n predecessors in arguing that the church, since it has its unity in\n Christ, is not under the necessity of being subject to a single\n primate. He placed the Emperor and the General Council above the\n pope, as his judges. In matters of faith he would not allow\n infallibility even to the General Councils. \u2018Only Holy Scripture\n and the beliefs of the universal church are of absolute\n validity.\u2019 \u201d W. Rauschenbusch, in The Examiner, July 28, 1892\u2014\u201cThe\n age of an ecclesiastical organization, instead of being an\n argument in its favor, is presumptive evidence against it, because\n all bodies organized for moral or religious ends manifest such a\n frightful inclination to become corrupt.... Marks of the true\n church are: present spiritual power, loyalty to Jesus, an\n unworldly morality, seeking and saving the lost, self\u2010sacrifice\n and self\u2010crucifixion.\u201d\n\n Romanism holds to a transmitted infallibility. The pope is\n infallible: 1. when he speaks as pope; 2. when he speaks for the\n whole church; 3. when he defines doctrine, or passes a final\n judgment; 4. when the doctrine thus defined is within the sphere\n of faith or morality; see Brandis, in N. A. Rev., Dec. 1892: 654.\n Schurman, Belief in God, 114\u2014\u201cLike the Christian pope, Zeus is\n conceived in the Homeric poems to be fallible as an individual,\n but infallible as head of the sacred convocation. The other gods\n are only his representatives and executives.\u201d But, even if the\n primacy of the Roman pontiff were acknowledged, there would still\n be abundant proof that he is not infallible. The condemnation of\n the letters of Pope Honorius, acknowledging monothelism and\n ordering it to be preached, by Pope Martin I and the first Council\n of Lateran in 649, shows that both could not be right. Yet both\n were _ex cathedra_ utterances, one denying what the other\n affirmed. Perrone concedes that only one error committed by a pope\n in an _ex cathedra_ announcement would be fatal to the doctrine of\n papal infallibility.\n\n Martineau, Seat of Authority, 139, 140, gives instances of papal\n inconsistencies and contradictions, and shows that Roman\n Catholicism does not answer to either one of its four notes or\n marks of a true church, _viz._: 1. unity; 2. sanctity; 3.\n universality; 4. apostolicity. Dean Stanley had an interview with\n Pope Pius IX, and came away saying that the infallible man had\n made more blunders in a twenty minutes\u2019 conversation than any\n person he had ever met. Dr. Fairbairn facetiously defines\n infallibility, as \u201cinability to detect errors even where they are\n most manifest.\u201d He speaks of \u201cthe folly of the men who think they\n hold God in their custody, and distribute him to whomsoever they\n will.\u201d The Pope of Rome can no more trace his official descent\n from Peter than Alexander the Great could trace his personal\n descent from Jupiter.\n\n\nThirdly,\u2014There is no conclusive evidence that Peter ever was at Rome, much\nless that he was bishop of Rome.\n\n\n Clement of Rome refers to Peter as a martyr, but he makes no claim\n for Rome as the place of his martyrdom. The tradition that Peter\n preached at Rome and founded a church there dates back only to\n Dionysius of Corinth and Iren\u00e6us of Lyons, who did not write\n earlier than the eighth decade of the second century, or more than\n a hundred years after Peter\u2019s death. Professor Lepsius of Jena\n submitted the Roman tradition to a searching examination, and came\n to the conclusion that Peter was never in Italy.\n\n A. A. Hodge, in Princetoniana, 129\u2014\u201cThree unproved assumptions: 1.\n that Peter was primate; 2. that Peter was bishop of Rome; 3. that\n Peter was primate _and_ bishop of Rome. The last is not\n unimportant; because Clement, for instance, might have succeeded\n to the bishopric of Rome without the primacy; as Queen Victoria\n came to the crown of England, but not to that of Hanover. Or, to\n come nearer home, Ulysses S. Grant was president of the United\n States and husband of Mrs. Grant. Mr. Hayes succeeded him, but not\n in both capacities!\u201d\n\n On the question whether Peter founded the Roman Church, see Meyer,\n Com. on Romans, transl., vol. 1:23\u2014\u201cPaul followed the principle of\n not interfering with another apostle\u2019s field of labor. Hence Peter\n could not have been laboring at Rome, at the time when Paul wrote\n his epistle to the Romans from Ephesus; _cf._ _Acts 19:21; Rom.\n 15:20; 2 Cor. 10:16._\u201d Meyer thinks Peter was martyred at Rome,\n but that he did not found the Roman church, the origin of which is\n unknown. \u201cThe Epistle to the Romans,\u201d he says, \u201csince Peter cannot\n have labored at Rome before it was written, is a fact destructive\n of the historical basis of the Papacy\u201d (p. 28). See also Elliott,\n Hor\u00e6 Apocalyptic\u00e6, 3:560.\n\n\nFourthly,\u2014There is no evidence that he really did so appoint the bishops\nof Rome as his successors.\n\n\n Denney, Studies in Theology, 191\u2014\u201cThe church was first the company\n of those united to Christ and living in Christ; then it became a\n society based on creed; finally a society based on clergy.\u201d A. J.\n Gordon, Ministry of the Spirit, 130\u2014\u201cThe Holy Spirit is the real\n \u2018Vicar of Christ.\u2019 Would any one desire to find the clue to the\n great apostasy whose dark eclipse now covers two thirds of nominal\n Christendom, here it is: The rule and authority of the Holy Spirit\n ignored in the church; the servants of the house assuming mastery\n and encroaching more and more on the prerogatives of the Head,\n till at last one man sets himself up as the administrator of the\n church, and daringly usurps the name of the Vicar of Christ.\u201d See\n also R. V. Littledale, The Petrine Claims.\n\n The secret of Baptist success and progress is in putting truth\n before unity. _James 3:17_\u2014\u201c_the wisdom that is from above is\n first pure, then peaceable._\u201d The substitution of external for\n internal unity, of which the apostolic succession, so called, is a\n sign and symbol, is of a piece with the whole sacramental scheme\n of salvation. Men cannot be brought into the kingdom of heaven,\n nor can they be made good ministers of Jesus Christ, by priestly\n manipulation. The Frankish wholesale conversion of races, the\n Jesuitical putting of obedience instead of life, the\n identification of the church with the nation, are all false\n methods of diffusing Christianity. The claims of Rome need\n irrefragible proof, if they are to be accepted. But they have no\n warrant in Scripture or in history. Methodist Review: \u201cAs long as\n the Bible is recognized to be authoritative, the church will face\n Romeward as little as Leo X will visit America to attend a\n Methodist campmeeting, or Justin D. Fulton be elected as his\n successor in the Papal chair.\u201d See Gore, Incarnation, 208, 209.\n\n\nFifthly,\u2014If Peter did so appoint the bishops of Rome, the evidence of\ncontinuous succession since that time is lacking.\n\n\n On the weakness of the argument for apostolic succession, see\n remarks with regard to the national church theory, below. Dexter,\n Congregationalism, 715\u2014\u201cTo spiritualize and evangelize Romanism,\n or High Churchism, will be to Congregationalize it.\u201d If all the\n Roman Catholics who have come to America had remained Roman\n Catholics, there would be sixteen millions of them, whereas there\n are actually only eight millions. If it be said that the remainder\n have no religion, we reply that they have just as much religion as\n they had before. American democracy has freed them from the\n domination of the priest, but it has not deprived them of anything\n but external connection with a corrupt church. It has given them\n opportunity for the first time to come in contact with the church\n of the New Testament, and to accept the offer of salvation through\n simple faith in Jesus Christ.\n\n \u201cRomanism,\u201d says Dorner, \u201cidentifies the church and the kingdom of\n God. The professedly perfect hierarchy is itself the church, or\n its essence.\u201d Yet Moehler, the greatest modern advocate of the\n Romanist system, himself acknowledges that there were popes before\n the Reformation \u201cwhom hell has swallowed up\u201d; see Dorner, Hist.\n Prot. Theol., Introd., _ad finem_. If the Romanist asks: \u201cWhere\n was your church before Luther?\u201d the Protestant may reply: \u201cWhere\n was your face this morning before it was washed?\u201d Disciples of\n Christ have sometimes kissed the feet of Antichrist, but it\n recalls an ancient story. When an Athenian noble thus, in old\n times, debased himself to the King of Persia, his fellow\u2010citizens\n at Athens doomed him to death. See Coleman, Manual on Prelacy and\n Ritualism, 265\u2010274; Park, in Bib. Sac., 2:451; Princeton Rev.,\n Apr., 1876:265.\n\n\nSixthly,\u2014There is abundant evidence that a hierarchical form of church\ngovernment is corrupting to the church and dishonoring to Christ.\n\n\n A. J. Gordon, Ministry of the Spirit, 131\u2010140\u2014\u201cCatholic writers\n claim that the Pope, as the Vicar of Christ, is the only\n mouthpiece of the Holy Ghost. But the Spirit has been given to the\n church as a whole, that is, to the body of regenerated believers,\n and to every member of that body according to his measure. The sin\n of sacerdotalism is, that it arrogates for a usurping few that\n which belongs to every member of Christ\u2019s mystical body. It is a\n suggestive fact that the name \u03ba\u03bb\u1fc6\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2, \u2018_the charge allotted to\n you_,\u2019 which Peter gives to the church as \u2018_the flock of God_\u2019 (_1\n Pet. 5:2_), when warning the elders against being lords over God\u2019s\n heritage, now appears in ecclesiastical usage as \u2019the clergy,\u2019\n with its orders of pontiff and prelates and lord bishops, whose\n appointed function it is to exercise lordship over Christ\u2019s\n flock.... But committees and majorities may take the place of the\n Spirit, just as perfectly as a pope or a bishop.... This is the\n reason why the light has been extinguished in many a\n candlestick.... The body remains, but the breath is withdrawn. The\n Holy Spirit is the only Administrator.\u201d\n\n Canon Melville: \u201cMake peace if you will with Popery, receive it\n into your Senate, enshrine it in your chambers, plant it in your\n hearts. But be ye certain, as certain as there is a heaven above\n you and a God over you, that the Popery thus honored and embraced\n is the Popery that was loathed and degraded by the holiest of your\n fathers; and the same in haughtiness, the same in intolerance,\n which lorded it over kings, assumed the prerogative of Deity,\n crushed human liberty, and slew the saints of God.\u201d On the\n strength and weakness of Romanism, see Harnack, What is\n Christianity? 246\u2010263.\n\n\n(_b_) The national\u2010church theory, or the theory of provincial or national\nchurches.\u2014This holds that all members of the church in any province or\nnation are bound together in provincial or national organization, and that\nthis organization has jurisdiction over the local churches. We reply:\n\nFirst,\u2014the theory has no support in the Scriptures. There is no evidence\nthat the word \u1f10\u03ba\u03ba\u03bb\u03b7\u03c3\u03af\u03b1 in the New Testament ever means a national church\norganization. 1 Cor. 12:28, Phil. 3:6, and 1 Tim. 3:15, may be more\nnaturally interpreted as referring to the generic church. In Acts 9:31,\n\u1f10\u03ba\u03ba\u03bb\u03b7\u03c3\u03af\u03b1 is a mere generalization for the local churches then and there\nexisting, and implies no sort of organization among them.\n\n\n _1 Cor. 12:28_\u2014\u201c_And God hath set some in the church, first\n apostles, secondly prophets, thirdly teachers, then miracles, then\n gifts of healings, helps, governments, divers kinds of tongues_\u201d;\n _Phil. 3:6_\u2014\u201c_as touching zeal, persecuting the church_\u201d; _1 Tim.\n 3:15_\u2014\u201c_that thou mayest know how men ought to behave themselves\n in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the\n pillar and ground of the truth_\u201d; _Acts 9:31_\u2014\u201c_So the church\n throughout all Jud\u00e6a and Galilee and Samaria had peace, being\n edified._\u201d For advocacy of the Presbyterian system, see\n Cunningham, Historical Theology, 2:514\u2010556; McPherson,\n Presbyterianism. _Per contra_, see Jacob, Eccl. Polity of N. T.,\n 9\u2014\u201cThere is no example of a national church in the New Testament.\u201d\n\n\nSecondly,\u2014It is contradicted by the intercourse which the New Testament\nchurches held with each other as independent bodies,\u2014for example at the\nCouncil of Jerusalem (Acts. 15:1\u201035).\n\n\n _Acts 15:2, 6, 13, 19, 22_\u2014\u201c_the brethren appointed that Paul and\n Barnabas, and certain other of them, should go up to Jerusalem\n unto the apostles and elders about this question.... And the\n apostles and the elders were gathered together to consider of this\n matter.... James answered ... my judgment is, that we trouble not\n them that from among the Gentiles turn to God ... it seemed good\n to the apostles and the elders, with the whole church, to choose\n men out of their company, and send them to Antioch with Paul and\n Barnabas._\u201d\n\n McGiffert, Apostolic Church, 645\u2014\u201cThe steps of developing\n organization were: 1. Recognition of the teaching of the apostles\n as exclusive standard and norm of Christian truth; 2. Confinement\n to a specific office, the Catholic office of bishop, of the power\n to determine what is the teaching of the apostles; 3. Designation\n of a specific institution, the Catholic church, as the sole\n channel of divine grace. The Twelve, in the church of Jerusalem,\n had only a purely spiritual authority. They could advise, but they\n did not command. Hence they were not qualified to transmit\n authority to others. They had no absolute authority themselves.\u201d\n\n\nThirdly,\u2014It has no practical advantages over the Congregational polity,\nbut rather tends to formality, division, and the extinction of the\nprinciples of self\u2010government and direct responsibility to Christ.\n\n\n E. G. Robinson: \u201cThe Anglican schism is the most sectarian of all\n the sects.\u201d Principal Rainey thus describes the position of the\n Episcopal Church: \u201cThey will not recognize the church standing of\n those who recognize them; and they only recognize the church\n standing of those, Greeks and Latins, who do not recognize them.\n Is not that an odd sort of Catholicity?\u201d \u201cEvery priestling hides a\n popeling.\u201d The elephant going through the jungle saw a brood of\n young partridges that had just lost their mother. Touched with\n sympathy he said: \u201cI will be a mother to you,\u201d and so he sat down\n upon them, as he had seen their mother do. Hence we speak of the\n \u201cincumbent\u201d of such and such a parish.\n\n There were no councils that claimed authority till the second\n century, and the independence of the churches was not given up\n until the third or fourth century. In Bp. Lightfoot\u2019s essay on the\n Christian Ministry, in the appendix to his Com. on Philippians,\n progress to episcopacy is thus described: \u201cIn the time of\n Ignatius, the bishop, then _primus inter pares_, was regarded only\n as a centre of unity; in the time of Iren\u00e6us, as a depositary of\n primitive truth; in the time of Cyprian, as absolute vicegerent of\n Christ in things spiritual.\u201d Nothing is plainer than the steady\n degeneration of church polity in the hands of the Fathers.\n Archibald Alexander: \u201cA better name than Church Fathers for these\n men would be church babies. Their theology was infantile.\u201d Luther:\n \u201cNever mind the Scribes,\u2014what saith the Scripture?\u201d\n\n\nFourthly,\u2014It is inconsistent with itself, in binding a professedly\nspiritual church by formal and geographical lines.\n\n\n Instance the evils of Presbyterianism in practice. Dr. Park says\n that \u201cthe split between the Old and the New School was due to an\n attempt on the part of the majority to impose their will on the\n minority.... The Unitarian defection in New England would have\n ruined Presbyterian churches, but it did not ruin Congregational\n churches. A Presbyterian church may be deprived of the minister it\n has chosen, by the votes of neighboring churches, or by the few\n leading men who control them, or by one single vote in a close\n contest.\u201d We may illustrate by the advantage of the adjustable\n card\u2010catalogue over the old method of keeping track of books in a\n library.\n\n A. J. Gordon, Ministry of the Spirit, 137, note\u2014\u201cBy the\n candlesticks in the Revelation being seven, instead of one as in\n the tabernacle, we are taught that whereas, in the Jewish\n dispensation, God\u2019s visible church was one, in the Gentile\n dispensation there are many visible churches, and that Christ\n himself recognizes them alike\u201d (quoted from Garratt, Com. on Rev.,\n 32). Bishop Moule, Veni Creator, 131, after speaking of the unity\n of the Spirit, goes on to say: \u201cBlessed will it be for the church\n and for the world when these principles shall so vastly prevail as\n to find expression from within in a harmonious counterpart of\n order; a far different thing from what is, I cannot but think, an\n illusory prospect\u2014the attainment of such internal unity by a\n previous exaction of exterior governmental uniformity.\u201d\n\n\nFifthly,\u2014It logically leads to the theory of Romanism. If two churches\nneed a superior authority to control them and settle their differences,\nthen two countries and two hemispheres need a common ecclesiastical\ngovernment,\u2014and a world\u2010church, under one visible head, is Romanism.\n\n\n Hatch, in his Bampton Lectures on Organization of Early Christian\n Churches, without discussing the evidence from the New Testament,\n proceeds to treat of the post\u2010apostolic development of\n organization, as if the existence of a germinal Episcopacy very\n soon _after_ the apostles proved such a system to be legitimate or\n obligatory. In reply, we would ask whether we are under moral\n obligation to conform to whatever succeeds in developing itself.\n If so, then the priests of Baal, as well as the priests of Rome,\n had just claims to human belief and obedience. Prof. Black: \u201cWe\n have no objection to antiquity, if they will only go back far\n enough. We wish to listen, not only to the fathers of the church,\n but also to the grandfathers.\u201d\n\n Phillips Brooks speaks of \u201cthe fantastic absurdity of apostolic\n succession.\u201d And with reason, for in the Episcopal system, bishops\n qualified to ordain must be: (1) baptized persons; (2) not\n scandalously immoral; (3) not having obtained office by bribery;\n (4) must not have been deposed. In view of these qualifications,\n Archbishop Whately pronounces the doctrine of apostolic succession\n untenable, and declares that \u201cthere is no Christian minister\n existing now, who can trace up with complete certainty his own\n ordination, through perfectly regular steps, to the time of the\n apostles.\u201d See Macaulay\u2019s Review of Gladstone on Church and State,\n in his Essays, 4:166\u2010178. There are breaks in the line, and a\n chain is only as strong as its weakest part. See Presb. Rev.,\n 1886:89\u2010126. Mr. Flanders called Phillips Brooks \u201can Episcopalian\n with leanings toward Christianity.\u201d Bishop Brooks replied that he\n could not be angry with \u201csuch a dear old moth\u2010eaten angel.\u201d On\n apostolic succession, see C. Anderson Scott, Evangelical Doctrine,\n 37\u201048, 267\u2010288.\n\n Apostolic succession has been called the pipe\u2010line conception of\n divine grace. To change the figure, it may be compared to the\n monopoly of communication with Europe by the submarine cable. But\n we are not confined to the pipe\u2010line or to the cable. There are\n wells of salvation in our private grounds, and wireless telegraphy\n practicable to every human soul, apart from any control of\n corporations.\n\n We see leanings toward the world\u2010church idea in Pananglican and\n Panpresbyterian Councils. Human nature ever tends to substitute\n the unity of external organization for the spiritual unity which\n belongs to all believers in Christ. There is no necessity for\n common government, whether Presbyterian or Episcopal; since\n Christ\u2019s truth and Spirit are competent to govern all as easily as\n one. It is a remarkable fact, that the Baptist denomination,\n without external bonds, has maintained a greater unity in\n doctrine, and a closer general conformity to New Testament\n standards, than the churches which adopt the principle of\n episcopacy, or of provincial organization. With Abp. Whately, we\n find the true symbol of Christian unity in \u201c_the tree of life,\n bearing twelve manner of __ fruits_\u201d (_Rev. 22:2_). _Cf._ _John\n 10:16_\u2014\u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03ae\u03c3\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03bc\u03af\u03b1 \u03c0\u03bf\u03af\u03bc\u03bd\u03b7, \u03b5\u1f36\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03bc\u03ae\u03bd\u2014\u201c_they shall become one\n flock, one shepherd_\u201d = not one fold, not external unity, but one\n flock in many folds. See Jacob, Eccl. Polity of N. T., 130;\n Dexter, Congregationalism, 236; Coleman, Manual on Prelacy and\n Ritualism, 128\u2010264; Albert Barnes, Apostolic Church.\n\n As testimonies to the adequacy of Baptist polity to maintain sound\n doctrine, we quote from the Congregationalist, Dr. J. L. Withrow:\n \u201cThere is not a denomination of evangelical Christians that is\n throughout as sound theologically as the Baptist denomination.\n There is not an evangelical denomination in America to\u2010day that is\n as true to the simple plain gospel of God, as it is recorded in\n the word, as the Baptist denomination.\u201d And the Presbyterian, Dr.\n W. G. T. Shedd, in a private letter dated Oct. 1, 1886, writes as\n follows: \u201cAmong the denominations, we all look to the Baptists for\n steady and firm adherence to sound doctrine. You have never had\n any internal doctrinal conflicts, and from year to year you\n present an undivided front in defense of the Calvinistic faith.\n Having no judicatures and regarding the local church as the unit,\n it is remarkable that you maintain such a unity and solidarity of\n belief. If you could impart your secret to our Congregational\n brethren, I think that some of them at least would thank you.\u201d\n\n A. H. Strong, Sermon in London before the Baptist World Congress,\n July, 1905\u2014\u201cCo\u00f6peration with Christ involves the spiritual unity\n not only of all Baptists with one another, but of all Baptists\n with the whole company of true believers of every name. We cannot,\n indeed, be true to our convictions without organizing into one\n body those who agree with us in our interpretation of the\n Scriptures. Our denominational divisions are at present\n necessities of nature. But we regret these divisions, and, as we\n grow in grace and in the knowledge of the truth, we strive, at\n least in spirit, to rise above them. In America our farms are\n separated from one another by fences, and in the springtime, when\n the wheat and barley are just emerging from the earth, these\n fences are very distinguishable and unpleasing features of the\n landscape. But later in the season, when the corn has grown and\n the time of harvest is near, the grain is so tall that the fences\n are entirely hidden, and for miles together you seem to see only a\n single field. It is surely our duty to confess everywhere and\n always that we are first Christians and only secondly Baptists.\n The tie which binds us to Christ is more important in our eyes\n than that which binds us to those of the same faith and order. We\n live in hope that the Spirit of Christ in us, and in all other\n Christian bodies, may induce such growth of mind and heart that\n the sense of unity may not only overtop and hide the fences of\n division, but may ultimately do away with these fences\n altogether.\u201d\n\n\n2. Officers of the Church.\n\n\nA. The number of offices in the church is two:\u2014first, the office of\nbishop, presbyter, or pastor; and, secondly, the office of deacon.\n\n\n(_a_) That the appellations \u201cbishop,\u201d \u201cpresbyter,\u201d and \u201cpastor\u201d designate\nthe same office and order of persons, may be shown from Acts\n20:28\u2014\u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03ba\u03cc\u03c0\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03bc\u03b1\u03af\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd (cf. 17\u2014\u03c0\u03c1\u03b5\u03c3\u03b2\u03c5\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2); Phil. 1:1; 1 Tim. 3:1,\n8; Titus 1:5, 7; 1 Pet. 5:1, 2\u2014\u03c0\u03c1\u03b5\u03c3\u03b2\u03c5\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 ... \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u1ff6 \u1f41 \u03c3\u03c5\u03bc\u03c0\u03c1\u03b5\u03c3\u03b2\u03cd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2\n... \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03bc\u03ac\u03bd\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5 \u03c0\u03bf\u03af\u03bc\u03bd\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd ... \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2. Conybeare and Howson: \u201cThe terms\n\u2018bishop\u2019 and \u2018elder\u2019 are used in the New Testament as equivalent,\u2014the\nformer denoting (as its meaning of overseer implies) the duties, the\nlatter the rank, of the office.\u201d See passages quoted in Gieseler, Church\nHistory, 1:90, note 1\u2014as, for example, Jerome: \u201cApud veteres iidem\nepiscopi et presbyteri, quia illud nomen dignitatis est, hoc \u00e6tatis. Idem\nest ergo presbyter qui episcopus.\u201d\n\n\n _Acts 20:28_\u2014\u201c_Take heed unto yourselves, and to all the flock, in\n which the Holy Spirit hath made you bishops_ [marg.\n \u2018_overseers_\u2019], _to feed_ [lit. \u2018_to shepherd_,\u2019 \u2018_be pastors\n of_\u2019] _the church of the Lord which he purchased with his own\n blood_\u201d; _cf._ _17_\u2014\u201c_the elders of the church_\u201d are those whom\n Paul addresses as bishops or overseers, and whom he exhorts to be\n good pastors. _Phil. 1:1_\u2014\u201c_bishops and deacons_\u201d; _1 Tim. 3:1,\n 8_\u2014\u201c_If a man seeketh the office of a bishop, he desireth a good\n work.... Deacons in like manner must be grave_\u201d; _Tit. 1:5,\n 7_\u2014\u201c_appoint elders in every city.... For the bishop must be\n blameless_\u201d; _1 Pet. 5:1, 2_\u2014\u201c_The elders therefore among you I\n exhort, who am a fellow\u2010elder.... Tend_ [lit. \u2018_shepherd_,\u2019 \u2018_be\n pastors of_\u2019] _the flock of God which is among you, exercising the\n oversight_ [acting as bishops], _not of constraint, but __\n willingly, according to the will of God._\u201d In this last passage,\n Westcott and Hort, with Tischendorf\u2019s 8th edition, follow \u05d0 and B\n in omitting \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2. Tregelles and our Revised Version\n follow A and \u05d0c in retaining it. Rightly, we think; since it is\n easy to see how, in a growing ecclesiasticism, it should have been\n omitted, from the feeling that too much was here ascribed to a\n mere presbyter.\n\n Lightfoot, Com. on Philippians, 95\u201099\u2014\u201cIt is a fact now generally\n recognized by theologians of all shades of opinion that in the\n language of the N. T. the same officer in the church is called\n indifferently \u2018_bishop_\u2019 (\u1f10\u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03c2) and \u2018_elder_\u2019 or\n \u2018_presbyter_\u2019 (\u03c0\u03c1\u03b5\u03c3\u03b2\u03cd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2).... To these special officers the\n priestly functions and privileges of the Christian people are\n never regarded as transferred or delegated. They are called\n stewards or messengers of God, servants or ministers of the\n church, and the like, but the sacerdotal is never once conferred\n upon them. The only priests under the gospel, designated as such\n in the N. T., are the saints, the members of the Christian\n brotherhood.\u201d On _Titus 1:5, 7_\u2014\u201c_appoint elders.... For the\n bishop must be blameless_\u201d\u2014Gould, Bib. Theol. N. T., 150, remarks:\n \u201cHere the word \u2018_for_\u2019 is quite out of place unless bishops and\n elders are identical. All these officers, bishops as well as\n deacons, are confined to the local church in their jurisdiction.\n The charge of a bishop is not a diocese, but a church. The\n functions are mostly administrative, the teaching office being\n subordinate, and a distinction is made between teaching elders and\n others, implying that the teaching function is not common to them\n all.\u201d\n\n Dexter, Congregationalism, 114, shows that bishop, elder, pastor\n are names for the same office: (1) from the significance of the\n words; (2) from the fact that the same qualifications are demanded\n from all; (3) from the fact that the same duties are assigned to\n all; (4) from the fact that the texts held to prove higher rank of\n the bishop do not support that claim. Plumptre, in Pop. Com.,\n Pauline Epistles, 555, 556\u2014\u201cThere cannot be a shadow of doubt that\n the two titles of Bishop and Presbyter were in the Apostolic Age\n interchangeable.\u201d\n\n\n(_b_) The only plausible objection to the identity of the presbyter and\nthe bishop is that first suggested by Calvin, on the ground of 1 Tim.\n5:17. But this text only shows that the one office of presbyter or bishop\ninvolved two kinds of labor, and that certain presbyters or bishops were\nmore successful in one kind than in the other. That gifts of teaching and\nruling belonged to the same individual, is clear from Acts 20:28\u201031; Eph.\n4:11; Heb. 13:7; 1 Tim. 3:2\u2014\u1f10\u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u03b9\u03b4\u03b1\u03ba\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03cc\u03bd.\n\n\n _1 Tim. 5:17_\u2014\u201c_Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of\n double honor, especially those who labor in the word and in\n teaching_\u201d; Wilson, Primitive Government of Christian Churches,\n concedes that this last text \u201cexpresses a diversity in the\n exercise of the Presbyterial office, but not in the office\n itself\u201d; and although he was a Presbyterian, he very consistently\n refused to have any ruling elders in his church.\n\n _Acts 20:28, 31_\u2014\u201c_bishops, to feed the church of the Lord ...\n wherefore watch ye_\u201d; _Eph. 4:11_\u2014\u201c_and some, pastors and\n teachers_\u201d\u2014here Meyer remarks that the single article binds the\n two words together, and prevents us from supposing that separate\n offices are intended. Jerome: \u201cNemo ... pastoris sibi nomen\n assumere debet, nisi possit docere quos pascit.\u201d _Heb.\n 13:7_\u2014\u201c_Remember them that had the rule over you, men that spake\n unto you the word of God_\u201d; _1 Tim. 3:2_\u2014\u201c_The bishop must be ...\n apt to teach._\u201d The great temptation to ambition in the Christian\n ministry is provided against by having no gradation of ranks. The\n pastor is a priest, only as every Christian is. See Jacob, Eccl.\n Polity of N. T., 56; Olshausen, on 1 Tim. 5:17; Hackett on _Acts\n 14:23_; Presb. Rev., 1886:89\u2010126.\n\n Dexter, Congregationalism, 52\u2014\u201cCalvin was a natural aristocrat,\n not a man of the people like Luther. Taken out of his own family\n to be educated in a family of the nobility, he received an early\n bent toward exclusiveness. He believed in authority and loved to\n exercise it. He could easily have been a despot. He assumed all\n citizens to be Christians until proof to the contrary. He resolved\n church discipline into police control. He confessed that the\n eldership was an expedient to which he was driven by\n circumstances, though after creating it he naturally enough\n endeavored to procure Scriptural proof in its favor.\u201d On the\n question, The Christian Ministry, is it a Priesthood? see C.\n Anderson Scott, Evangelical Doctrine, 205\u2010224.\n\n\n(_c_) In certain of the N. T. churches there appears to have been a\nplurality of elders (Acts 20:17; Phil. 1:1; Tit. 1:5). There is, however,\nno evidence that the number of elders was uniform, or that the plurality\nwhich frequently existed was due to any other cause than the size of the\nchurches for which these elders cared. The N. T. example, while it permits\nthe multiplication of assistant pastors according to need, does not\nrequire a plural eldership in every case; nor does it render this\neldership, where it exists, of co\u00f6rdinate authority with the church. There\nare indications, moreover, that, at least in certain churches, the pastor\nwas one, while the deacons were more than one, in number.\n\n\n _Acts 20:17_\u2014\u201c_And from Miletus he sent to Ephesus, and called to\n him the elders of the church_\u201d; _Phil. 1:1_\u2014\u201c_Paul and Timothy,\n servants of Christ Jesus, to all the saints in Christ Jesus that\n are at Philippi, with the bishops and deacons_\u201d; _Tit. 1:5_\u2014\u201c_For\n this cause I left thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order\n the things that were wanting, and appoint elders in every city, as\n I gave thee charge._\u201d See, however, _Acts 12:17_\u2014\u201c_Tell these\n things unto James, and to the brethren_\u201d; _15:13_\u2014\u201c_And after they\n had held their peace, James answered, saying, Brethren, hearken\n unto me_\u201d; _21:18_\u2014\u201c_And the day following Paul went in with us\n unto James; and all the elders were present_\u201d; _Gal. 1:19_\u2014\u201c_But\n other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord\u2019s brother_\u201d;\n _2:12_\u2014\u201c_certain came from James._\u201d These passages seem to\n indicate that James was the pastor or president of the church at\n Jerusalem, an intimation which tradition corroborates.\n\n _1 Tim. 3:2_\u2014\u201c_The bishop therefore must be without reproach_\u201d;\n _Tit. 1:7_\u2014\u201c_For the bishop must be blameless, as God\u2019s steward_\u201d;\n _cf._ _1 Tim. 3:8, 10, 12_\u2014\u201c_Deacons in like manner must be\n grave.... And let these also first be proved; then let them serve\n as deacons, if they be blameless.... Let deacons be husbands of\n one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well_\u201d\u2014in all\n these passages the bishop is spoken of in the singular number, the\n deacons in the plural. So, too, in _Rev. 2:1, 8, 12, 18 and 3:1,\n 7, 14_, \u201c_the angel of the church_\u201d is best interpreted as meaning\n the pastor of the church; and, if this be correct, it is clear\n that each church had, not many pastors, but one.\n\n It would, moreover, seem antecedently improbable that every church\n of Christ, however small, should be required to have a plural\n eldership, particularly since churches exist that have only a\n single male member. A plural eldership is natural and\n advantageous, only where the church is very numerous and the\n pastor needs assistants in his work: and only in such cases can we\n say that New Testament example favors it. For advocacy of the\n theory of plural eldership, see Fish, Ecclesiology, 229\u2010249; Ladd,\n Principles of Church Polity, 22\u201029. On the whole subject of\n offices in the church, see Dexter, Congregationalism, 77\u201098; Dagg,\n Church Order, 241\u2010266; Lightfoot on the Christian Ministry,\n appended to his Commentary on Philippians, and published in his\n Dissertations on the Apostolic Age.\n\n\nB. The duties belonging to these offices.\n\n\n(_a_) The pastor, bishop, or elder is:\n\nFirst,\u2014a spiritual teacher, in public and private;\n\n\n _Acts 20:20, 21, 35_\u2014\u201c_how I shrank not from declaring unto you\n anything that was profitable, and teaching you publicly, and from\n house to house, testifying both to Jews and to Greeks repentance\n toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ.... In all\n things I gave you an example, that so laboring ye ought to help\n the weak, and to remember the words of the Lord Jesus, that he\n himself said, It is more blessed to give than to receive_\u201d; _1\n Thess. 5:12_\u2014\u201c_But we beseech you, brethren, to know them that\n labor among you, and are over you in the Lord, and admonish you_\u201d;\n _Heb. 13:7, 17_\u2014\u201c_Remember them that had the rule over you, men\n that spake unto you the word of God; and considering the issue of\n their life, imitate their faith.... Obey them that have the rule\n over you, and submit to them: for they watch in behalf of your\n souls, as they that shall give account._\u201d\n\n Here we should remember that the pastor\u2019s private work of\n religious conversation and prayer is equally important with his\n public ministrations; in this respect he is to be an example to\n his flock, and they are to learn from him the art of winning the\n unconverted and of caring for those who are already saved. A\n Jewish Rabbi once said: \u201cGod could not be every where,\u2014therefore\n he made mothers.\u201d We may substitute, for the word \u2019mothers,\u2019 the\n word \u2019pastors.\u2019 Bishop Ken is said to have made a vow every\n morning, as he rose, that he would not be married that day. His\n own lines best express his mind: \u201cA virgin priest the altar best\n attends; our Lord that state commands not, but commends.\u201d\n\n\nSecondly,\u2014administrator of the ordinances;\n\n\n _Mat. 28:19, 20_\u2014\u201c_Go ye therefore and make disciples of all the\n nations, baptizing them into the name of the Father and of the Son\n and of the Holy Spirit: teaching them to observe all things\n whatsoever I commanded_\u201d; _1 Cor. 1:16, 17_\u2014\u201c_And __ I baptized\n also the household of Stephanas: besides, I know not whether I\n baptized any other. For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to\n preach the gospel._\u201d Here it is evident that, although the pastor\n administers the ordinances, this is not his main work, nor is the\n church absolutely dependent upon him in the matter. He is not set,\n like an O. T. priest, to minister at the altar, but to preach the\n gospel. In an emergency any other member appointed by the church\n may administer them with equal propriety, the church always\n determining who are fit subjects of the ordinances, and\n constituting him their organ in administering them. Any other view\n is based on sacramental notions, and on ideas of apostolic\n succession. All Christians are \u201c_priests unto ... God_\u201d (_Rev.\n 1:6_). \u201cThis universal priesthood is a priesthood, not of\n expiation, but of worship, and is bound to no ritual, or order of\n times and places\u201d (P. S. Moxom).\n\n\nThirdly,\u2014superintendent of the discipline, as well as presiding officer at\nthe meetings, of the church.\n\n\n Superintendent of discipline: _1 Tim. 5:17_\u2014\u201c_Let the elders that\n rule well be counted worthy of double honor, especially those who\n labor in the word and in teaching_\u201d; _3:5_\u2014\u201c_if a man knoweth not\n how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of\n God?_\u201d Presiding officer at meetings of the church: _1 Cor.\n 12:28_\u2014\u201c_governments_\u201d\u2014here \u03ba\u03c5\u03b2\u03b5\u03c1\u03bd\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2, or \u201c_governments_,\u201d\n indicating the duties of the pastor, are the counterpart of\n \u1f00\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03bb\u03ae\u03c8\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2, or \u201c_helps_,\u201d which designate the duties of the\n deacons; _1 Pet. 5:2, 3_\u2014\u201c_Tend the flock of God which is among\n you, exercising the oversight, not of constraint, but willingly,\n according to the will of God; nor yet for filthy lucre, but of a\n ready mind; neither as lording it over the charge allotted to you,\n but making yourselves ensamples to the flock._\u201d\n\n In the old Congregational churches of New England, an authority\n was accorded to the pastor which exceeded the New Testament\n standard. \u201cDr. Bellamy could break in upon a festival which he\n deemed improper, and order the members of his parish to their\n homes.\u201d The congregation rose as the minister entered the church,\n and stood uncovered as he passed out of the porch. We must not\n hope or desire to restore the New England _r\u00e9gime_. The pastor is\n to take responsibility, to put himself forward when there is need,\n but he is to _rule_ only by moral suasion, and that only by\n guiding, teaching, and carrying into effect the rules imposed by\n Christ and the decisions of the church in accordance with those\n rules.\n\n Dexter, Congregationalism, 115, 155, 157\u2014\u201cThe Governor of New York\n suggests to the Legislature such and such enactments, and then\n executes such laws as they please to pass. He is chief ruler of\n the State, while the Legislature adopts or rejects what he\n proposes.\u201d So the pastor\u2019s functions are not legislative, but\n executive. Christ is the only lawgiver. In fulfilling this office,\n the manner and spirit of the pastor\u2019s work are of as great\n importance as are correctness of judgment and faithfulness to\n Christ\u2019s law. \u201cThe young man who cannot distinguish the wolves\n from the dogs should not think of becoming a shepherd.\u201d Gregory\n Nazianzen: \u201cEither teach none, or let your life teach too.\u201d See\n Harvey, The Pastor; Wayland, Apostolic Ministry; Jacob, Eccl.\n Polity of N. T., 99; Samson, in Madison Avenue Lectures, 261\u2010288.\n\n\n(_b_) The deacon is helper to the pastor and the church, in both spiritual\nand temporal things.\n\nFirst,\u2014relieving the pastor of external labors, informing him of the\ncondition and wants of the church, and forming a bond of union between\npastor and people.\n\n\n _Acts 6:1\u20106_\u2014\u201c_Now in these days, when the number of the disciples\n was multiplying, there arose a murmuring of the Grecian Jews\n against the Hebrews, because their widows were neglected in the\n daily ministration. And the twelve called the multitude of the\n disciples unto them, and said, It is not fit that we should\n forsake the word of God, and serve tables. Look ye out therefore,\n brethren, from among you seven men of good report, full of the\n Spirit and of wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business. But\n we will continue stedfastly in prayer, and in the ministry of the\n word. And the saying pleased the whole multitude: and they chose\n Stephen, a man full of faith and of the Holy Spirit, and Philip,\n and Prochorus, and Nicanor, and Timon, and Parmenas, and Nicolaus\n a proselyte of Antioch; whom they set before the apostles: and\n when they had prayed, they laid their hands upon them_\u201d; _cf._\n _8\u201020_\u2014where Stephen shows power in disputation; _Rom. 12:7_\u2014\u201c_or\n ministry_ \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03ba\u03bf\u03bd\u03af\u03b1\u03bd, _let us give ourselves to our ministry_\u201d; _1\n Cor. 12:28_\u2014\u201c_helps_\u201d\u2014here \u1f00\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03bb\u03ae\u03c8\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2, \u201c_helps_,\u201d indicating the\n duties of deacons, are the counterpart of \u03ba\u03c5\u03b2\u03b5\u03c1\u03bd\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2,\n \u201c_governments_,\u201d which designate the duties of the pastor; _Phil.\n 1:1_\u2014\u201c_bishops and deacons._\u201d\n\n Dr. E. G. Robinson did not regard the election of the seven, in\n _Acts 6:1\u20104_, as marking the origin of the diaconate, though he\n thought the diaconate grew out of this election. The Autobiography\n of C. H. Spurgeon, 3:22, gives an account of the election of\n \u201celders\u201d at the Metropolitan Tabernacle in London. These \u201celders\u201d\n were to attend to the spiritual affairs of the church, as the\n deacons were to attend to the temporal affairs. These \u201celders\u201d\n were chosen year by year, while the office of deacon was\n permanent.\n\n\nSecondly,\u2014helping the church, by relieving the poor and sick and\nministering in an informal way to the church\u2019s spiritual needs, and by\nperforming certain external duties connected with the service of the\nsanctuary.\n\n\n Since deacons are to be helpers, it is not necessary in all cases\n that they should be old or rich; in fact, it is better that among\n the number of deacons the various differences in station, age,\n wealth, and opinion in the church should be represented. The\n qualifications for the diaconate mentioned in _Acts 6:1\u20104_ and _1\n Tim. 3:8\u201013_, are, in substance: wisdom, sympathy, and\n spirituality. There are advantages in electing deacons, not for\n life, but for a term of years. While there is no New Testament\n prescription in this matter, and each church may exercise its\n option, service for a term of years, with re\u2010election where the\n office has been well discharged, would at least seem favored by _1\n Tim. 3:10_\u2014\u201c_Let these also first be proved; then let them serve\n as deacons, if they be blameless_\u201d; _13_\u2014\u201c_For they that have\n served well as deacons gain to themselves a good standing, and\n great boldness in the faith which is in Christ Jesus._\u201d\n\n Expositor\u2019s Greek Testament, on _Acts 5:6_, remarks that those who\n carried out and buried Ananias are called \u03bf\u1f31 \u03bd\u03b5\u03ce\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9\u2014\u201c_the young\n men_\u201d\u2014and in the case of Sapphira they were \u03bf\u1f31 \u03bd\u03b5\u03b1\u03bd\u03af\u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03b9\u2014meaning\n the same thing. \u201cUpon the natural distinction between \u03c0\u03c1\u03b5\u03c3\u03b2\u03cd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9\n and \u03bd\u03b5\u03ce\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9\u2014elders and young men\u2014it may well have been that\n official duties in the church were afterward based.\u201d Dr. Leonard\n Bacon thought that the apostles included the whole membership in\n the \u201c_we_,\u201d when they said: \u201c_It is not fit that we should forsake\n the word of God, and serve tables_.\u201d The deacons, on this\n interpretation, were chosen to help the whole church in temporal\n matters.\n\n In _Rom. 16:1, 2_, we have apparent mention of a deaconess\u2014\u201c_I\n commend unto you Ph\u0153be our sister, who is a servant_ [marg.:\n \u2018_deaconess_\u2019] _of the church that is at Cenchre\u00e6 ... for she\n herself also hath been a helper of many, and of mine own self_.\u201d\n See also _1 Tim. 3:11_\u2014\u201c_Women in like manner must be grave, not\n slanderers, temperate, faithful in all things_\u201d\u2014here Ellicott and\n Alford claim that the word \u201c_women_\u201d refers, not to deacons\u2019\n wives, as our Auth. Vers. had it, but to deaconesses. Dexter,\n Congregationalism, 69, 132, maintains that the office of\n deaconess, though it once existed, has passed away, as belonging\n to a time when men could not, without suspicion, minister to\n women.\n\n This view that there are temporary offices in the church does not,\n however, commend itself to us. It is more correct to say that\n there is yet doubt whether there _was_ such an office as\n deaconess, even in the early church. Each church has a right in\n this matter to interpret Scripture for itself, and to act\n accordingly. An article in the Bap. Quar., 1869:40, denies the\n existence of any diaconal rank or office, for male or female.\n Fish, in his Ecclesiology, holds that Stephen was a deacon, but an\n elder also, and preached as elder, not as deacon,\u2014_Acts 6:1\u20104_\n being called the institution, not of the diaconate, but of the\n Christian ministry. The use of the phrase \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03ba\u03bf\u03bd\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd \u03c4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c0\u03ad\u03b6\u03b1\u03b9\u03c2, and\n the distinction between the diaconate and the pastorate\n subsequently made in the Epistles, seem to refute this\n interpretation. On the fitness of women for the ministry of\n religion, see F. P. Cobbe, Peak of Darien, 199\u2010262; F. E. Willard,\n Women in the Pulpit; B. T. Roberts, Ordaining Women. On the\n general subject, see Howell, The Deaconship; Williams, The\n Deaconship; Robinson, N. T. Lexicon, \u1f00\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03bb\u03ae\u03c8\u03b9\u03c2. On the Claims of\n the Christian Ministry, and on Education for the Ministry, see A.\n H. Strong, Philosophy and Religion, 269\u2010318, and Christ in\n Creation, 314\u2010331.\n\n\nC. Ordination of officers.\n\n\n(a) What is ordination?\n\n\nOrdination is the setting apart of a person divinely called to a work of\nspecial ministration in the church. It does not involve the communication\nof power,\u2014it is simply a recognition of powers previously conferred by\nGod, and a consequent formal authorization, on the part of the church, to\nexercise the gifts already bestowed. This recognition and authorization\nshould not only be expressed by the vote in which the candidate is\napproved by the church or the council which represents it, but should also\nbe accompanied by a special service of admonition, prayer, and the laying\u2010\non of hands (Acts 6:5, 6; 13:2, 3; 14:23; 1 Tim. 4:14; 5:22).\n\nLicensure simply commends a man to the churches as fitted to preach.\nOrdination recognizes him as set apart to the work of preaching and\nadministering ordinances, in some particular church or in some designated\nfield of labor, as representative of the church.\n\nOf his call to the ministry, the candidate himself is to be first\npersuaded (1 Cor. 9:16; 1 Tim. 1:12); but, secondly, the church must be\npersuaded also, before he can have authority to minister among them (1\nTim. 3:2\u20107; 4:14; Titus 1:6\u20109).\n\n\n The word \u201cordain\u201d has come to have a technical signification not\n found in the New Testament. There it means simply to choose,\n appoint, set apart. In _1 Tim. 2:7_\u2014\u201c_whereunto I was appointed_\n [\u1f10\u03c4\u03ad\u03b8\u03b7\u03bd] _a preacher and an apostle ... a teacher of the Gentiles\n in faith and truth_\u201d\u2014it apparently denotes ordination of God. In\n the following passages we read of an ordination by the church:\n _Acts 6:5, 6_\u2014\u201c_And the saying pleased the whole multitude: and\n they chose Stephen ... and Philip, and Prochorus, and Nicanor, and\n Timon, and Parmenas, and Nicolaus ... whom they set before the\n apostles: and when they had prayed, they laid their hands upon\n them_\u201d\u2014the ordination of deacons; _13:2, 3_\u2014\u201c_And as they\n ministered to the Lord, and fasted, the Holy Spirit said, Separate\n me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them.\n Then, when they had fasted and prayed and laid their hands on\n them, they sent them away_\u201d; _14:23_\u2014\u201c_And when they had appointed\n for them elders in every church, and had prayed with fasting, they\n commended them to the Lord, on whom they had believed_\u201d; _1 Tim.\n 4:14_\u2014\u201c_Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee\n by prophecy, with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery_\u201d;\n _5:22_\u2014\u201c_Lay hands hastily on no man, neither be partaker of other\n men\u2019s sins._\u201d\n\n Cambridge Platform, 1648, chapter 9\u2014\u201cOrdination is nothing else\n but the solemn putting of a man into his place and office in the\n church whereunto he had right before by election, being like the\n installing of a Magistrate in the Commonwealth.\u201d Ordination\n confers no authority\u2014it only recognizes authority already\n conferred by God. Since it is only recognition, it can be repeated\n as often as a man changes his denominational relations. Leonard\n Bacon: \u201cThe action of a Council has no more authority than the\n reason on which it is based. The church calling the Council is a\n competent court of appeal from any decision of the Council.\u201d\n\n Since ordination is simply choosing, appointing, setting apart, it\n seems plain that in the case of deacons, who sustain official\n relations only to the church that constitutes them, ordination\n requires no consultation with other churches. But in the\n ordination of a pastor, there are three natural stages: (1) the\n call of the church; (2) the decision of a council (the council\n being virtually only the church advised by its brethren); (3) the\n publication of this decision by a public service of prayer and the\n laying\u2010on of hands. The prior call to be pastor may be said, in\n the case of a man yet unordained, to be given by the church\n conditionally, and in anticipation of a ratification of its action\n by the subsequent judgment of the council. In a well\u2010instructed\n church, the calling of a council is a regular method of appeal\n from the church unadvised to the church advised by its brethren;\n and the vote of the council approving the candidate is only the\n essential completing of an ordination, of which the vote of the\n church calling the candidate to the pastorate was the preliminary\n stage.\n\n This setting apart by the church, with the advice and assistance\n of the council, is all that is necessarily implied in the New\n Testament words which are translated \u201cordain\u201d; and such\n ordination, by simple vote of church and council, could not be\n counted invalid. But it would be irregular. New Testament\n precedent makes certain accompaniments not only appropriate, but\n obligatory. A formal publication of the decree of the council, by\n laying\u2010on of hands, in connection with prayer, is the last of the\n duties of this advisory body, which serves as the organ and\n assistant of the church. The laying\u2010on of hands is appointed to be\n the regular accompaniment of ordination, as baptism is appointed\n to be the regular accompaniment of regeneration; while yet the\n laying\u2010on of hands is no more the substance of ordination, than\n baptism is the substance of regeneration.\n\n The imposition of hands is the natural symbol of the\n communication, not of grace, but of authority. It does not make a\n man a minister of the gospel, any more than coronation makes\n Victoria a queen. What it does signify and publish, is formal\n recognition and authorization. Viewed in this light, there not\n only can be no objection to the imposition of hands upon the\n ground that it favors sacramentalism, but insistence upon it is\n the bounden duty of every council of ordination.\n\n Mr. Spurgeon was never ordained. He began and ended his remarkable\n ministry as a lay preacher. He revolted from the sacramentalism of\n the Church of England, which seemed to hold that in the imposition\n of hands in ordination divine grace trickled down through a\n bishop\u2019s finger ends, and he felt moved to protest against it. In\n our judgment it would have been better to follow New Testament\n precedent, and at the same time to instruct the churches as to the\n real meaning of the laying\u2010on of hands. The Lord\u2019s Supper had in a\n similar manner been interpreted as a physical communication of\n grace, but Mr. Spurgeon still continued to observe the Lord\u2019s\n Supper. His gifts enabled him to carry his people with him, when a\n man of smaller powers might by peculiar views have ruined his\n ministry. He was thankful that he was pastor of a large church,\n because he felt that he had not enough talent to be pastor of a\n small one. He said that when he wished to make a peculiar\n impression on his people he put himself into his cannon and fired\n himself at them. He refused the degree of Doctor of Divinity, and\n said that \u201cD. D.\u201d often meant \u201cDoubly Destitute.\u201d Dr. P. S. Henson\n suggests that the letters mean only \u201cFiddle Dee Dee.\u201d For\n Spurgeon\u2019s views on ordination, see his Autobiography, 1:355 _sq._\n\n John Wesley\u2019s three tests of a call to preach: \u201cInquire of\n applicants,\u201d he says, \u201c1. Do they know God as a pardoning God?\n Have they the love of God abiding in them? Do they desire and see\n nothing but God? And are they holy, in all manner of conversation?\n 2. Have they gifts, as well as grace, for the work? Have they a\n clear sound understanding? Have they a right judgment in the\n things of God? Have they a just conception of salvation by faith?\n And has God given them any degree of utterance? Do they speak\n justly, readily, clearly? 3. Have they fruit? Are any truly\n convinced of sin, and converted to God, by their preaching?\u201d The\n second of these qualifications seems to have been in the mind of\n the little girl who said that the bishop, in laying hands on the\n candidate, was feeling of his head to see whether he had brains\n enough to preach. There is some need of the preaching of a \u201ctrial\n sermon\u201d by the candidate, as proof to the Council that he has the\n gifts requisite for a successful ministry. In this respect the\n Presbyteries of Scotland are in advance of us.\n\n\n(b) Who are to ordain?\n\n\nOrdination is the act of the church, not the act of a privileged class in\nthe church, as the eldership has sometimes wrongly been regarded, nor yet\nthe act of other churches, assembled by their representatives in council.\nNo ecclesiastical authority higher than that of the local church is\nrecognized in the New Testament. This authority, however, has its limits;\nand since the church has no authority outside of its own body, the\ncandidate for ordination should be a member of the ordaining church.\n\nSince each church is bound to recognize the presence of the Spirit in\nother rightly constituted churches, and its own decisions, in like manner,\nare to be recognized by others, it is desirable in ordination, as in all\nimportant steps affecting other churches, that advice be taken before the\ncandidate is inducted into office, and that other churches be called to\nsit with it in council, and if thought best, assist in setting the\ncandidate apart for the ministry.\n\n\n Hands were laid on Paul and Barnabas at Antioch, not by their\n ecclesiastical superiors, as High Church doctrine would require,\n but by their equals or inferiors, as simple representatives of the\n church. Ordination was nothing more than the recognition of a\n divine appointment and the commending to God\u2019s care and blessing\n of those so appointed. The council of ordination is only the\n church advised by its brethren, or a committee with power, to act\n for the church after deliberation.\n\n The council of ordination is not to be composed simply of\n ministers who have been themselves ordained. As the whole church\n is to preserve the ordinances and to maintain sound doctrine, and\n as the unordained church member is often a more sagacious judge of\n a candidate\u2019s Christian experience than his own pastor would be,\n there seems no warrant, either in Scripture or in reason, for the\n exclusion of lay delegates from ordaining councils. It was not\n merely the apostles and elders, but the whole church at Jerusalem,\n that passed upon the matters submitted to them at the council, and\n others than ministers appear to have been delegates. The theory\n that only ministers can ordain has in it the beginnings of a\n hierarchy. To make the ministry a close corporation is to\n recognize the principle of apostolic succession, to deny the\n validity of all our past ordinations, and to sell to an\n ecclesiastical caste the liberties of the church of God. Very\n great importance attaches to decorum and settled usage in matters\n of ordination. To secure these, the following suggestions are made\n with regard to\n\n I. PRELIMINARY ARRANGEMENTS to be attended to by the candidate: 1.\n His letter of dismission should be received and acted upon by the\n church before the Council convenes. Since the church has no\n jurisdiction outside of its own membership, the candidate should\n be a member of the church which proposes to ordain him. 2. The\n church should vote to call the Council. 3. It should invite all\n the churches of its Association. 4. It should send printed\n invitations, asking written responses. 5. Should have printed\n copies of an Order of Procedure, subject to adoption by the\n Council. 6. The candidate may select one or two persons to\n officiate at the public service, subject to approval of the\n Council. 7. The clerk of the church should be instructed to be\n present with the records of the church and the minutes of the\n Association, so that he may call to order and ask responses from\n delegates. 8. Ushers should be appointed to ensure reserved seats\n for the Council. 9. Another room should be provided for the\n private session of the Council. 10. The choir should be instructed\n that one anthem, one hymn, and one doxology will suffice for the\n public service. 11. Entertainment of the delegates should be\n provided for. 12. A member of the church should be chosen to\n present the candidate to the Council. 13. The church should be\n urged on the previous Sunday to attend the examination of the\n candidate as well as the public service.\n\n II. THE CANDIDATE AT THE COUNCIL: 1. His demeanor should be that\n of an applicant. Since he asks the favorable judgment of his\n brethren, a modest bearing and great patience in answering their\n questions, are becoming to his position. 2. Let him stand during\n his narration, and during questions, unless for reasons of ill\n health or fatigue he is specially excused. 3. It will be well to\n divide his narration into 15 minutes for his Christian experience,\n 10 minutes for his call to the ministry, and 35 minutes for his\n views of doctrine. 4. A _viva voce_ statement of all these three\n is greatly preferable to an elaborate written account. 5. In the\n relation of his views of doctrine: (_a_) the more fully he states\n them, the less need there will be for questioning; (_b_) his\n statement should be positive, not negative\u2014not what he does not\n believe, but what he _does_ believe; (_c_) he is not required to\n tell the _reasons_ for his belief, unless he is specially\n questioned with regard to these; (_d_) he should elaborate the\n later and practical, not the earlier and theoretical, portions of\n his theological system; (_e_) he may well conclude each point of\n his statement with a single text of Scripture proof.\n\n III. THE DUTY OF THE COUNCIL: 1. It should not proceed to examine\n the candidate until proper credentials have been presented. 2. It\n should in every case give to the candidate a searching\n examination, in order that this may not seem invidious in other\n cases. 3. Its vote of approval should read: \u201cWe do now set apart,\u201d\n and \u201cWe will hold a public service expressive of this fact.\u201d 4.\n Strict decorum should be observed in every stage of the\n proceedings, remembering that the Council is acting for Christ the\n great head of the church and is transacting business for eternity.\n 5. The Council should do no other business than that for which the\n church has summoned it, and when that business is done, the\n Council should adjourn _sine die_.\n\n\nIt is always to be remembered, however, that the power to ordain rests\nwith the church, and that the church may proceed without a Council, or\neven against the decision of the Council. Such ordination, of course,\nwould give authority only within the bounds of the individual church.\nWhere no immediate exception is taken to the decision of the Council, that\ndecision is to be regarded as virtually the decision of the church by\nwhich it was called. The same rule applies to a Council\u2019s decision to\ndepose from the ministry. In the absence of immediate protest from the\nchurch, the decision of the Council is rightly taken as virtually the\ndecision of the church.\n\nIn so far as ordination is an act performed by the local church with the\nadvice and assistance of other rightly constituted churches, it is justly\nregarded as giving formal permission to exercise gifts and administer\nordinances within the bounds of such churches. Ordination is not,\ntherefore, to be repeated upon the transfer of the minister\u2019s pastoral\nrelation from one church to another. In every case, however, where a\nminister from a body of Christians not Scripturally constituted assumes\nthe pastoral relation in a rightly organized church, there is peculiar\npropriety, not only in the examination, by a Council, of his Christian\nexperience, call to the ministry, and views of doctrine, but also in that\nact of formal recognition and authorization which is called ordination.\n\n\n The Council should be numerous and impartially constituted. The\n church calling the Council should be represented in it by a fair\n number of delegates. Neither the church, nor the Council, should\n permit a prejudgment of the case by the previous announcement of\n an ordination service. While the examination of the candidate\n should be public, all danger that the Council be unduly influenced\n by pressure from without should be obviated by its conducting its\n deliberations, and arriving at its decision, in private session.\n We subjoin the form of a letter missive, calling a Council of\n ordination; an order of procedure after the Council has assembled;\n and a programme of exercises for the public service.\n\n LETTER MISSIVE.\u2014The \u2014\u2014 church of \u2014\u2014 to the \u2014\u2014 church of \u2014\u2014: _Dear\n Brethren_: By vote of this church, you are requested to send your\n pastor and two delegates to meet with us in accordance with the\n following resolutions, passed by us on the \u2014\u2014 \u2014\u2014, 19\u2014: _Whereas_,\n brother \u2014\u2014, a member of this church, has offered himself to the\n work of the gospel ministry, and has been chosen by us as our\n pastor, therefore, _Resolved_, 1. That such neighboring churches,\n in fellowship with us, as shall be herein designated, be requested\n to send their pastor and two delegates each, to meet and counsel\n with this church, at \u2014 o\u2019clock \u2014. M., on \u2014\u2014, 19\u2014\u2014, and if, after\n examination, he be approved, that brother \u2014\u2014 be set apart, by vote\n of the Council, to the gospel ministry, and that a public service\n be held, expressive of this fact. _Resolved_, 2. That the Council,\n if it do so ordain, be requested to appoint two of its number to\n act with the candidate, in arranging the public services.\n _Resolved_, 3. That printed letters of invitation, embodying these\n resolutions, and signed by the clerk of this church, be sent to\n the following churches, \u2014\u2014 \u2014\u2014 \u2014\u2014 \u2014\u2014 \u2014\u2014, and that these churches be\n requested to furnish to their delegates an officially signed\n certificate of their appointment, to be presented at the\n organization of the Council. _Resolved_, 4. That Rev. \u2014\u2014, and\n brethren \u2014\u2014 \u2014\u2014, be also invited by the clerk of the church to be\n present as members of the Council. _Resolved_, 5. That brethren\n \u2014\u2014, \u2014\u2014, and \u2014\u2014, be appointed as our delegates, to represent this\n church in the deliberations of the Council; and that brother \u2014\u2014 be\n requested to present the candidate to the Council, with an\n expression of the high respect and warm attachment with which we\n have welcomed him and his labors among us. In behalf of the\n church, \u2014\u2014 \u2014\u2014, Clerk. \u2014\u2014, 19\u2014.\n\n ORDER OF PROCEDURE.\u20141. Reading, by the clerk of the church, of the\n letter\u2010missive, followed by a call, in their order, upon all\n churches and individuals invited, to present responses and names\n in writing; each delegate, as he presents his credentials, taking\n his seat in a portion of the house reserved for the Council. 2.\n Announcement, by the clerk of the church, that a Council has\n convened, and call for the nomination of a moderator,\u2014the motion\n to be put by the clerk,\u2014after which the moderator takes the chair.\n 3. Organization completed by election of a clerk of the Council,\n the offering of prayer, and an invitation to visiting brethren to\n sit with the Council, but not to vote. 4. Reading, on behalf of\n the church, by its clerk, of the records of the church concerning\n the call extended to the candidate, and his acceptance, together\n with documentary evidence of his licensure, of his present church\n membership, and of his standing in other respects, if coming from\n another denomination. 5. Vote, by the Council, that the\n proceedings of the church, and the standing of the candidate,\n warrant an examination of his claim to ordination. 6. Introduction\n of the candidate to the Council, by some representative of the\n church, with an expression of the church\u2019s feeling respecting him\n and his labors. 7. Vote to hear his Christian experience.\n Narration on the part of the candidate, followed by questions as\n to any features of it still needing elucidation. 8. Vote to hear\n the candidate\u2019s reasons for believing himself called to the\n ministry. Narration and questions. 9. Vote to hear the candidate\u2019s\n views of Christian doctrine. Narration and questions. 10. Vote to\n conclude the public examination, and to withdraw for private\n session. 11. In private session, after prayer, the Council\n determines, by three separate votes, in order to secure separate\n consideration of each question, whether it is satisfied with the\n candidate\u2019s Christian experience, call to the ministry, and views\n of Christian doctrine. 12. Vote that the candidate be hereby set\n apart to the gospel ministry, and that a public service be held,\n expressive of this fact; that for this purpose, a committee of two\n be appointed, to act with the candidate, in arranging such service\n of ordination, and to report before adjournment. 13. Reading of\n minutes, by clerk of Council, and correction of them, to prepare\n for presentation at the ordination service, and for preservation\n in the archives of the church. 14. Vote to give the candidate a\n certificate of ordination, signed by the moderator and clerk of\n the Council, and to publish an account of the proceedings in the\n journals of the denomination. 15. Adjourn to meet at the service\n of ordination.\n\n PROGRAMME OF PUBLIC SERVICE (two hours in length).\u20141.\n Voluntary\u2014five minutes. 2. Anthem\u2014five. 3. Reading minutes of the\n Council, by the clerk of the Council\u2014ten. 4. Prayer of\n invocation\u2014five. 5. Reading of Scripture\u2014five. 6. Sermon\u2014twenty\u2010\n five. 7. Prayer of ordination, with laying\u2010on of hands\u2014fifteen. 8.\n Hymn\u2014ten. 9. Right hand of fellowship\u2014five. 10. Charge to the\n candidate\u2014fifteen. 11. Charge to the church\u2014fifteen. 12.\n Doxology\u2014five. 13. Benediction by the newly ordained pastor.\n\n The tenor of the N. T. would seem to indicate that deacons should\n be ordained with prayer and the laying\u2010on of hands, though not by\n council or public service. Evangelists, missionaries, ministers\n serving as secretaries of benevolent societies, should also be\n ordained, since they are organs of the church, set apart for\n special religious work on behalf of the churches. The same rule\n applies to those who are set to be teachers of the teachers, the\n professors of theological seminaries. Philip, baptizing the\n eunuch, is to be regarded as an organ of the church at Jerusalem.\n Both home missionaries and foreign missionaries are evangelists;\n and both, as organs of the home churches to which they belong, are\n not under obligation to take letters of dismission to the churches\n they gather. George Adam Smith, in his Life of Henry Drummond,\n 265, says that Drummond was ordained to his professorship by the\n laying\u2010on of the hands of the Presbytery: \u201cThe rite is the same in\n the case whether of a minister or of a professor, for the church\n of Scotland recognizes no difference between her teachers and her\n pastors, but lays them under the same vows, and ordains them all\n as ministers of Christ\u2019s gospel and of his sacraments.\u201d\n\n Rome teaches that ordination is a sacrament, and \u201conce a priest,\n always a priest,\u201d but only when Rome confers the ordination. It is\n going a great deal further than Rome to maintain the indelibility\n of _all_ orders\u2014at least, of all orders conferred by an\n evangelical church. At Dover in England, a medical gentleman\n declined to pay his doctor\u2019s bill upon the ground that it was not\n the custom of his calling to pay one another for their services.\n It appeared however that he was a retired practitioner, and upon\n that ground he lost his case. Ordination, like vaccination, may\n run out. Retirement from the office of public teacher should work\n a forfeiture of the official character. The authorization granted\n by the Council was based upon a previous recognition of a divine\n call. When by reason of permanent withdrawal from the ministry,\n and devotion to wholly secular pursuits, there remains no longer\n any divine call to be recognized, all authority and standing as a\n Christian minister should cease also. We therefore repudiate the\n doctrine of the \u201cindelibility of sacred orders,\u201d and the\n corresponding maxim: \u201cOnce ordained, always ordained\u201d; although we\n do not, with the Cambridge Platform, confine the ministerial\n function to the pastoral relation. That Platform held that \u201cthe\n pastoral relation ceasing, the ministerial function ceases, and\n the pastor becomes a layman again, to be restored to the ministry\n only by a second ordination, called installation. This theory of\n the ministry proved so inadequate, that it was held scarcely more\n than a single generation. It was rejected by the Congregational\n churches of England ten years after it was formulated in New\n England.\u201d\n\n \u201cThe National Council of Congregational Churches, in 1880,\n resolved that any man serving a church as minister can be dealt\n with and disciplined by any church, no matter what his relations\n may be in church membership, or ecclesiastical affiliations. If\n the church choosing him will not call a council, then any church\n can call one for that purpose\u201d; see New Englander, July,\n 1883:461\u2010491. This latter course, however, presupposes that the\n steps of fraternal labor and admonition, provided for in our next\n section on the Relation of Local Churches to one another, have\n been taken, and have been insufficient to induce proper action on\n the part of the church to which such minister belongs.\n\n The authority of a Presbyterian church is limited to the bounds of\n its own denomination. It cannot ordain ministers for Baptist\n churches, any more than it can ordain them for Methodist churches\n or for Episcopal churches. When a Presbyterian minister becomes a\n Baptist, his motives for making the change and the conformity of\n his views to the New Testament standard need to be scrutinized by\n Baptists, before they can admit him to their Christian and church\n fellowship; in other words, he needs to be ordained by a Baptist\n church. Ordination is no more a discourtesy to the other\n denomination than Baptism is. Those who oppose re\u00f6rdination in\n such cases virtually hold to the Romish view of the sacredness of\n orders.\n\n The Watchman, April 17, 1902\u2014\u201cThe Christian ministry is not a\n priestly class which the laity is bound to support. If the\n minister cannot find a church ready to support him, there is\n nothing to prevent his entering another calling. Only ten per\n cent. of the men who start in independent business avoid failure,\n and a much smaller proportion achieve substantial success. They\n are not failures, for they do useful and valuable work. But they\n do not secure the prizes. It is not wonderful that the proportion\n of ministers securing prominent pulpits is small. Many men fail in\n the ministry. There is no sacred character imparted by ordination.\n They should go into some other avocation. \u2018Once a minister, always\n a minister\u2019 is a piece of Popery that Protestant churches should\n get rid of.\u201d See essay on Councils of Ordination, their Powers and\n Duties, by A. H. Strong, in Philosophy and Religion, 259\u2010268;\n Wayland, Principles and Practices of Baptists, 114; Dexter,\n Congregationalism, 136, 145, 146, 150, 151. _Per contra_, see\n Fish, Ecclesiology, 365\u2010399; Presb. Rev., 1886:89\u2010126.\n\n\n3. Discipline of the Church.\n\n\nA. Kinds of discipline.\u2014Discipline is of two sorts, according as offences\nare private or public. (_a_) Private offences are to be dealt with\naccording to the rule in Mat. 5:23, 24; 18:15\u201017.\n\n\n _Mat. 5:23, 24_\u2014\u201c_If therefore thou art offering thy gift at the\n altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hath aught against\n thee, leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way, first\n be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy\n gift_\u201d\u2014here is provision for self\u2010discipline on the part of each\n offender; _18:15\u201017_\u2014\u201c_And if thy brother sin against thee, go,\n show him his fault between thee and him alone: if he hear thee,\n thou hast gained thy brother. But if he hear thee not, take with\n thee one or two more, that at the mouth of two witnesses or three\n every word may be established. And if he refuse to hear them, tell\n it unto the church: and if he refuse to hear the church also, let\n him be unto thee as the Gentile and the publican_\u201d\u2014here is, first,\n private discipline, one of another; and then, only as a last\n resort, discipline by the church. Westcott and Hort, however omit\n the \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03c3\u03ad\u2014\u201c_against thee_\u201d\u2014in _Mat. 18:15_, and so make each\n Christian responsible for bringing to repentance every brother\n whose sin he becomes cognizant of. This would abolish the\n distinction between private and public offences.\n\n When a brother wrongs me, I am not to speak of the offence to\n others, nor to write to him a letter, but to go to him. If the\n brother is already penitent, he will start from his house to see\n me at the same time that I start from my house to see him, and we\n will meet just half way between the two. There would be little\n appeal to the church, and little cherishing of ancient grudges, if\n Christ\u2019s disciples would observe his simple rules. These rules\n impose a duty upon both the offending and the offended party. When\n a brother brings a personal matter before the church, he should\n always be asked whether he has obeyed Christ\u2019s command to labor\n privately with the offender. If he has not, he should be bidden to\n keep silence.\n\n\n(_b_) Public offences are to be dealt with according to the rule in 1 Cor.\n5:3\u20105, 13, and 2 Thess. 3:6.\n\n\n _1 Cor. 5:3\u20105, 13_\u2014\u201c_For I verily, being absent in body but\n present in spirit, have already as though I were present judged\n him that hath so wrought this thing, in the name of the Lord\n Jesus, ye being gathered together, and my spirit, with the power\n of our Lord Jesus, to deliver such a one unto Satan for the\n destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day\n of the Lord Jesus.... Put away the wicked man from among\n yourselves._\u201d\n\n Notice here that Paul gave the incestuous person no opportunity to\n repent, confess, or avert sentence. The church can have no valid\n evidence of repentance immediately upon discovery and arraignment.\n At such a time the natural conscience always reacts in remorse and\n self\u2010accusation, but whether the sin is hated because of its\n inherent wickedness, or only because of its unfortunate\n consequences, cannot be known at once. Only fruits meet for\n repentance can prove repentance real. But such fruits take time,\n And the church has no time to wait. Its good repute in the\n community, and its influence over its own members, are at stake.\n These therefore demand the instant exclusion of the wrong\u2010doer, as\n evidence that the church clears its skirts from all complicity\n with the wrong. In the case of gross public offences, labor with\n the offender is to come, not before, but after, his\n excommunication; _cf._ _2 Cor. 2:6\u20108_\u2014\u201c_Sufficient to such a one\n is this punishment which was inflicted by the many;... forgive him\n and comfort him;... confirm your love toward him._\u201d\n\n The church is not a Mutual Insurance Company, whose object is to\n protect and shield its individual members. It is a society whose\n end is to represent Christ in the world, and to establish his\n truth and righteousness. Christ commits his honor to its keeping.\n The offender who is only anxious to escape judgment, and who\n pleads to be forgiven without delay, often shows that he cares\n nothing for the cause of Christ which he has injured, but that he\n has at heart only his own selfish comfort and reputation. The\n truly penitent man will rather beg the church to exclude him, in\n order that it may free itself from the charge of harboring\n iniquity. He will accept exclusion with humility, will love the\n church that excludes him, will continue to attend its worship,\n will in due time seek and receive restoration. There is always a\n way back into the church for those who repent. But the Scriptural\n method of ensuring repentance is the method of immediate\n exclusion.\n\n In _2 Cor. 2:6\u20108_\u2014\u201c_inflicted by the many_\u201d might at first sight\n seem to imply that, although the offender was excommunicated, it\n was only by a majority vote, some members of the church\n dissenting. Some interpreters think he had not been excommunicated\n at all, but that only ordinary association with him had ceased.\n But, if Paul\u2019s command in the first epistle to \u201c_put away the\n wicked man from among yourselves_\u201d (_1 Cor. 5:13_) had been thus\n disobeyed, the apostle would certainly have mentioned and rebuked\n the disobedience. On the contrary he praises them that they had\n done as he had advised. The action of the church at Corinth was\n blessed by God to the quickening of conscience and the\n purification of life. In many a modern church the exclusion of\n unworthy members has in like manner given to Christians a new\n sense of their responsibility, while at the same time it has\n convinced worldly people that the church was in thorough earnest.\n The decisions of the church, indeed, when guided by the Holy\n Spirit, are nothing less than an anticipation of the judgments of\n the last day; see _Mat. 18:18_\u2014\u201c_What things soever ye shall bind\n on earth shall be bound in heaven; and what things soever ye shall\n loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven._\u201d In _John 8:7_, Jesus\n recognizes the sin and urges repentance, while he challenges the\n right of the mob to execute judgment, and does away with the\n traditional stoning. His gracious treatment of the sinning woman\n gave no hint as to the proper treatment of her case by the regular\n synagogue authorities.\n\n _2 Thess. 3:6_\u2014\u201c_Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our\n Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother\n that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which they\n received of us._\u201d The mere \u201cdropping\u201d of names from the list of\n members seems altogether contrary to the spirit of the N. T.\n polity. That recognizes only three methods of exit from the local\n church: (1) exclusion; (2) dismission; (3) death. To provide for\n the case of members whose residence has long been unknown, it is\n well for the church to have a standing rule that all members\n residing at a distance shall report each year by letter or by\n contribution, and, in case of failure to report for two successive\n years, shall be subject to discipline. The action of the church,\n in such cases, should take the form of an adoption of preamble and\n resolution: \u201c_Whereas_ A. B. has been absent from the church for\n more than two years, and has failed to comply with the standing\n rule requiring a yearly report or contribution, therefore,\n _Resolved_, that the church withdraw from A. B. the hand of\n fellowship.\u201d\n\n In _all_ cases of exclusion, the resolution may uniformly read as\n above; the preamble may indefinitely vary, and should always cite\n the exact nature of the offence. In this way, neglect of the\n church or breach of covenant obligations may be distinguished from\n offences against common morality, so that exclusion upon the\n former ground shall not be mistaken for exclusion upon the latter.\n As the persons excluded are not commonly present at the meeting of\n the church when they are excluded, a written copy of the preamble\n and resolution, signed by the Clerk of the Church, should always\n be immediately sent to them.\n\n\nB. Relation of the pastor to discipline.\u2014(_a_) He has no original\nauthority; (_b_) but is the organ of the church, and (_c_) superintendent\nof its labors for its own purification and for the reclamation of\noffenders; and therefore (_d_) may best do the work of discipline, not\ndirectly, by constituting himself a special policeman or detective, but\nindirectly, by securing proper labor on the part of the deacons or\nbrethren of the church.\n\n\n The pastor should regard himself as a judge, rather than as a\n prosecuting attorney. He should press upon the officers of his\n church their duty to investigate cases of immorality and to deal\n with them. But if he himself makes charges, he loses dignity, and\n puts it out of his power to help the offender. It is not well for\n him to be, or to have the reputation of being, a ferreter\u2010out of\n misdemeanors among his church members. It is best for him in\n general to serve only as presiding officer in cases of discipline,\n instead of being a partisan or a counsel for the prosecution. For\n this reason it is well for him to secure the appointment by his\n church of a Prudential Committee, or Committee on Discipline,\n whose duty it shall be at a fixed time each year to look over the\n list of members, initiate labor in the case of delinquents, and,\n after the proper steps have been taken, present proper preambles\n and resolutions in cases where the church needs to take action.\n This regular yearly process renders discipline easy; whereas the\n neglect of it for several successive years results in an\n accumulation of cases, in each of which the person exposed to\n discipline has friends, and these are tempted to obstruct the\n church\u2019s dealing with others from fear that the taking up of any\n other case may lead to the taking up of that one in which they are\n most nearly interested. The church which pays no regular attention\n to its discipline is like the farmer who milked his cow only once\n a year, in order to avoid too great a drain; or like the small boy\n who did not see how any one could bear to comb his hair every\n day,\u2014he combed his own only once in six weeks, and then it nearly\n killed him.\n\n As the Prudential Committee, or Committee on Discipline, is simply\n the church itself preparing its own business, the church may well\n require all complaints to be made to it through the committee. In\n this way it may be made certain that the preliminary steps of\n labor have been taken, and the disquieting of the church by\n premature charges may be avoided. Where the committee, after\n proper representations made to it, fails to do its duty, the\n individual member may appeal directly to the assembled church; and\n the difference between the New Testament order and that of a\n hierarchy is this, that according to the former all final action\n and responsibility is taken by the church itself in its collective\n capacity, whereas on the latter the minister, the session, or the\n bishop, so far as the individual church is concerned, determines\n the result. See Savage, Church Discipline, Formative and\n Corrective; Dagg, Church Order, 268\u2010274. On church discipline in\n cases of remarriage after divorce, see A. H. Strong, Philosophy\n and Religion, 431\u2010442.\n\n\n\nIV. Relation of Local Churches to one another.\n\n\n1. The general nature of this relation is that of fellowship between\nequals.\n\n\nNotice here:\n\n(_a_) The absolute equality of the churches.\u2014No church or council of\nchurches, no association or convention or society, can relieve any single\nchurch of its direct responsibility to Christ, or assume control of its\naction.\n\n(_b_) The fraternal fellowship and co\u00f6peration of the churches.\u2014No church\ncan properly ignore, or disregard, the existence or work of other churches\naround it. Every other church is presumptively possessed of the Spirit, in\nequal measure with itself. There must therefore be sympathy and mutual\nfurtherance of each other\u2019s welfare among churches, as among individual\nChristians. Upon this principle are based letters of dismission,\nrecognition of the pastors of other churches, and all associational\nunions, or unions for common Christian work.\n\n\n H. O. Rowlands, in Bap. Quar. Rev., Oct. 1891:669\u2010677, urges the\n giving up of special Councils, and the turning of the Association\n into a Permanent Council, not to take original cognizance of what\n cases it pleases, but to consider and judge such questions as may\n be referred to it by the individual churches. It could then revise\n and rescind its action, whereas the present Council when once\n adjourned can never be called together again. This method would\n prevent the packing of a Council, and the Council when once\n constituted would have greater influence. We feel slow to sanction\n such a plan, not only for the reason that it seems destitute of\n New Testament authority and example, but because it tends toward a\n Presbyterian form of church government. All permanent bodies of\n this sort gradually arrogate to themselves power; indirectly if\n not directly they can assume original jurisdiction; their\n decisions have altogether too great influence, if they go further\n than personal persuasion. The independence of the individual\n church is a primary element of polity which must not be sacrificed\n or endangered for the mere sake of inter\u2010ecclesiastical harmony.\n Permanent Councils of any sort are of doubtful validity. They need\n to be kept under constant watch and criticism, lest they undermine\n our Baptist church government, a fundamental principle of which is\n that there is no authority on earth above that of the local\n church.\n\n\n2. This fellowship involves the duty of special consultation with regard\nto matters affecting the common interest.\n\n\n(_a_) The duty of seeking advice.\u2014Since the order and good repute of each\nis valuable to all the others, cases of grave importance and difficulty in\ninternal discipline, as well as the question of ordaining members to the\nministry, should be submitted to a council of churches called for the\npurpose.\n\n(_b_) The duty of taking advice.\u2014For the same reason, each church should\nshow readiness to receive admonition from others. So long as this is in\nthe nature of friendly reminder that the church is guilty of defects from\nthe doctrine or practice enjoined by Christ, the mutual acceptance of\nwhose commands is the basis of all church fellowship, no church can justly\nrefuse to have such defects pointed out, or to consider the Scripturalness\nof its own proceeding. Such admonition or advice, however, whether coming\nfrom a single church or from a council of churches, is not itself of\nbinding authority. It is simply in the nature of moral suasion. The church\nreceiving it has still to compare it with Christ\u2019s laws. The ultimate\ndecision rests entirely with the church so advised or asking advice.\n\n\n Churches should observe comity, and should not draw away one\n another\u2019s members. Ministers should bring churches together, and\n should teach their members the larger unity of the whole church of\n God. The pastor should not confine his interest to his own church\n or even to his own Association. The State Convention, the\n Education Society, the National Anniversaries, should all claim\n his attention and that of his people. He should welcome new\n laborers and helpers, instead of regarding the ministry as a close\n corporation whose numbers are to be kept forever small. E. G.\n Robinson: \u201cThe spirit of sectarianism is devilish. It raises the\n church above Christ. Christ did not say: \u2018Blessed is the man who\n accepts the Westminster Confession or the Thirty\u2010Nine Articles.\u2019\n There is not the least shadow of churchism in Christ. Churchism is\n a revamped and whitewashed Judaism. It keeps up the middle wall of\n partition which Christ has broken down.\u201d\n\n Dr. P. H. Mell, in his Manual of Parliamentary Practice, calls\n Church Councils \u201cCommittees of Help.\u201d President James C. Welling\n held that \u201cWe Baptists are not true to our democratic polity in\n the conduct of our collective evangelical operations. In these\n matters we are simply a bureaucracy, tempered by individual\n munificence.\u201d A. J. Gordon, Ministry of the Spirit, 149, 150,\n remarks on _Mat. 18:19_\u2014\u201c_If two of you shall\n agree_\u201d\u2014\u03c3\u03c5\u03bc\u03c6\u03c9\u03bd\u03ae\u03c3\u03c9\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd, from which our word \u201csymphony\u201d comes: \u201cIf\n two shall \u2018accord,\u2019 or \u2018symphonize\u2019 in what they ask, they have\n the promise of being heard. But, as in tuning an organ, all the\n notes must be keyed to the standard pitch, else harmony were\n impossible, so in prayer. It is not enough that two disciples\n agree with each other,\u2014they must agree with a Third\u2014the righteous\n and holy Lord, before they can agree in intercession. There may be\n agreement which is in most sinful conflict with the divine will:\n \u2018_How is it that ye have agreed together_\u2019\u2014\u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b5\u03c6\u03c9\u03bd\u03ae\u03b8\u03b7\u2014the same\n word\u2014\u2018_to try the Spirit of the Lord?_\u2019 says Peter (_Acts 5:9_).\n Here is mutual accord, but guilty discord with the Holy Spirit.\u201d\n\n\n3. This fellowship may be broken by manifest departures from the faith or\npractice of the Scriptures, on the part of any church.\n\n\nIn such case, duty to Christ requires the churches, whose labors to\nreclaim a sister church from error have proved unavailing, to withdraw\ntheir fellowship from it, until such time as the erring church shall\nreturn to the path of duty. In this regard, the law which applies to\nindividuals applies to churches, and the polity of the New Testament is\ncongregational rather than independent.\n\n\n Independence is qualified by interdependence. While each church\n is, in the last resort thrown upon its own responsibility in\n ascertaining doctrine and duty, it is to acknowledge the\n indwelling of the Holy Spirit in other churches as well as in\n itself, and the value of the public opinion of the churches as an\n indication of the mind of the Spirit. The church in Antioch asked\n advice of the church in Jerusalem, although Paul himself was at\n Antioch. Although no church or union of churches has rightful\n jurisdiction over the single local body, yet the Council, when\n rightly called and constituted, has the power of moral influence.\n Its decision is an index to truth, which only the gravest reasons\n will justify the church in ignoring or refusing to follow.\n\n Dexter, Congregationalism, 695\u2014\u201cBarrowism gave all power into the\n hands of the elders, and it would have no Councils.\n Congregationalism is Brownism. It has two foci: Independence and\n Interdependence.\u201d Charles S. Scott, on Baptist Polity and the\n Pastorate, in Bap. Quar. Rev., July, 1890:291\u2010297\u2014\u201cThe difference\n between the polity of Baptist and of Congregational churches is in\n the relative authority of the Ecclesiastical Council.\n Congregationalism is Councilism. Not only the ordination and first\n settlement of the minister must be with the advice and consent of\n a Council, but every subsequent unsettlement and settlement.\u201d\n Baptist churches have regarded this dependence upon Councils after\n the minister\u2019s ordination as extreme and unwarranted.\n\n The fact that the church has always the right, for just cause, of\n going behind the decision of the Council, and of determining for\n itself whether it will ratify or reject that decision, shows\n conclusively that the church has parted with no particle of its\n original independence or authority. Yet, though the Council is\n simply a counsellor\u2014an organ and helper of the church,\u2014the neglect\n of its advice may involve such ecclesiastical or moral wrong as to\n justify the churches represented in it, as well as other churches,\n in withdrawing, from the church that called it, their\n denominational fellowship. The relation of churches to one another\n is analogous to the relation of private Christians to one another.\n No meddlesome spirit is to be allowed; but in matters of grave\n moment, a church, as well as an individual, may be justified in\n giving advice unasked.\n\n Lightfoot, in his new edition of Clemens Romanus, shows that the\n Epistle, instead of emanating from Clement as Bishop of Rome, is a\n letter of the church at Rome to the Corinthians, urging them to\n peace. No pope and no bishop existed, but the whole church\n congregationally addressed its counsels to its sister body of\n believers at Corinth. Congregationalism, in A. D. 95, considered\n it a duty to labor with a sister church that had in its judgment\n gone astray, or that was in danger of going astray. The only\n primacy was the primacy of the church, not of the bishop; and this\n primacy was a primacy of goodness, backed up by metropolitan\n advantages. All this fraternal fellowship follows from the\n fundamental conception of the local church as the concrete\n embodiment of the universal church. Park: \u201cCongregationalism\n recognizes a voluntary co\u00f6peration and communion of the churches,\n which Independency does not do. Independent churches ordain and\n depose pastors without asking advice from other churches.\u201d\n\n In accordance with this general principle, in a case of serious\n disagreement between different portions of the same church, the\n council called to advise should be, if possible, a mutual, not an\n _ex parte_, council; see Dexter, Congregationalism, 2, 3, 61\u201064.\n It is a more general application of the same principle, to say\n that the pastor should not shut himself in to his own church, but\n should cultivate friendly relations with other pastors and with\n other churches, should be present and active at the meetings of\n Associations and State Conventions, and at the Anniversaries of\n the National Societies of the denomination. His example of\n friendly interest in the welfare of others will affect his church.\n The strong should be taught to help the weak, after the example of\n Paul in raising contributions for the poor churches of Judea.\n\n The principle of church independence is not only consistent with,\n but it absolutely requires under Christ, all manner of Christian\n co\u00f6peration with other churches; and Social and Mission Unions to\n unify the work of the denomination, to secure the starting of new\n enterprises, to prevent one church from trenching upon the\n territory or appropriating the members of another, are only\n natural outgrowths of the principle. President Wayland\u2019s remark,\n \u201cHe who is displeased with everybody and everything gives the best\n evidence that his own temper is defective and that he is a bad\n associate,\u201d applies to churches as well as to individuals. Each\n church is to remember that, though it is honored by the indwelling\n of the Lord, it constitutes only a part of that great body of\n which Christ is the head.\n\n See Davidson, Eccl. Polity of the N. T.; Ladd, Principles of\n Church Polity; and on the general subject of the Church, Hodge,\n Essays, 201; Flint, Christ\u2019s Kingdom on Earth, 53\u201082; Hooker,\n Ecclesiastical Polity; The Church,\u2014a collection of essays by\n Luthardt, Kahnis, _etc._; Hiscox, Baptist Church Directory;\n Ripley, Church Polity; Harvey, The Church; Crowell, Church\n Members\u2019 Manual; R. W. Dale, Manual of Congregational Principles;\n Lightfoot, Com. on Philippians, excursus on the Christian\n Ministry; Ross, The Church\u2010Kingdom\u2014Lectures on Congregationalism;\n Dexter, Congregationalism, 681\u2010716, as seen in its Literature;\n Allison, Baptist Councils in America. For a denial that there is\n any real apostolic authority for modern church polity, see O. J.\n Thatcher, Sketch of the History of the Apostolic Church.\n\n\n\n\nChapter II. The Ordinances Of The Church.\n\n\nBy the ordinances, we mean those outward rites which Christ has appointed\nto be administered in his church as visible signs of the saving truth of\nthe gospel. They are signs, in that they vividly express this truth and\nconfirm it to the believer.\n\nIn contrast with this characteristically Protestant view, the Romanist\nregards the ordinances as actually conferring grace and producing\nholiness. Instead of being the external manifestation of a preceding union\nwith Christ, they are the physical means of constituting and maintaining\nthis union. With the Romanist, in this particular, sacramentalists of\nevery name substantially agree. The Papal Church holds to seven sacraments\nor ordinances:\u2014ordination, confirmation, matrimony, extreme unction,\npenance, baptism, and the eucharist. The ordinances prescribed in the N.\nT., however, are two and only two, viz.:\u2014Baptism and the Lord\u2019s Supper.\n\n\n It will be well to distinguish from one another the three words:\n symbol, rite, and ordinance. 1. A _symbol_ is the sign, or visible\n representation, of an invisible truth or idea; as for example, the\n lion is the symbol of strength and courage, the lamb is the symbol\n of gentleness, the olive branch of peace, the sceptre of dominion,\n the wedding ring of marriage, and the flag of country. Symbols may\n teach great lessons; as Jesus\u2019 cursing the barren fig tree taught\n the doom of unfruitful Judaism, and Jesus\u2019 washing of the\n disciples\u2019 feet taught his own coming down from heaven to purify\n and save, and the humble service required of his followers. 2. A\n _rite_ is a symbol which is employed with regularity and sacred\n intent. Symbols became rites when thus used. Examples of\n authorized rites in the Christian Church are the laying on of\n hands in ordination, and the giving of the right hand of\n fellowship. 3. An _ordinance_ is a symbolic rite which sets forth\n the central truths of the Christian faith, and which is of\n universal and perpetual obligation. Baptism and the Lord\u2019s Supper\n are rites which have become ordinances by the specific command of\n Christ and by their inner relation to the essential truths of his\n kingdom. No ordinance is a sacrament in the Romanist sense of\n conferring grace; but, as the _sacramentum_ was the oath taken by\n the Roman soldier to obey his commander even unto death, so\n Baptism and the Lord\u2019s Supper are sacraments, in the sense of vows\n of allegiance to Christ our Master.\n\n President H. G. Weston has recorded his objections to the\n observance of the so\u2010called \u201cChristian Year,\u201d in words that we\n quote, as showing the danger attending the Romanist multiplication\n of ordinances. \u201c1. The \u2018Christian Year\u2019 is not Christian. It makes\n everything of actions, and nothing of relations. Make a day holy\n that God has not made holy, and you thereby make all other days\n unholy. 2. It limits the Christian\u2019s view of Christ to the scenes\n and events of his earthly life. Salvation comes through spiritual\n relations to a living Lord. The \u2018Christian Year\u2019 makes Christ only\n a memory, and not a living, present, personal power. Life, not\n death, is the typical word of the N. T. Paul craved, not a\n knowledge of the fact of the resurrection, but of the power of it.\n The New Testament records busy themselves most of all with what\n Christ is doing now. 3. The appointments of the \u2018Christian Year\u2019\n are not in accord with the N. T. These appointments lack the\n reality of spiritual life, and are contrary to the essential\n spirit of Christianity.\u201d We may add that where the \u201cChristian\n Year\u201d is most generally and rigidly observed, there popular\n religion is most formal and destitute of spiritual power.\n\n\n\nI. Baptism.\n\n\nChristian Baptism is the immersion of a believer in water, in token of his\nprevious entrance into the communion of Christ\u2019s death and\nresurrection,\u2014or, in other words, in token of his regeneration through\nunion with Christ.\n\n\n1. Baptism an Ordinance of Christ.\n\n\nA. Proof that Christ instituted an external rite called baptism.\n\n(_a_) From the words of the great commission; (_b_) from the injunctions\nof the apostles; (_c_) from the fact that the members of the New Testament\nchurches were baptized believers; (_d_) from the universal practice of\nsuch a rite in Christian churches of subsequent times.\n\n\n (_a_) _Mat. 28:19_\u2014\u201c_Go ye therefore, and make disciples of all\n the nations, baptizing them into the name of the Father and of the\n Son and of the Holy Spirit_\u201d; _Mark 16:16_\u2014\u201c_He that believeth and\n is baptized shall be saved_\u201d\u2014we hold, with Westcott and Hort, that\n _Mark 16:9\u201020_ is of canonical authority, though probably not\n written by Mark himself. (_b_) _Acts 2:38_\u2014\u201c_And Peter said unto\n them, Repent ye, and be baptized every one of you in the name of\n Jesus Christ unto the remission of your sins_\u201d; (_c_) _Rom.\n 6:3\u20105_\u2014\u201c_Or are ye ignorant that all we who were baptized into\n Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were buried\n therefore with him through baptism into death: that like as Christ\n was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we\n also might walk in newness of life. For if we have become united\n with him in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the\n likeness of his resurrection_\u201d; _Col. 2:11, 12_\u2014\u201c_in whom ye were\n also circumcised with a circumcision not made with hands, in the\n putting off of the body of the flesh, in the circumcision of\n Christ; having been buried with him in baptism, wherein ye were\n also raised with him through faith in the working of God, who\n raised him from the dead._\u201d (_d_) The only marked exceptions to\n the universal requisition of baptism are found in the Society of\n Friends, and in the Salvation Army. The Salvation Army does not\n regard the ordinance as having any more permanent obligation than\n feet\u2010washing. General Booth: \u201cWe teach our soldiers that every\n time they break bread, they are to remember the broken body of the\n Lord, and every time they wash the body, they are to remind\n themselves of the cleansing power of the blood of Christ and of\n the indwelling Spirit.\u201d The Society of Friends regard Christ\u2019s\n commands as fulfilled, not by any outward baptism of water, but\n only by the inward baptism of the Spirit.\n\n\nB. This external rite intended by Christ to be of universal and perpetual\nobligation.\n\n(_a_) Christ recognized John the Baptist\u2019s commission to baptize as\nderived immediately from heaven.\n\n\n _Mat. 21:25_\u2014\u201c_The baptism of John, whence was it? from heaven or\n from men?_\u201d\u2014here Jesus clearly intimates that John\u2019s commission to\n baptize was derived directly from God; _cf._ _John 1:25_\u2014the\n delegates sent to the Baptist by the Sanhedrin ask him: \u201c_Why then\n baptizest thou, if thou art not the Christ, neither Elijah,\n neither the prophet?_\u201d thus indicating that John\u2019s baptism, either\n in its form or its application, was a new ordinance that required\n special divine authorization.\n\n Broadus in his American Com. on _Mat. 3:6_, claims that John\u2019s\n baptism was no modification of an existing rite. Proselyte baptism\n is not mentioned in the Mishna (A. D. 200); the first distinct\n account of it is in the Babylonian Talmud (Gemara) written in the\n fifth century; it was not adopted from the Christians, but was one\n of the Jewish purifications which came to be regarded, after the\n destruction of the Temple, as a peculiar initiatory rite. There is\n no mention of it, as a Jewish rite, in the O. T., N. T.,\n Apocrypha, Philo, or Josephus.\n\n For the view that proselyte\u2010baptism did not exist among the Jews\n before the time of John, see Schneckenburger, Ueber das Alter der\n j\u00fcdischen Proselytentaufe; Stuart, in Bib. Repos., 1833:338\u2010355;\n Toy, In Baptist Quarterly, 1872:301\u2010332. Dr. Toy, however, in a\n private note to the author (1884), says: \u201cI am disposed now to\n regard the Christian rite as borrowed from the Jewish, contrary to\n my view in 1872.\u201d So holds Edersheim, Life and Times of Jesus,\n 2:742\u2010744\u2014\u201cWe have positive testimony that the baptism of\n proselytes existed in the times of Hillel and Shammai. For,\n whereas the school of Shammai is said to have allowed a proselyte\n who was circumcised on the eve of the Passover, to partake, after\n baptism, of the Passover, the school of Hillel forbade it. This\n controversy must be regarded as proving that at that time\n [previous to Christ] the baptism of proselytes was customary.\u201d\n\n Porter, on Proselyte Baptism, Hastings\u2019 Bible Dict., 4:132\u2014\u201cIf\n circumcision was the decisive step in the case of all male\n converts, there seems no longer room for serious question that a\n bath of purification must have followed, even though early mention\n of such proselyte baptism is not found. The law (_Lev. 11\u201015_;\n _Num. 19_) prescribed such baths in all cases of impurity, and one\n who came with the deep impurity of a heathen life behind him could\n not have entered the Jewish community without such cleansing.\u201d\n Plummer, on Baptism, Hastings\u2019 Bible Dict., 1:239\u2014\u201cWhat is wanted\n is direct evidence that, before John the Baptist made so\n remarkable a use of the rite, it was the custom to make all\n proselytes submit to baptism; and such evidence is not\n forthcoming. Nevertheless the fact is not really doubtful. It is\n not credible that the baptizing of proselytes was instituted and\n made essential for their admission to Judaism at a period\n subsequent to the institution of Christian baptism; and the\n supposition that it was borrowed from the rite enjoined by Christ\n is monstrous.\u201d\n\n Although the O. T. and the Apocrypha, Josephus and Philo, are\n silent with regard to proselyte baptism, it is certain that it\n existed among the Jews in the early Christian centuries; and it is\n almost equally certain that the Jews could not have adopted it\n from the Christians. It is probable, therefore, that the baptism\n of John was an application to Jews of an immersion which, before\n that time, was administered to proselytes from among the Gentiles;\n and that it was this adaptation of the rite to a new class of\n subjects and with a new meaning, which excited the inquiry and\n criticism of the Sanhedrin. We must remember, however, that the\n Lord\u2019s Supper was likewise an adaptation of certain portions of\n the old Passover service to a new use and meaning. See also Kitto,\n Bib. Cyclop., 3:593.\n\n\n(_b_) In his own submission to John\u2019s baptism, Christ gave testimony to\nthe binding obligation of the ordinance (Mat. 3:13\u201017). John\u2019s baptism was\nessentially Christian baptism (Acts 19:4), although the full significance\nof it was not understood until after Jesus\u2019 death and resurrection (Mat.\n20:17\u201023; Luke 12:50; Rom. 6:3\u20106).\n\n\n _Mat. 3:13\u201017_\u2014\u201c_Suffer it now: for thus it becometh us to fulfill\n all righteousness_\u201d; _Acts 19:4_\u2014\u201c_John baptized with the baptism\n of repentance, saying unto the people that they should believe on\n him that should come after him, that is, on Jesus_\u201d; _Mat. 20:18,\n 19, 22_\u2014\u201c_the Son of man shall be delivered unto the chief priests\n and scribes; and they shall condemn him to death, and shall\n deliver him unto the Gentiles to mock, and to scourge, and to\n crucify.... Are ye able to drink the cup that I am about to\n drink?_\u201d _Luke 12:50_\u2014\u201c_But I have a baptism to be baptized with;\n and how am I straitened till it be accomplished!_\u201d _Rom. 6:3,\n 4_\u2014\u201c_Or are ye ignorant that all we who were baptized into Christ\n Jesus were baptized into his death? We were buried therefore with\n him through baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised\n from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we also might\n walk is newness of life._\u201d\n\n Robert Hall, Works, 1:367\u2010399, denies that John\u2019s baptism was\n Christian baptism, and holds that there is not sufficient evidence\n that all the apostles were baptized. The fact that John\u2019s baptism\n was a baptism of faith in the coming Messiah, as well as a baptism\n of repentance for past and present sin, refutes this theory. The\n only difference between John\u2019s baptism, and the baptism of our\n time, is that John baptized upon profession of faith in a Savior\n yet to come; baptism is now administered upon profession of faith\n in a Savior who has actually and already come. On John\u2019s baptism\n as presupposing faith in those who received it, see treatment of\n the Subjects of Baptism, page 950.\n\n\n(_c_) In continuing the practice of baptism through his disciples (John\n4:1, 2), and in enjoining it upon them as part of a work which was to last\nto the end of the world (Mat. 28:19, 20), Christ manifestly adopted and\nappointed baptism as the invariable law of his church.\n\n\n _John 4:1, 2_\u2014\u201c_When therefore the Lord knew that the Pharisees\n had heard that Jesus was making and baptizing more disciples than\n John (although Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples)_\u201d;\n _Mat. 28:19, 20_\u2014\u201c_Go ye therefore, and make disciples of all the\n nations, baptizing them into the name of the Father and of the Son\n and of the Holy Spirit: teaching them to observe all things\n whatsoever I commanded you: and lo, I am with you always, even\n unto the end of the world._\u201d\n\n\n(_d_) The analogy of the ordinance of the Lord\u2019s Supper also leads to the\nconclusion that baptism is to be observed as an authoritative memorial of\nChrist and his truth, until his second coming.\n\n\n _1 Cor. 11:26_\u2014\u201c_For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink the\n cup, ye proclaim the Lord\u2019s death till he come._\u201d Baptism, like\n the Lord\u2019s Supper, is a teaching ordinance, and the two ordinances\n together furnish an indispensable witness to Christ\u2019s death and\n resurrection.\n\n\n(_e_) There is no intimation whatever that the command of baptism is\nlimited, or to be limited, in its application,\u2014that it has been or ever is\nto be repealed; and, until some evidence of such limitation or repeal is\nproduced, the statute must be regarded as universally binding.\n\n\n On the proof that baptism is an ordinance of Christ, see Pepper,\n in Madison Avenue Lectures, 85\u2010114; Dagg, Church Order, 9\u201021.\n\n\n2. The Mode of Baptism.\n\n\nThis is immersion, and immersion only. This appears from the following\nconsiderations:\n\n\nA. The command to baptize is a command to immerse.\n\n\nWe show this:\n\n(_a_) From the meaning of the original word \u03b2\u03b1\u03c0\u03c4\u03af\u03b6\u03c9. That this is to\nimmerse, appears:\n\nFirst,\u2014from the usage of Greek writers\u2014including the church Fathers, when\nthey do not speak of the Christian rite, and the authors of the Greek\nversion of the Old Testament.\n\n\n Liddell and Scott, Greek Lexicon: \u201c\u03b2\u03b1\u03c0\u03c4\u03af\u03b6\u03c9, to dip in or under\n water; Lat. _immergere_.\u201d Sophocles, Lexicon of Greek Usage in the\n Roman and Byzantine Periods, 140 B. C. to 1000 A. D.\u2014\u201c\u03b2\u03b1\u03c0\u03c4\u03af\u03b6\u03c9, to\n dip, to immerse, to sink ... There is no evidence that Luke and\n Paul and the other writers of the N. T. put upon this verb\n meanings not recognized by the Greeks.\u201d Thayer, N. T. Lexicon:\n \u201c\u03b2\u03b1\u03c0\u03c4\u03af\u03b6\u03c9, literally to dip, to dip repeatedly, to immerse, to\n submerge, ... metaphorically, to overwhelm.... \u03b2\u03ac\u03c0\u03c4\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u03b1,\n immersion, submersion ... a rite of sacred immersion commanded by\n Christ.\u201d Prof. Goodwin of Harvard University, Feb. 13, 1895, says:\n \u201cThe classical meaning of \u03b2\u03b1\u03c0\u03c4\u03af\u03b6\u03c9, which seldom occurs, and of the\n more common \u03b2\u03ac\u03c0\u03c4\u03c9, is dip (literally or metaphorically), and I\n never heard of its having any other meaning anywhere. Certainly I\n never saw a lexicon which gives either sprinkle or pour, as\n meanings of either. I must be allowed to ask why I am so often\n asked this question, which seems to me to have but one perfectly\n plain answer.\u201d\n\n In the International Critical Commentary, see Plummer on Luke, p.\n 86\u2014\u201cIt is only when baptism is administered by immersion that its\n full significance is seen\u201d; Abbott on Colossians, p. 251\u2014\u201cThe\n figure was naturally suggested by the immersion in baptism\u201d; see\n also Gould on Mark, p. 127; Sanday on Romans, p. 154\u2010157. No one\n of these four Commentaries was written by a Baptist. The two\n latest English Bible Dictionaries agree upon this point. Hastings,\n Bib. Dict., art.: Baptism, p. 243 a\u2014\u201cThe mode of using was\n commonly immersion. The symbolism of the ordinance required this\u201d;\n Cheyne, Encyc. Biblica, 1:473, while arguing from the _Didache_\n that from a very early date \u201ca triple pouring was admitted where a\n sufficiency of water could not be had,\u201d agrees that \u201csuch a method\n [as immersion] is presupposed as the ideal, at any rate, in Paul\u2019s\n words about death, burial and resurrection in baptism (_Rom.\n 6:3\u20105_).\u201d\n\n Conant, Appendix to Bible Union Version of Matthew, 1\u201064, has\n examples \u201cdrawn from writers in almost every department of\n literature and science; from poets, rhetoricians, philosophers,\n critics, historians, geographers; from writers on husbandry, on\n medicine, on natural history, on grammar, on theology; from almost\n every form and style of composition, romances, epistles, orations,\n fables, odes, epigrams, sermons, narratives: from writers of\n various nations and religions, Pagan, Jew, and Christian,\n belonging to many countries and through a long succession of ages.\n In all, the word has retained its ground\u2010meaning without change.\n From the earliest age of Greek literature down to its close, a\n period of nearly two thousand years, not an example has been found\n in which the word has any other meaning. There is no instance in\n which it signifies to make a partial application of water by\n affusion or sprinkling, or to cleanse, to purify, apart from the\n literal act of immersion as the means of cleansing or purifying.\u201d\n See Stuart, in Bib. Repos., 1833:313; Broadus on Immersion, 57,\n note.\n\n Dale, in his Classic, Judaic, Christic, and Patristic Baptism,\n maintains that \u03b2\u03ac\u03c0\u03c4\u03c9 alone means \u201cto dip,\u201d and that \u03b2\u03b1\u03c0\u03c4\u03af\u03b6\u03c9 never\n means \u201cto dip,\u201d but only \u201cto put within,\u201d giving no intimation\n that the object is to be taken out again. But see Review of Dale,\n by A. C. Kendrick, in Bap. Quarterly, 1869:129, and by Harvey, in\n Bap. Review, 1879:141\u2010163. \u201cPlutarch used the word \u03b2\u03b1\u03c0\u03c4\u03af\u03b6\u03c9, when\n he describes the soldiers of Alexander on a riotous march as by\n the roadside dipping (lit.: baptizing) with cups from huge wine\n jars and mixing bowls, and drinking to one another. Here we have\n \u03b2\u03b1\u03c0\u03c4\u03af\u03b6\u03c9 used where Dr. Dale\u2019s theory would call for \u03b2\u03ac\u03c0\u03c4\u03c9. The\n truth is that \u03b2\u03b1\u03c0\u03c4\u03af\u03b6\u03c9, the stronger word, came to be used in the\n same sense with the weaker; and the attempt to prove a broad and\n invariable difference of meaning between them breaks down. Of Dr.\n Dale\u2019s three meanings of \u03b2\u03b1\u03c0\u03c4\u03af\u03b6\u03c9\u2014(1) intusposition without\n influence (stone in water), (2) intusposition with influence (man\n drowned in water), (3) influence without intusposition,\u2014the last\n is a figment of Dr. Dale\u2019s imagination. It would allow me to say\n that when I burned a piece of paper, I baptized it. The grand\n result is this: Beginning with the position that baptize means\n immerse, Dr. Dale ends by maintaining that immersion is not\n baptism. Because Christ speaks of drinking a cup, Dr. Dale infers\n that this is baptism.\u201d For a complete reply to Dale, see Ford,\n Studies on Baptism.\n\n\nSecondly,\u2014every passage where the word occurs in the New Testament either\nrequires or allows the meaning \u201cimmerse.\u201d\n\n\n _Mat. 3:6, 11_\u2014\u201c_I indeed baptize you in water unto repentance ...\n he shall baptize you in the holy Spirit and in fire_\u201d; _cf._ _2\n Kings 5:14_\u2014\u201c_Then went he_ [Naaman] _down, and dipped himself_\n \u1f10\u03b2\u03b1\u03c0\u03c4\u03af\u03c3\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf _seven times in the Jordan_\u201d; _Mark 1:5, 9_\u2014\u201c_they were\n baptized of him in the river Jordan, confessing their sins....\n Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee, and was baptized of John into\n the Jordan_\u201d; _7:4_\u2014\u201c_and when they come from the market\u2010place,\n except they bathe_ [lit.: \u2018_baptize_\u2019] _themselves, they eat not:\n and many other things there are, which they have received to hold,\n washings_ [lit.: \u2018_baptizings_\u2019] _of cups, and pots, and brasen\n vessels_\u201d\u2014in this verse, Westcott and Hort, with \u05d0 and B, read\n \u1fe5\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03af\u03c3\u03c9\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, instead of \u03b2\u03b1\u03c0\u03c4\u03af\u03c3\u03c9\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9; but it is easy to see how\n subsequent ignorance of Pharisaic scrupulousness might have\n changed \u03b2\u03b1\u03c0\u03c4\u03af\u03c3\u03c9\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 into \u1fe5\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03af\u03c3\u03c9\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9; but not easy to see how\n \u1fe5\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03af\u03c3\u03c9\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 should have been changed into \u03b2\u03b1\u03c0\u03c4\u03af\u03c3\u03c9\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9. On _Mat.\n 15:2_ (and the parallel passage _Mark 7:4_), see Broadus, Com. on\n Mat., pages 332, 333. Herodotus, 2:47, says that if any Egyptian\n touches a swine in passing, with his clothes, he goes to the river\n and dips himself from it.\n\n Meyer, Com. _in loco_\u2014\u201c\u1f10\u1f70\u03bd \u03bc\u1f74 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c0\u03c4\u03af\u03c3\u03c9\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 is not to be understood\n of washing the hands (Lightfoot, Wetstein), but of immersion,\n which the word in classic Greek and in the N. T. everywhere means;\n here, according to the context, to take a bath.\u201d The Revised\n Version omits the words \u201cand couches,\u201d although Maimonides speaks\n of a Jewish immersion of couches; see quotation from Maimonides in\n Ingham, Handbook of Baptism, 373\u2014\u201cWhenever in the law washing of\n the flesh or of the clothes is mentioned, it means nothing else\n than the dipping of the whole body in a laver; for if any man dip\n himself all over except the tip of his little finger, he is still\n in his uncleanness.... A bed that is wholly defiled, if a man dip\n it part by part, it is pure.\u201d Watson, in Annotated Par. Bible,\n 1126.\n\n _Luke 11:38_\u2014\u201c_And when the Pharisee saw it, he marvelled that he\n had not first bathed_ [lit.: \u2018_baptized_\u2019] _himself before\n dinner_\u201d; _cf._ _Ecclesiasticus 31:25_\u2014\u201c_He that washeth himself\n after the touching of a dead body_\u201d (\u03b2\u03b1\u03c0\u03c4\u03b9\u03b6\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c0\u1f78 \u03bd\u03b5\u03ba\u03c1\u03bf\u1fe6);\n _Judith 12:7_\u2014\u201c_washed herself \u1f10\u03b2\u03b1\u03c0\u03c4\u03af\u03b6\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf in a fountain of water\n by the camp_\u201d; _Lev. 22:4\u20106_\u2014\u201c_Whoso toucheth anything that is\n unclean by the dead ... unclean until the even ... bathe his flesh\n in water._\u201d _Acts 2:41_\u2014\u201c_They then that received his word were\n baptized: and there were added unto them in that day about three\n thousand souls._\u201d Although the water supply of Jerusalem is\n naturally poor, the artificial provision of aqueducts, cisterns,\n and tanks, made water abundant. During the siege of Titus, though\n thousands died of famine, we read of no suffering from lack of\n water. The following are the dimensions of pools in modern\n Jerusalem: King\u2019s Pool, 15 feet x 16 x 3; Siloam, 53 x 18 x 19;\n Hezekiah, 240 x 140 x 10; Bethesda (so\u2010called), 360 x 130 x 75;\n Upper Gihon, 316 x 218 x 19; Lower Gihon, 592 x 260 x 18; see\n Robinson, Biblical Researches, 1:323\u2010348, and Samson, Water\u2010supply\n of Jerusalem, pub. by Am. Bap. Pub. Soc. There was no difficulty\n in baptizing three thousand in one day; for, in the time of\n Chrysostom, when all candidates of the year were baptized in a\n single day, three thousand were once baptized; and, on July 3,\n 1878, 2222 Telugu Christians were baptized by two administrators\n in nine hours. These Telugu baptisms took place at Velumpilly, ten\n miles north of Ongole. The same two men did not baptize all the\n time. There were six men engaged in baptizing, but never more than\n two men at the same time.\n\n _Acts 16:33_\u2014\u201c_And he took them the same hour of the night, and\n washed their stripes; and was baptized, he and all his,\n immediately_\u201d\u2014the prison was doubtless, as are most large edifices\n in the East, whether public or private, provided with tank and\n fountain. See Cremer, Lexicon of N. T. Greek, _sub voce_\u2014\u201c\u03b2\u03b1\u03c0\u03c4\u03af\u03b6\u03c9,\n immersion or submersion for a religious purpose.\u201d Grimm\u2019s ed. of\n Wilke\u2014\u201c\u03b2\u03b1\u03c0\u03c4\u03af\u03b6\u03c9, 1. Immerse, submerge; 2. Wash or bathe, by\n immersing or submerging (_Mark 7:4_, also Naaman and Judith); 3.\n Figuratively, to overwhelm, as with debts, misfortunes, _etc._\u201d In\n the N. T. rite, he says it denotes \u201can immersion in water,\n intended as a sign of sins washed away, and received by those who\n wished to be admitted to the benefits of Messiah\u2019s reign.\u201d\n\n D\u00f6llinger, Kirche und Kirchen, 337\u2014\u201cThe Baptists are, however,\n from the Protestant point of view, unassailable, since for their\n demand of baptism by submersion they have the clear Bible text;\n and the authority of the church and of her testimony is not\n regarded by either party\u201d\u2014_i. e._, by either Baptists or\n Protestants, generally. Prof. Harnack, of Giessen, writes in the\n Independent, Feb. 19, 1885\u2014\u201c1. _Baptizein_ undoubtedly signifies\n immersion (_eintauchen_). 2. No proof can be found that it\n signifies anything else in the N. T. and in the most ancient\n Christian literature. The suggestion regarding a \u2018sacred sense\u2019 is\n out of the question. 3. There is no passage in the N. T. which\n suggests the supposition that any New Testament author attached to\n the word _baptizein_ any other sense than _eintauchen_ =\n _untertauchen_ (immerse, submerge).\u201d See Com. of Meyer, and\n Cunningham, Croall lectures.\n\n\nThirdly,\u2014the absence of any use of the word in the passive voice with\n\u201cwater\u201d as its subject confirms our conclusion that its meaning is \u201cto\nimmerse.\u201d Water is never said to be baptized upon a man.\n\n(_b_) From the use of the verb \u03b2\u03b1\u03c0\u03c4\u03af\u03b6\u03c9 with prepositions:\n\nFirst,\u2014with \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 (Mark 1:9\u2014where \u1f38\u03bf\u03c1\u03b4\u03ac\u03bd\u03b7\u03bd is the element into which the\nperson passes in the act of being baptized).\n\n_Mark 1:9, marg._\u2014\u201c_And it came to pass in those days, that Jesus came\nfrom Nazareth of Galilee, and was baptized of John into the Jordan._\u201d\n\nSecondly,\u2014with \u1f10\u03bd (Mark 1:5, 8; _cf._ Mat. 3:11. John 1:26, 31, 33; _cf._\nActs 2:2, 4). In these texts, \u1f10\u03bd is to be taken, not instrumentally, but\nas indicating the element in which the immersion takes place.\n\n\n _Mark 1:5, 8_\u2014\u201c_they were baptized of him in the river Jordan,\n confessing their sins.... I baptized you in water; but he shall\n baptize you in the Holy Spirit_\u201d\u2014here see Meyer\u2019s Com. on _Mat.\n 3:11_\u2014\u201c\u1f10\u03bd is in accordance with the meaning of \u03b2\u03b1\u03c0\u03c4\u03af\u03b6\u03c9 (immerse),\n not to be understood instrumentally, but on the contrary, in the\n sense of the element in which the immersion takes place.\u201d Those\n who pray for a \u201cbaptism of the Holy Spirit\u201d pray for such a\n pouring out of the Spirit as shall fill the place and permit them\n to be flooded or immersed in his abundant presence and power; see\n C. E. Smith, Baptism of Fire, 1881:305\u2010311. Plumptre: \u201cThe baptism\n with the Holy Ghost would imply that the souls thus baptized would\n be plunged, as it were, in that creative and informing Spirit,\n which was the source of light and holiness and wisdom.\u201d\n\n A. J. Gordon, Ministry of the Spirit, 67\u2014\u201cThe upper room became\n the Spirit\u2019s baptistery. His presence \u2018_filled all the house where\n they were sitting_\u2019 (_Acts 2:2_).... Baptism in the Holy Spirit\n was given once for all on the day of Pentecost, when the Paraclete\n came in person to make his abode in the church. It does not follow\n that every believer has received this baptism. God\u2019s gift is one\n thing,\u2014our appropriation of that gift is quite another thing. Our\n relation to the second and to the third persons of the Godhead is\n exactly parallel in this respect. \u2018God so loved the world, that he\n _gave_ his only begotten Son\u2019 (_John 3:16_). \u2018But as many as\n _received_ him, to them gave he the right to become children of\n God, even to them that believe on his name\u2019 (_John 1:12_). We are\n required to appropriate the Spirit as sons, in the same way that\n we are required to appropriate Christ as sinners.... \u2018_He breathed\n on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye_\u2019\u2014take ye, actively\u2014\u2018_the\n Holy Spirit_\u2019 (_John 20:22_).\u201d\n\n\n(_c_) From circumstances attending the administration of the ordinance\n(Mark 1:10\u2014\u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03b2\u03b1\u03af\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u1f10\u03ba \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f55\u03b4\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2; John 3:23\u2014\u1f55\u03b4\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u03ac; Acts 8:38,\n39\u2014\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03ad\u03b2\u03b7\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f78 \u1f55\u03b4\u03c9\u03c1 ... \u1f00\u03bd\u03ad\u03b2\u03b7\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u1f10\u03ba \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f55\u03b4\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2).\n\n\n _Mark 1:10_\u2014\u201c_coming up out of the water_\u201d; _John 3:23_\u2014\u201c_And John\n also was baptizing in \u00c6non near to Salim, because there was much\n water there_\u201d\u2014a sufficient depth of water for baptizing; see Prof.\n W. A. Stevens, on \u00c6non near to Salim, in Journ. Soc. of Bib. Lit.\n and Exegesis, Dec. 1883. _Acts 8:38, 39_\u2014\u201c_and they both went down\n into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him.\n And when they came up out of the water...._\u201d In the case of Philip\n and the eunuch, President Timothy Dwight, in S. S. Times, Aug. 27,\n 1892, says: \u201cThe baptism was apparently by immersion.\u201d The Editor\n adds that \u201cpractically scholars are agreed that the primitive\n meaning of the word \u2019baptize\u2019 was to immerse.\u201d\n\n\n(_d_) From figurative allusions to the ordinance.\n\n\n _Mark 10:38_\u2014\u201c_Are ye able to drink the cup that I drink? or to be\n baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with?_\u201d\u2014here the cup\n is the cup of suffering in Gethsemane; _cf._ _Luke\n 22:42_\u2014\u201c_Father, if thou be willing, remove this cup from me_\u201d;\n and the baptism is the baptism of death on Calvary, and of the\n grave that was to follow; _cf._ _Luke 12:50_\u2014\u201c_I have a baptism to\n be baptized with; and how am I straitened till it be\n accomplished!_\u201d Death presented itself to the Savior\u2019s mind as a\n baptism, because it was a sinking under the floods of suffering.\n _Rom. 6:4_\u2014\u201c_We were buried therefore with him through baptism\n into death: that like as Christ was raised from the dead through\n the glory of the Father, so we also might walk in newness of\n life_\u201d\u2014Conybeare and Howson, Life and Epistles of St. Paul, say,\n on this passage, that \u201cit cannot be understood without remembering\n that the primitive method of baptism was by immersion.\u201d On _Luke\n 12:49, marg._\u2014\u201c_I came to cast fire upon the earth, and how would\n I that it were already kindled!_\u201d\u2014see Wendt, Teaching of Jesus,\n 2:225\u2014\u201cHe knew that he was called to bring a new energy and\n movement into the world, which mightily seizes and draws\n everything towards it, as a hurled firebrand, which whereever it\n falls kindles a flame which expands into a vast sea of fire\u201d\u2014the\n baptism of fire, the baptism in the Holy Spirit?\n\n _1 Cor. 10:1, 2_\u2014\u201c_our fathers were all under the cloud, and all\n passed through the sea; and were all baptized unto Moses in the\n cloud and in the sea_\u201d; _Col. 2:12_\u2014\u201c_having been buried with him\n in baptism, wherein ye were also raised with him_\u201d; _Heb.\n 10:22_\u2014\u201c_having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and\n having our body washed_ [\u03bb\u03b5\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9] _with pure water_\u201d\u2014here\n Trench, N. T. Synonyms, 216, 217, says that \u201c\u03bb\u03bf\u03cd\u03c9 implies always,\n not the bathing of a part of the body, but of the whole.\u201d _1 Pet\n 3:20, 21_\u2014\u201c_saved through water: which also after a true likeness\n doth now save you, even baptism, not the putting away of the filth\n of the flesh, but the interrogation of a good conscience toward\n God, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ_\u201d\u2014as the ark whose\n sides were immersed in water saved Noah, so the immersion of\n believers typically saves them; that is, the answer of a good\n conscience, the turning of the soul to God, which baptism\n symbolizes. \u201cIn the ritual of Moses and Aaron, three things were\n used: oil, blood, and water. The oil was poured, the blood was\n sprinkled, the water was used for complete ablution first of all,\n and subsequently for partial ablution to those to whom complete\n ablution had been previously administered\u201d (Wm. Ashmore).\n\n\n(_e_) From the testimony of church history as to the practice of the early\nchurch.\n\n\n Tertullian, De Baptismo, chap. 12\u2014\u201cOthers make the suggestion\n (forced enough, clearly) that the apostles then served the turn of\n baptism when in their little ship they were sprinkled and covered\n with the waves; that Peter himself also was immersed enough when\n he walked on the sea. It is however, as I think, one thing to be\n sprinkled or intercepted by the violence of the sea; another thing\n to be baptized in obedience to the discipline of religion.\u201d\n Fisher, Beginnings of Christianity, 565\u2014\u201cBaptism, it is now\n generally agreed among scholars, was commonly administered by\n immersion.\u201d Schaff, History of the Apostolic Church,\n 570\u2014\u201cRespecting the form of baptism, the impartial historian is\n compelled by exegesis and history substantially to yield the point\n to the Baptists.\u201d Elsewhere Dr. Schaff says: \u201cThe baptism of\n Christ in the Jordan, and the illustrations of baptism used in the\n N. T., are all in favor of immersion, rather than of sprinkling,\n as is freely admitted by the best exegetes, Catholic and\n Protestant, English and German. Nothing can be gained by unnatural\n exegesis. The persistency and aggressiveness of Baptists have\n driven pedobaptists to opposite extremes.\u201d\n\n Dean Stanley, in his address at Eton College, March, 1879, on\n Historical Aspects of American Churches, speaks of immersion as\n \u201cthe primitive, apostolical, and, till the 13th century, the\n universal, mode of baptism, which is still retained throughout the\n Eastern churches, and which is still in our own church as\n positively enjoined in theory as it is universally neglected in\n practice.\u201d The same writer, in the Nineteenth Century, Oct. 1879,\n says that \u201cthe change from immersion to sprinkling has set aside\n the larger part of the apostolic language regarding baptism, and\n has altered the very meaning of the word.\u201d Neander, Church Hist.,\n 1:310\u2014\u201cIn respect to the form of baptism, it was, in conformity\n with the original institution and the original import of the\n symbol, performed by immersion, as a sign of entire baptism into\n the Holy Spirit, of being entirely penetrated by the same.... It\n was only with the sick, where exigency required it, that any\n exception was made. Then it was administered by sprinkling; but\n many superstitious persons imagined such sprinkling to be not\n fully valid, and stigmatized those thus baptized as clinics.\u201d\n\n Until recently, there has been no evidence that clinic baptism,\n _i. e._, the baptism of a sick or dying person in bed by pouring\n water copiously around him, was practised earlier than the time of\n Novatian, in the third century; and in these cases there is good\n reason to believe that a regenerating efficacy was ascribed to the\n ordinance. We are now, however, compelled to recognize a departure\n from N. T. precedent somewhat further back. Important testimony is\n that of Prof. Harnack, of Giessen, in the Independent of Feb. 19,\n 1885\u2014\u201cUp to the present moment we possess no certain proof from\n the period of the second century, in favor of the fact that\n baptism by aspersion was then even facultatively administered; for\n Tertullian (De P\u0153nit., 6, and De Baptismo, 12) is uncertain; and\n the age of those pictures upon which is represented a baptism by\n aspersion is not certain. The \u2018Teaching of the Twelve Apostles,\u2019\n however, has now instructed us that already, in very early times,\n people in the church took no offence when aspersion was put in\n place of immersion, when any kind of outward circumstances might\n render immersion impossible or impracticable.... But the rule was\n also certainly maintained that immersion was obligatory if the\n outward conditions of such a performance were at hand.\u201d This seems\n to show that, while the corruption of the N. T. rite began soon\n after the death of the apostles, baptism by any other form than\n immersion was even then a rare exception, which those who\n introduced the change sought to justify upon the plea of\n necessity. See Schaff, Teaching of the Twelve Apostles, 29\u201057, and\n other testimony in Coleman, Christian Antiquities, 275; Stuart, in\n Bib. Repos., 1883:355\u2010363.\n\n The \u201cTeaching of the Twelve Apostles,\u201d section 7, reads as\n follows: \u201cBaptize ... in living water. And if thou have no living\n water, baptize in other water; and if thou canst not in cold, then\n in warm. And if thou have neither, pour water upon the head\n thrice.\u201d Here it is evident that \u201cbaptize\u201d means only \u201cimmerse,\u201d\n but if water be scarce pouring may be substituted for baptism. Dr.\n A. H. Newman, Antipedobaptism, 5, says that \u201cThe Teaching of the\n Twelve Apostles\u201d may possibly belong to the second half of the\n second century, but in its present form is probably much later. It\n does not explicitly teach baptismal regeneration, but this view\n seems to be implied in the requirement, in case of an absolute\n lack of a sufficiency of water of any kind for baptism proper,\n that pouring water on the head three times be resorted to as a\n substitute. Catechetical instruction, repentance, fasting, and\n prayer, must precede the baptismal rite.\n\n Dexter, in his True Story of John Smyth and Sebaptism, maintains\n that immersion was a new thing in England in 1641. But if so, it\n was new, as Congregationalism was new\u2014a newly restored practice\n and ordinance of apostolic times. For reply to Dexter, see Long,\n in Bap. Rev., Jan. 1883:12, 13, who tells us, on the authority of\n Blunt\u2019s Ann. Book of Com. Prayer, that from 1085 to 1549, the\n \u201cSalisbury Use\u201d was the accepted mode, and this provided for the\n child\u2019s trine immersion. \u201cThe Prayerbook of Edward VI succeeded to\n the Salisbury Use in 1549; but in this too immersion has the place\n of honor\u2014affusion is only for the weak. The English church has\n never sanctioned sprinkling (Blunt, 226). In 1664, the Westminster\n Assembly said \u2019sprinkle or pour,\u2019 thus annulling what Christ\n commanded 1600 years before. Queen Elizabeth was immersed in 1533.\n If in 1641 immersion had been so generally and so long disused\n that men saw it with wonder and regarded it as a novelty, then the\n more distinct, emphatic, and peculiarly their own was the work of\n the Baptists. They come before the world, with no partners, or\n rivals, or abettors, or sympathizers, as the restorers and\n preservers of Christian baptism.\u201d\n\n\n(_f_) From the doctrine and practice of the Greek church.\n\n\n DeStourdza, the greatest modern theologian of the Greek church,\n writes; \u201c\u03b2\u03b1\u03c0\u03c4\u03af\u03b6\u03c9 signifies literally and always \u2018to plunge.\u2019\n Baptism and immersion are therefore identical, and to say \u2018baptism\n by aspersion\u2019 is as if one should say \u2018immersion by aspersion,\u2019 or\n any other absurdity of the same nature. The Greek church maintain\n that the Latin church, instead of a \u03b2\u03b1\u03c0\u03c4\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u03cc\u03c2, practice a mere\n \u1fe5\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u03cc\u03c2,\u2014instead of baptism, a mere sprinkling\u201d\u2014quoted in Conant\n on Mat., appendix, 99. See also Broadus on Immersion, 18.\n\n The evidence that immersion is the original mode of baptism is\n well summed up by Dr. Marcus Dods, in his article on Baptism in\n Hastings\u2019 Dictionary of Christ and the Apostles. Dr. Dods defines\n baptism as \u201ca rite wherein by immersion in water the participant\n symbolizes and signalizes his transition from an impure to a pure\n life, his death to a past he abandons, and his birth to a future\n he desires.\u201d As regards the \u201cmode of baptism,\u201d he remarks: \u201cThat\n the normal mode was by immersion of the whole body may be inferred\n (_a_) from the meaning of _baptizo_, which is the intensive or\n frequentative form of _bapto_, \u2018I dip,\u2019 and denotes to _immerse_\n or _submerge_\u2014the point is, that \u2018dip\u2019 or \u2018immerse\u2019 is the\n primary, \u2018wash\u2019 the secondary meaning of _bapto_ or _baptizo_.\n (_b_) The same inference may be drawn from the law laid down\n regarding the baptism of proselytes: \u2018As soon as he grows whole of\n the wound of circumcision, they bring him to baptism, and being\n placed in the water, they again instruct him in some weightier and\n in some lighter commands of the Law, which being heard, he plunges\n himself and comes up, and behold, he is an Israelite in all\n things\u2019 (Lightfoot\u2019s Hor\u00e6 Hebraic\u00e6). To use Pauline language, his\n old man is dead and buried in water, and he rises from this\n cleansing grave a new man. The full significance of the rite would\n have been lost had immersion not been practised. Again, it was\n required in proselyte baptism that \u2018every person baptized must dip\n his whole body, now stripped and made naked, at one dipping. And\n wheresoever in the Law washing of the body or garments is\n mentioned, it means nothing else than the washing of the whole\n body.\u2019 (_c_) That immersion was the mode of baptism adopted by\n John is the natural conclusion from his choosing the neighborhood\n of the Jordan as the scene of his labors; and from the statement\n of _John 3:23_ that he was baptizing in Enon \u2018because there was\n much water there.\u2019 (_d_) That this form was continued in the\n Christian Church appears from the expression _Loutron\n palingenesias_ (bath of regeneration, _Titus 3:5_), and from the\n use made by St. Paul in _Romans 6_ of the symbolism. This is well\n put by Bingham (Antiquities xi.2).\u201d The author quotes Bingham to\n the effect that \u201ctotal immersion under water\u201d was the universal\n practice during the early Christian centuries \u201cexcept in some\n particular cases of exigence, wherein they allow of sprinkling, as\n in the case of a clinic baptism, or where there is a scarcity of\n water.\u201d Dr. Dods continues: \u201cThis statement exactly reflects the\n ideas of the Pauline Epistles and the \u2019_Didache_\u2019\u201d (Teaching of\n the Twelve Apostles).\n\n\nThe prevailing usage of any word determines the sense it bears, when found\nin a command of Christ. We have seen, not only that the prevailing usage\nof the Greek language determines the meaning of the word \u201cbaptize\u201d to be\n\u201cimmerse,\u201d but that this is its fundamental, constant, and only meaning.\nThe original command to baptize is therefore a command to immerse.\n\n\n As evidence that quite diverse sections of the Christian world are\n coming to recognize the original form of baptism to be immersion,\n we may cite the fact that a memorial to the late Archbishop of\n Canterbury has recently been erected in the parish church of\n Lambeth, and that it is in the shape of a \u201cfont\u2010grave,\u201d in which a\n believer can be buried with Christ in baptism; and also that the\n Rev. G. Campbell Morgan has had a baptistery constructed in the\n newly renovated Westminster Congregational Church in London.\n\n Pfleiderer, Philos. Religion, 2:211\u2014\u201cAs in the case of the Lord\u2019s\n Supper, so did Baptism also first receive its sacramental\n significance through Paul. As he saw in the immersing under water\n the symbolical repetition of the death and resurrection of Christ,\n baptism appeared to him as the act of spiritual dying and\n renovation, or regeneration, of incorporation into the mystical\n body of Christ, that \u2019new creation.\u2019 As for Paul the baptism of\n adults only was in question, faith in Christ is already of course\n presupposed by it, and baptism is just the act in which faith\n realizes the decisive resolution of giving one\u2019s self up actually\n as belonging to Christ and his community. Yet the outward act is\n not on that account a mere semblance of what is already present in\n faith, but according to the mysticism common to Paul with the\n whole ancient world, the symbolical act effectuates what it\n typifies, and therefore in this case the mortification of the\n carnal man and the animation of the spiritual man.\u201d For the view\n that sprinkling or pouring constitutes valid baptism, see Hall,\n Mode of Baptism. _Per contra_, see Hovey, in Baptist Quarterly,\n April, 1875; Wayland, Principles and Practices of Baptists, 85;\n Carson, Noel, Judson, and Pengilly, on Baptism; especially recent\n and valuable is Burrage, Act of Baptism.\n\n\nB. No church has the right to modify or dispense with this command of\nChrist.\n\n\nThis is plain:\n\n(_a_) From the nature of the church. Notice:\n\nFirst,\u2014that, besides the local church, no other visible church of Christ\nis known to the New Testament. Secondly,\u2014that the local church is not a\nlegislative, but is simply an executive, body. Only the authority which\noriginally imposed its laws can amend or abrogate them. Thirdly,\u2014that the\nlocal church cannot delegate to any organization or council of churches\nany power which it does not itself rightfully possess. Fourthly,\u2014that the\nopposite principle puts the church above the Scriptures and above Christ,\nand would sanction all the usurpations of Rome.\n\n\n _Mat. 5:19_\u2014\u201c_Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least\n commandments, and shall teach men so, shall be called least in the\n kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, he shall\n be called great in the kingdom of heaven_\u201d; _cf._ _2 Sam.\n 6:7_\u2014\u201c_And the anger of Jehovah was kindled against Uzzah; and God\n smote him there for his error; and there he died by the ark of\n God._\u201d Shakespeare, Henry VI, Part I, 2:4\u2014\u201cFaith, I have been a\n truant in the law, And never yet could frame my will to it, And\n therefore frame the law unto my will.\u201d As at the Reformation\n believers rejoiced to restore communion in both kinds, so we\n should rejoice to restore baptism as to its subjects and as to its\n meaning. To administer it to a wailing and resisting infant, or to\n administer it in any other form than that prescribed by Jesus\u2019\n command and example, is to desecrate and destroy the ordinance.\n\n\n(_b_) From the nature of God\u2019s command:\n\nFirst,\u2014as forming a part, not only of the law, but of the fundamental law,\nof the church of Christ. The power claimed for a church to change it is\nnot only legislative but constitutional. Secondly,\u2014as expressing the\nwisdom of the Lawgiver. Power to change the command can be claimed for the\nchurch, only on the ground that Christ has failed to adapt the ordinance\nto changing circumstances, and has made obedience to it unnecessarily\ndifficult and humiliating. Thirdly,\u2014as providing in immersion the only\nadequate symbol of those saving truths of the gospel which both of the\nordinances have it for their office to set forth, and without which they\nbecome empty ceremonies and forms. In other words, the church has no right\nto change the method of administering the ordinance, because such a change\nvacates the ordinance of its essential meaning. As this argument, however,\nis of such vital importance, we present it more fully in a special\ndiscussion of the Symbolism of Baptism.\n\n\n Abraham Lincoln, in his debates with Douglas, ridiculed the idea\n that there could be any constitutional way of violating the\n Constitution. F. L. Anderson: \u201cIn human governments we change the\n constitution to conform to the will of the people; in the divine\n government we change the will of the people to conform to the\n Constitution.\u201d For advocacy of the church\u2019s right to modify the\n form of an ordinance, see Coleridge, Aids to Reflection, in Works,\n 1:333\u2010348\u2014\u201cWhere a ceremony answered, and was intended to answer,\n several purposes which at its first institution were blended in\n respect of the time, but which afterward, by change of\n circumstances, were necessarily disunited, then either the church\n hath no power or authority delegated to her, or she must be\n authorized to choose and determine to which of the several\n purposes the ceremony should be attached.\u201d Baptism, for example,\n at the first symbolized not only entrance into the church of\n Christ, but personal faith in him as Savior and Lord. It is\n assumed that entrance into the church and personal faith are now\n necessarily disunited. Since baptism is in charge of the church,\n she can attach baptism to the former, and not to the latter.\n\n We of course deny that the separation of baptism from faith is\n ever necessary. We maintain, on the contrary, that thus to\n separate the two is to pervert the ordinance, and to make it teach\n the doctrine of hereditary church membership and salvation by\n outward manipulation apart from faith. We say with Dean Stanley\n (on Baptism, in the Nineteenth Century, Oct. 1879), though not, as\n he does, with approval, that the change in the method of\n administering the ordinance shows \u201chow the spirit that lives and\n moves in human society can override the most sacred ordinances.\u201d\n We cannot with him call this spirit \u201cthe free spirit of\n Christianity,\u201d\u2014we regard it rather as an evil spirit of\n disobedience and unbelief. \u201cBaptists are therefore pledged to\n prosecute the work of the Reformation until the church shall\n return to the simple forms it possessed under the apostles\u201d (G. M.\n Stone). See Curtis, Progress of Baptist Principles, 234\u2010245.\n\n _Objections_: 1. Immersion is often impracticable.\u2014We reply that,\n when really impracticable, it is no longer a duty. Where the will\n to obey is present, but providential circumstances render outward\n obedience impossible, Christ takes the will for the deed.\n\n 2. It is often dangerous to health and life.\u2014We reply that, when\n it is really dangerous, it is no longer a duty. But then, we have\n no warrant for substituting another act for that which Christ has\n commanded. Duty demands simple delay until it can be administered\n with safety. It must be remembered that ardent feeling nerves even\n the body. \u201cBrethren, if your hearts be warm, Ice and snow can do\n no harm.\u201d The cold climate of Russia does not prevent the\n universal practice of immersion by the Greek church of that\n country.\n\n 3. It is indecent.\u2014We reply, that there is need of care to prevent\n exposure, but that with this care there is no indecency, more than\n in fashionable sea\u2010bathing. The argument is valid only against a\n careless administration of the ordinance, not against immersion\n itself.\n\n 4. It is inconvenient.\u2014We reply that, in a matter of obedience to\n Christ, we are not to consult convenience. The ordinance which\n symbolizes his sacrificial death, and our spiritual death with\n him, may naturally involve something of inconvenience, but joy in\n submitting to that inconvenience will be a test of the spirit of\n obedience. When the act is performed, it should be performed as\n Christ enjoined.\n\n 5. Other methods of administration have been blessed to those who\n submitted to them.\u2014We reply that God has often condescended to\n human ignorance, and has given his Spirit to those who honestly\n sought to serve him, even by erroneous forms, such as the Mass.\n This, however, is not to be taken as a divine sanction of the\n error, much less as a warrant for the perpetuation of a false\n system on the part of those who know that it is a violation of\n Christ\u2019s commands. It is, in great part, the position of its\n advocates, as representatives of Christ and his church, that gives\n to this false system its power for evil.\n\n\n3. The Symbolism of Baptism.\n\n\nBaptism symbolizes the previous entrance of the believer into the\ncommunion of Christ\u2019s death and resurrection,\u2014or, in other words,\nregeneration through union with Christ.\n\n\nA. Expansion of this statement as to the symbolism of baptism.\n\n\nBaptism, more particularly, is a symbol:\n\n(_a_) Of the death and resurrection of Christ.\n\n\n _Rom. 6:3_\u2014\u201c_Or are ye ignorant that all we who were baptized into\n Christ Jesus were baptized into his death?_\u201d _cf._ _Mat\n 3:13_\u2014\u201c_Then cometh Jesus from Galilee to the Jordan unto John, to\n be baptized of him_\u201d; _Mark 10:38_\u2014\u201c_Are ye able to drink the cup\n that I drink? or to be baptized with the baptism that I am\n baptized with?_\u201d; _Luke 12:50_\u2014\u201c_But I have a baptism to be\n baptized with; and how am I straitened till it be accomplished!_\u201d\n _Col. 2:12_\u2014\u201c_buried with him in baptism, wherein ye were also\n raised with him through faith in the working of God, who raised\n him from the dead._\u201d For the meaning of these passages, see note\n on the baptism of Jesus, under B. (_a_), pages 942, 943.\n\n Denney, in Expositor\u2019s Greek Testament, on _Rom. 6:3\u20105_\u2014\u201cThe\n argumentative requirements of the passage ... demand the idea of\n an actual union to, or incorporation in Christ.... We were buried\n with him [in the act of immersion] through that baptism into his\n death.... If the baptism, _which is a similitude of Christ\u2019s\n death_, has had a reality answering to its obvious import, so that\n we have really died in it as Christ died, then we shall have a\n corresponding experience of resurrection. Baptism, inasmuch as one\n emerges from the water after being immersed, is a similitude of\n resurrection as well as of death.\u201d\n\n\n(_b_) Of the purpose of that death and resurrection,\u2014namely, to atone for\nsin, and to deliver sinners from its penalty and power.\n\n\n _Rom. 6:4_\u2014\u201c_We were buried therefore with him through baptism\n into death: that like as Christ was raised from the dead through\n the glory of the Father, so we also might walk in newness of\n life_\u201d; _cf._ _7, 10, 11_\u2014\u201c_for he that hath died is justified\n from sin.... For the death that he died, he died unto sin once:\n but the life that he liveth, he liveth unto God. Even so reckon ye\n also yourselves to be dead unto sin, but alive unto God in Christ\n Jesus_\u201d; _2 Cor. 5:14_\u2014\u201c_we thus judge, that one died for all,\n therefore all died._\u201d Baptism is therefore a confession of\n evangelical faith both as to sin, and as to the deity and\n atonement of Christ. No one is properly a Baptist who does not\n acknowledge these truths which baptism signifies.\n\n T. W. Chambers, in Presb. and Ref. Rev., Jan. 1890:113\u2010118,\n objects that this view of the symbolism of baptism is based on two\n texts, _Rom. 6:4_ and _Col. 2:12_, which are illustrative and not\n explanatory, while the great majority of passages make baptism\n only an act of purification. Yet Dr. Chambers concedes: \u201cIt is to\n be admitted that nearly all modern critical expositors (Meyer,\n Godet, Alford, Conybeare, Lightfoot, Beet) consider that there is\n a reference here [in _Rom. 6:4_] to the act of baptism, which, as\n the Bishop of Durham says, \u2018is the grave of the old man and the\n birth of the new\u2014an image of the believer\u2019s participation both in\n the death and in the resurrection of Christ.... As he sinks\n beneath the baptismal waters, the believer buries there all his\n corrupt affections and past sins; as he emerges thence, he rises\n regenerate, quickened to new hopes and a new life.\u2019 \u201d\n\n\n(_c_) Of the accomplishment of that purpose in the person baptized,\u2014who\nthus professes his death to sin and resurrection to spiritual life.\n\n\n _Gal. 3:27_\u2014\u201c_For as many of you as were baptized into Christ did\n put on Christ_\u201d; _1 Pet. 3:21_\u2014\u201c_which_ [water] _also after a true\n likeness doth now save you, even baptism, not the putting away of\n the filth of the flesh, but the interrogation of a good conscience\n toward God, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ_\u201d; _cf._\n _Gal. 2:19, 20_\u2014\u201c_For I through the law died unto the law, that I\n might live unto God. I have been crucified with Christ; and it is\n no longer I that live, but Christ liveth in me: and that life\n which I now live in the flesh I live in faith, the faith which is\n in the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself up for me_\u201d;\n _Col. 3:3_\u2014\u201c_For ye died, and your life is hid with Christ in\n God._\u201d\n\n C. H. M.: \u201cA truly baptized person is one who has passed from the\n old world into the new.... The water rolls over his person,\n signifying that his place in nature is ignored, that his old\n nature is entirely set aside, in short, that he is a dead man,\n that the flesh with all that pertained thereto\u2014its sins and its\n liabilities\u2014is buried in the grave of Christ and can never come\n into God\u2019s sight again.... When the believer rises up from the\n water, expression is given to the truth that he comes up as the\n possessor of a new life, even the resurrection life of Christ, to\n which divine righteousness inseparably attaches.\u201d\n\n\n(_d_) Of the method in which that purpose is accomplished,\u2014by union with\nChrist, receiving him and giving one\u2019s self to him by faith.\n\n\n _Rom. 6:5_\u2014\u201c_For if we have become united_ [\u03c3\u03cd\u03bc\u03c6\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9] _with him in\n the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his\n resurrection_\u201d\u2014\u03c3\u03cd\u03bc\u03c6\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9, or \u03c3\u03c5\u03bc\u03c0\u03b5\u03c6\u03c5\u03ba\u03ce\u03c2, is used of the man and the\n horse as grown together in the Centaur, by Lucian, Dial. Mort.,\n 16:4, and by Xenophon, Cyrop., 4:3:18. _Col. 2:12_\u2014\u201c_having been\n buried with him in baptism, wherein ye were also raised with him\n through faith in the working of God, who raised him from the\n dead._\u201d Dr. N. S. Burton: \u201cThe oneness of the believer and Christ\n is expressed by the fact that the one act of immersion sets forth\n the death and resurrection of both Christ and the believer.\u201d As\n the voluntary element in faith has two parts, a giving and a\n taking, so baptism illustrates both. Submergence = surrender to\n Christ; emergence = reception of Christ; see page 839, (_b_).\n \u201c_Putting on Christ_\u201d (_Gal. 3:27_) is the burying of the old life\n and the rising to a new. _Cf._ the active and the passive\n obedience of Christ (pages 749, 770), the two elements of\n justification (pages 854\u2010859), the two aspects of formal worship\n (page 23), the two divisions of the Lord\u2019s Prayer.\n\n William Ashmore holds that incorporation into Christ is the root\n idea of baptism, union with Christ\u2019s death and resurrection being\n only a part of it. We are \u201c_baptized into Christ_\u201d (_Rom. 6:3_),\n as the Israelites were \u201c_baptized into Moses_\u201d (_1 Cor. 10:2_). As\n baptism symbolizes the incorporation of the believer into Christ,\n so the Lord\u2019s Supper symbolizes the incorporation of Christ into\n the believer. We go down into the water, but the bread goes down\n into us. We are \u201c_in Christ_,\u201d and Christ is \u201c_in us_.\u201d The\n candidate does not baptize himself, but puts himself wholly into\n the hands of the administrator. This seems symbolic of his\n committing himself entirely to Christ, of whom the administrator\n is the representative. Similarly in the Lord\u2019s Supper, it is\n Christ who through his representative distributes the emblems of\n his death and life.\n\n E. G. Robinson regarded baptism as implying: 1. death to sin; 2.\n resurrection to new life in Christ; 3. entire surrender of\n ourselves to the authority of the triune God. Baptism \u201c_into the\n name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit_\u201d (_Mat\n 28:19_) cannot imply supreme allegiance to the Father, and only\n subordinate allegiance to the Son. Baptism therefore is an\n assumption of supreme allegiance to Jesus Christ. N. E. Wood, in\n The Watchman, Dec. 3, 1896, 15\u2014\u201cCalvinism has its five points; but\n Baptists have also their own five points: the Trinity, the\n Atonement, Regeneration, Baptism, and an inspired Bible. All other\n doctrines gather round these.\u201d\n\n\n(_e_) Of the consequent union of all believers in Christ.\n\n\n _Eph. 4:5_\u2014\u201c_one Lord, one faith, one baptism_\u201d; _1 Cor.\n 12:13_\u2014\u201c_For in one Spirit were we all baptized into one body,\n whether Jews or Greeks, whether bond or free; and were all made to\n drink of one Spirit_\u201d; _cf._ _10:3, 4_\u2014\u201c_and did all eat the same\n spiritual food; and did all drink the same spiritual drink: for\n they drank of a spiritual rock that followed them: and the rock\n was Christ._\u201d\n\n In _Eph. 4:5_, it is noticeable that, not the Lord\u2019s Supper, but\n baptism, is referred to as the symbol of Christian unity. A. H.\n Strong, Cleveland Sermon, 1904\u2014\u201cOur fathers lived in a day when\n simple faith was subject to serious disabilities. The\n establishments frowned upon dissent and visited it with pains and\n penalties. It is no wonder that believers in the New Testament\n doctrine and polity felt that they must come out from what they\n regarded as an apostate church. They could have no sympathy with\n those who held back the truth in unrighteousness and persecuted\n the saints of God. But our doctrine has leavened all Christendom.\n Scholarship is on the side of immersion. Infant baptism is on the\n decline. The churches that once opposed us now compliment us on\n our stedfastness in the faith and on our missionary zeal. There is\n a growing spirituality in these churches, which prompts them to\n extend to us hands of fellowship. And there is a growing sense\n among us that the kingdom of Christ is wider than our own\n membership, and that loyalty to our Lord requires us to recognize\n his presence and blessing even in bodies which we do not regard as\n organized in complete accordance with the New Testament model.\n Faith in the larger Christ is bringing us out from our\n denominational isolation into an inspiring recognition of our\n oneness with the universal church of God throughout the world.\u201d\n\n\n(_f_) Of the death and resurrection of the body,\u2014which will complete the\nwork of Christ in us, and which Christ\u2019s death and resurrection assure to\nall his members.\n\n\n _1 Cor. 15:12, 22_\u2014\u201c_Now if Christ is preached that he hath been\n raised from the dead, how say some among you that there is no\n resurrection of the dead?... For as in Adam all die, so also in\n Christ shall all be made alive._\u201d In the Scripture passages quoted\n above, we add to the argument from the meaning of the word \u03b2\u03b1\u03c0\u03c4\u03af\u03b6\u03c9\n the argument from the meaning of the ordinance. Luther wrote, in\n his Babylonish Captivity of the Church, section 103 (English\n translation in Wace and Buchheim, First Principles of the\n Reformation, 192): \u201cBaptism is a sign both of death and\n resurrection. Being moved by this reason, I would have those that\n are baptized to be altogether dipped into the water, as the word\n means and the mystery signifies.\u201d See Calvin on _Acts 8:38_;\n Conybeare and Howson on _Rom. 6:4_; Boardman, in Madison Avenue\n Lectures, 115\u2010135.\n\n\nB. Inferences from the passages referred to.\n\n\n(_a_) The central truth set forth by baptism is the death and resurrection\nof Christ,\u2014and our own death and resurrection only as connected with that.\n\n\n The baptism of Jesus in Jordan, equally with the subsequent\n baptism of his followers, was a symbol of his death. It was his\n death which he had in mind, when he said: \u201c_Are ye able to drink\n the cup that I drink? or to be baptized with the baptism that I am\n baptized with?_\u201d (_Mark 10:38_); \u201c_But I have a baptism to be\n baptized with; and how am I straitened till it be accomplished!_\u201d\n (_Luke 12:50_). The being immersed and overwhelmed in waters is a\n frequent metaphor in all languages to express the rush of\n successive troubles; compare _Ps. 69:2_\u2014\u201c_I am come into deep\n waters, where the floods overflow me_\u201d; _42:7_\u2014\u201c_All thy waves and\n thy billows are gone over me_\u201d; _124:4, 5_\u2014\u201c_Then the waters had\n overwhelmed us, The stream had gone over our soul; Then the proud\n waters had gone over our soul._\u201d\n\n So the suffering, death, and burial, which were before our Lord,\n presented themselves to his mind as a baptism, because the very\n idea of baptism was that of a complete submersion under the floods\n of waters. Death was not to be poured upon Christ,\u2014it was no mere\n sprinkling of suffering which he was to endure, but a sinking into\n the mighty waters, and a being overwhelmed by them. It was the\n giving of himself to this, which he symbolized by his baptism in\n Jordan. That act was not arbitrary, or formal, or ritual. It was a\n public consecration, a consecration to death, to death for the\n sins of the world. It expressed the essential nature and meaning\n of his earthly work: the baptism of water at the beginning of his\n ministry consciously and designedly prefigured the baptism of\n death with which that ministry was to close.\n\n Jesus\u2019 submission to John\u2019s baptism of repentance, the rite that\n belonged only to sinners, can be explained only upon the ground\n that he was \u201c_made to be sin on our behalf_\u201d (_2 Cor. 5:21_). He\n had taken our nature upon him, without its hereditary corruption\n indeed, but with all its hereditary guilt, that he might redeem\n that nature and reunite it to God. As one with humanity, he had in\n his unconscious childhood submitted to the rites of circumcision,\n purification, and legal redemption (_Luke 2:21\u201024_; _cf._ _Ex.\n 13:2, 13_; see Lange, Alford, Webster and Wilkinson on _Luke\n 2:24_)\u2014all of them rites appointed for sinners. \u201c_Made in the\n likeness of men_\u201d (_Phil. 2:7_), \u201c_the likeness of sinful flesh_\u201d\n (_Rom. 8:3_), he was \u201c_to put away sin by the sacrifice of\n himself_\u201d (_Heb. 9:26_).\n\n In his baptism, therefore, he could say, \u201c_Thus it becometh us to\n fulfil all righteousness_\u201d (_Mat. 3:15_) because only through the\n final baptism of suffering and death, which this baptism in water\n foreshadowed, could he \u201c_make an end of sins_\u201d and \u201c_bring in\n everlasting righteousness_\u201d (_Dan. 9:24_) to the condemned and\n ruined world. He could not be \u201c_the Lord our Righteousness_\u201d\n (_Jer. 23:6_) except by first suffering the death due to the\n nature he had assumed, thereby delivering it from its guilt and\n perfecting it forever. All this was indicated in that act by which\n he was first \u201c_made manifest to Israel_\u201d (_John 1:31_). In his\n baptism in Jordan, he was buried in the likeness of his coming\n death, and raised in the likeness of his coming resurrection. _1\n John 5:6_\u2014\u201c_This is he that came by water and blood, even Jesus\n Christ; not in the water only, but in the water and in the blood_\u201d\n = in the baptism of water at the beginning of his ministry, and in\n the baptism of blood with which that ministry was to close.\n\n As that baptism pointed forward to Jesus\u2019 death, so our baptism\n points backward to the same, as the centre and substance of his\n redeeming work, the one death by which we live. We who are\n \u201c_baptized into Christ_\u201d are \u201c_baptized into his death_\u201d (_Rom.\n 6:3_), that is, into spiritual communion and participation in that\n death which he died for our salvation; in short, in baptism we\n declare in symbol that his death has become ours. On the Baptism\n of Jesus, see A. H. Strong, Philosophy and Religion, 226\u2010237.\n\n\n(_b_) The correlative truth of the believer\u2019s death and resurrection, set\nforth in baptism, implies, first,\u2014confession of sin and humiliation on\naccount of it, as deserving of death; secondly,\u2014declaration of Christ\u2019s\ndeath for sin, and of the believer\u2019s acceptance of Christ\u2019s\nsubstitutionary work; thirdly,\u2014acknowledgment that the soul has become\npartaker of Christ\u2019s life, and now lives only in and for him.\n\n\n A false mode of administering the ordinance has so obscured the\n meaning of baptism that it has to multitudes lost all reference to\n the death of Christ, and the Lord\u2019s Supper is assumed to be the\n only ordinance which is intended to remind us of the atoning\n sacrifice to which we owe our salvation. For evidence of this, see\n the remarks of President Woolsey in the Sunday School Times:\n \u201cBaptism it [the Christian religion] could share in with the\n doctrine of John the Baptist, and if a similar rite had existed\n under the Jewish law, it would have been regarded as appropriate\n to a religion which inculcated renunciation of sin and purity of\n heart and life. But [in the Lord\u2019s Supper] we go beyond the\n province of baptism to the very _penetrale_ of the gospel, to the\n efficacy and meaning of Christ\u2019s death.\u201d\n\n Baptism should be a public act. We cannot afford to relegate it to\n a corner, or to celebrate it in private, as some professedly\n Baptist churches of England are said to do. Like marriage, the\n essence of it is the joining of ourselves to another before the\n world. In baptism we merge ourselves in Christ, before God and\n angels and men. The Mohammedan stands five times a day, and prays\n with his face toward Mecca, caring not who sees him. _Luke\n 12:8_\u2014\u201c_Every one who shall confess me before men, him shall the\n Son of man also confess before the angels of God._\u201d\n\n\n(_c_) Baptism symbolizes purification, but purification in a peculiar and\ndivine way,\u2014namely, through the death of Christ and the entrance of the\nsoul into communion with that death. The radical defect of sprinkling or\npouring as a mode of administering the ordinance, is that it does not\npoint to Christ\u2019s death as the procuring cause of our purification.\n\n\n It is a grievous thing to say by symbol, as those do say who\n practice sprinkling in place of immersion, that a man may\n regenerate himself, or, if not this, yet that his regeneration may\n take place without connection with Christ\u2019s death. Edward\n Beecher\u2019s chief argument against Baptist views is drawn from _John\n 3:22\u201025_\u2014\u201c_a questioning on the part of John\u2019s disciples with a\n Jew about purifying._\u201d Purification is made to be the essential\n meaning of baptism, and the conclusion is drawn that any form\n expressive of purification will answer the design of the\n ordinance. But if Christ\u2019s death is the procuring cause of our\n purification, we may expect it to be symbolized in the ordinance\n which declares that purification; if Christ\u2019s death is the central\n fact of Christianity, we may expect it to be symbolized in the\n initiatory rite of Christianity.\n\n\n(_d_) In baptism we show forth the Lord\u2019s death as the original source of\nholiness and life in our souls, just as in the Lord\u2019s Supper we show forth\nthe Lord\u2019s death as the source of all nourishment and strength after this\nlife of holiness has been once begun. As the Lord\u2019s Supper symbolizes the\nsanctifying power of Jesus\u2019 death, so baptism symbolizes its regenerating\npower.\n\n\n The truth of Christ\u2019s death and resurrection is a precious jewel,\n and it is given us in these outward ordinances as in a casket. Let\n us care for the casket lest we lose the gem. As a scarlet thread\n runs through every rope and cord of the British navy, testifying\n that it is the property of the Crown, so through every doctrine\n and ordinance of Christianity runs the red line of Jesus\u2019 blood.\n It is their common reference to the death of Christ that binds the\n two ordinances together.\n\n\n(_e_) There are two reasons, therefore, why nothing but immersion will\nsatisfy the design of the ordinance: first,\u2014because nothing else can\nsymbolize the radical nature of the change effected in regeneration\u2014a\nchange from spiritual death to spiritual life; secondly,\u2014because nothing\nelse can set forth the fact that this change is due to the entrance of the\nsoul into communion with the death and resurrection of Christ.\n\n\n Christian truth is an organism. Part is bound to part, and all\n together constitute one vitalized whole. To give up any single\n portion of that truth is like maiming the human body. Life may\n remain, but one manifestation of life has ceased. The whole body\n of Christian truth has lost its symmetry and a part of its power\n to save.\n\n Pfleiderer, Philos. Religion, 2:212\u2014\u201cIn the Eleusinian mysteries,\n the act of reception was represented as a regeneration, and the\n hierophant appointed to the temple service had to take a\n sacramental bath, out of which he proceeded as a \u2018new man\u2019 with a\n new name, which signifies that, as they were wont to say, \u2018the\n first one was forgotten,\u2019\u2014that is, the old man was put off at the\n same time with the old name. The parallel of this Eleusinian rite\n with the thoughts which Paul has written about Baptism in the\n Epistle to the Romans, and therefore from Corinth, is so striking\n that a connection between the two may well be conjectured; and all\n the more that even in the case of the Lord\u2019s Supper, Paul has\n brought in the comparison with the heathen festivals, in order to\n give a basis for his mystical theory.\u201d\n\n\n(_f_) To substitute for baptism anything which excludes all symbolic\nreference to the death of Christ, is to destroy the ordinance, just as\nsubstituting for the broken bread and poured out wine of the communion\nsome form of administration which leaves out all reference to the death of\nChrist would be to destroy the Lord\u2019s Supper, and to celebrate an\nordinance of human invention.\n\n\n Baptism, like the Fourth of July, the Passover, the Lord\u2019s Supper,\n is a historical monument. It witnesses to the world that Jesus\n died and rose again. In celebrating it, we show forth the Lord\u2019s\n death as truly as in the celebration of the Supper. But it is more\n than a historical monument. It is also a pictorial expression of\n doctrine. Into it are woven all the essential truths of the\n Christian scheme. It tells of the nature and penalty of sin, of\n human nature delivered from sin in the person of a crucified and\n risen Savior, of salvation secured for each human soul that is\n united to Christ, of obedience to Christ as the way to life and\n glory. Thus baptism stands from age to age as a witness for God\u2014a\n witness both to the facts and to the doctrine of Christianity. To\n change the form of administering the ordinance is therefore to\n strike a blow at Christianity and at Christ, and to defraud the\n world of a part of God\u2019s means of salvation. See Ebrard\u2019s view of\n Baptism, in Baptist Quarterly, 1869:257, and in Olshausen\u2019s Com.\n on N. T., 1:270, and 3:594. Also Lightfoot, Com. on _Colossians\n 2:20_, and _3:1_.\n\n Ebrard: \u201cBaptism = Death.\u201d So Sanday, Com. on _Rom. 6_\u2014\u201cImmersion\n = Death; Submersion = Burial (the ratification of death);\n Emergence = Resurrection (the ratification of life).\u201d William\n Ashmore: \u201cSolomon\u2019s Temple had two monumental pillars: _Jachin_,\n \u2018he shall establish,\u2019 and _Boaz_, \u2018in it is strength.\u2019 In\n Zechariah\u2019s vision were two olive trees on either side of the\n golden candlestick. In like manner, Christ has left two monumental\n witnesses to testify concerning himself\u2014Baptism and the Lord\u2019s\n Supper.\u201d The lady in the street car, who had inadvertently stuck\n her parasol into a man\u2019s eye, very naturally begged his pardon.\n But he replied: \u201cIt is of no consequence, madame; I have still one\n eye left.\u201d Our friends who sprinkle or pour put out one eye of the\n gospel witness, break down one appointed monument of Christ\u2019s\n saving truth,\u2014shall we be content to say that we have still one\n ordinance left? At the Rappahannock one of the Federal regiments,\n just because its standard was shot away, was mistaken by our own\n men for a regiment of Confederates, and was subjected to a\n murderous enfilading fire that decimated its ranks. Baptism and\n the Lord\u2019s Supper are the two flags of Christ\u2019s army,\u2014we cannot\n afford to lose either one of them.\n\n\n4. The Subjects of Baptism.\n\n\nThe proper subjects of baptism are those only who give credible evidence\nthat they have been regenerated by the Holy Spirit,\u2014or, in other words,\nhave entered by faith into the communion of Christ\u2019s death and\nresurrection.\n\n\nA. Proof that only persons giving evidence of being regenerated are proper\nsubjects of baptism.\n\n\n(_a_) From the command and example of Christ and his apostles, which show:\n\nFirst, that those only are to be baptized who have previously been made\ndisciples.\n\n\n _Mat. 28:19_\u2014\u201c_Go ye therefore, and make disciples of all the\n nations, baptizing them into the name of the Father and of the Son\n and of the Holy Spirit_\u201d; _Acts 2:41_\u2014\u201c_They then that received\n his word were baptized._\u201d\n\n\nSecondly, that those only are to be baptized who have previously repented\nand believed.\n\n\n _Mat. 3:2, 3, 6_\u2014\u201c_Repent ye ... make ye ready the way of the Lord\n ... and they were baptized of him in the river Jordan, confessing\n their sins_\u201d; _Acts 2:37, 38_\u2014\u201c_Now when they heard this, they\n were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and the rest of\n the apostles, Brethren, what shall we do? And Peter said unto\n them, Repent ye, and be baptized every one of you_\u201d; _8:12_\u2014\u201c_But\n when they believed Philip preaching good tidings concerning the\n kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized,\n both men and women_\u201d; _18:8_\u2014\u201c_And Crispus, the ruler of the\n synagogue, believed in the Lord with all his house; and many of\n the Corinthians hearing believed, and were baptized_\u201d;\n _19:4_\u2014\u201c_John baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto\n the people that they should believe on him that should come after\n him, that is, on Jesus._\u201d\n\n\n(_b_) From the nature of the church\u2014as a company of regenerate persons.\n\n\n _John 3:5_\u2014\u201c_Except one be born of water and the Spirit, he cannot\n enter into the kingdom of God_\u201d; _Rom. 6:13_\u2014\u201c_neither present\n your members unto sin as instruments of unrighteousness; but\n present yourselves unto God, as alive from the dead, and your\n members as instruments of righteousness unto God._\u201d\n\n\n(_c_) From the symbolism of the ordinance,\u2014as declaring a previous\nspiritual change in him who submits to it.\n\n\n _Acts 10:47_\u2014\u201c_Can any man forbid the water, that these should not\n be baptized, who have received the Holy Spirit as well as we?_\u201d\n _Rom. 6:2\u20105_\u2014\u201c_We who died to sin, how shall we any longer live\n therein? Or are ye ignorant that all we who were baptized into\n Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were buried\n therefore with him through baptism into death: that like as Christ\n was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we\n also might walk in newness of life. For if we have become united\n with him in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the\n likeness of his resurrection_\u201d; _Gal. 3:26, 27_\u2014\u201c_For ye are all\n sons of God, through faith, in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as\n were baptized into Christ did put on Christ._\u201d\n\n As marriage should never be solemnized except between persons who\n are already joined in heart and with whom the outward ceremony is\n only the sign of an existing love, so baptism should never be\n administered except in the case of those who are already joined to\n Christ and who signify in the ordinance their union with him in\n his death and resurrection. See Dean Stanley on Baptism, 24\u2014\u201cIn\n the apostolic age and in the three centuries which followed, it is\n evident that, as a general rule, those who came to baptism came in\n full age, of their own deliberate choice. The liturgical service\n of baptism was framed for full\u2010grown converts, and is only by\n considerable adaptation applied to the case of infants\u201d; Wayland,\n Principles and Practices of Baptists, 93; Robins, in Madison\n Avenue Lectures, 136\u2010159.\n\n\nB. Inferences from the fact that only persons giving evidence of being\nregenerate are proper subjects of baptism.\n\n\n(_a_) Since only those who give credible evidence of regeneration are\nproper subjects of baptism, baptism cannot be the means of regeneration.\nIt is the appointed sign, but is never the condition, of the forgiveness\nof sins.\n\nPassages like Mat. 3:11; Mark 1:4; 16:16; John 3:5; Acts 2:38; 22:16; Eph.\n5:26; Titus 3:5; and Heb. 10:22, are to be explained as particular\ninstances \u201cof the general fact that, in Scripture language, a single part\nof a complex action, and even that part of it which is most obvious to the\nsenses, is often mentioned for the whole of it, and thus, in this case,\nthe whole of the solemn transaction is designated by the external symbol.\u201d\nIn other words, the entire change, internal and external, spiritual and\nritual, is referred to in language belonging strictly only to the outward\naspect of it. So the other ordinance is referred to by simply naming the\nvisible \u201cbreaking of bread,\u201d and the whole transaction of the ordination\nof ministers is termed the \u201cimposition of hands\u201d (_cf._ Acts 2:42; 1 Tim.\n4:14).\n\n\n _Mat. 3:11_\u2014\u201c_I indeed baptize you in water unto repentance_\u201d;\n _Mark 1:4_\u2014\u201c_the baptism of repentance unto remission of sins_\u201d;\n _16:16_\u2014\u201c_He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved_\u201d;\n _John 3:5_\u2014\u201c_Except one be born of water and the Spirit, he cannot\n enter into the kingdom of God_\u201d\u2014here Nicodemus, who was familiar\n with John\u2019s baptism, and with the refusal of the Sanhedrin to\n recognize its claims, is told that the baptism of water, which he\n suspects may be obligatory, is indeed necessary to that complete\n change by which one enters outwardly, as well as inwardly, into\n the kingdom of God; but he is taught also, that to \u201c_be born of\n water_\u201d is worthless unless it is the accompaniment and sign of a\n new birth of \u201c_the Spirit_\u201d; and therefore, in the further\n statements of Christ, baptism is not alluded to; see _verses 6,\n 8_\u2014\u201c_that which is born of the Spirit is spirit ... so is every\n one that is born of the Spirit._\u201d\n\n _Acts 2:38_\u2014\u201c_Repent ye, and be baptized ... unto the remission of\n your sins_\u201d\u2014on this passage see Hackett: \u201cThe phrase \u2018in order to\n the forgiveness of sins\u2019 we connect naturally with both the\n preceding verbs (\u2018_repent_\u2019 and \u2018_be baptized_\u2019). The clause\n states the motive or object which should induce them to repent and\n be baptized. It enforces the entire exhortation, not one part to\n the exclusion of the other\u201d\u2014_i. e._, they were to repent for the\n remission of sins, quite as much as they were to be baptized for\n the remission of sins. _Acts 22:16_\u2014\u201c_arise, and be baptized, and\n wash away thy sins, calling on his name_\u201d; _Eph. 5:26_\u2014\u201c_that he\n might sanctify it_ [the church], _having cleansed it by the\n washing of water with the word_\u201d; _Tit. 3:5_\u2014\u201c_according __ to his\n mercy he saved as, through the washing of regeneration_ [baptism]\n _and renewing of the Holy Spirit_ [the new birth]\u201d; _Heb.\n 10:22_\u2014\u201c_having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience_\n [regeneration]: _and having our body washed with pure water_\n [baptism]\u201d; _cf._ _Acts 2:42_\u2014\u201c_the breaking of bread_\u201d; _1 Tim.\n 4:14_\u2014\u201c_the laying on of the hands of the presbytery._\u201d\n\n Dr. A. C. Kendrick: \u201cConsidering how inseparable they were in the\n Christian profession\u2014believe and be baptized, and how imperative\n and absolute was the requisition upon the believer to testify his\n allegiance by baptism, it could not be deemed singular that the\n two should be thus united, as it were, in one complex\n conception.... We have no more right to assume that the birth from\n water involves the birth from the Spirit and thus do away with the\n one, than to assume that the birth from the Spirit involves the\n birth from water, and thus do away with the other. We have got to\n have them both, each in its distinctness, in order to fulfil the\n conditions of membership in the kingdom of God.\u201d Without baptism,\n faith is like the works of a clock that has no dial or hands by\n which one can tell the time; or like the political belief of a man\n who refuses to go to the polls and vote. Without baptism,\n discipleship is ineffective and incomplete. The inward\n change\u2014regeneration by the Spirit\u2014may have occurred, but the\n outward change\u2014Christian profession\u2014is yet lacking.\n\n Campbellism, however, holds that instead of regeneration preceding\n baptism and expressing itself in baptism, it is completed only in\n baptism, so that baptism is a means of regeneration. Alexander\n Campbell: \u201cI am bold to affirm that every one of them, who in the\n belief of what the apostle spoke was immersed, did, in the very\n instant in which he was put under water, receive the forgiveness\n of his sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit.\u201d But Peter commanded\n that men should be baptized because they had already received the\n Holy Spirit: _Acts 10:47_\u2014\u201c_Can any man forbid the water, that\n these should not be baptized, who have received the Holy Spirit as\n well as we?_\u201d Baptists baptize Christians; Disciples baptize\n sinners, and in baptism think to make them Christians. With this\n form of sacramentalism, Baptists are necessarily less in sympathy\n than with pedobaptism or with sprinkling. The view of the\n Disciples confines the divine efficiency to the word (see\n quotation from Campbell on page 821). It was anticipated by Claude\n Pajon, the Reformed theologian, in 1673: see Dorner, Gesch. prot.\n Theologie, 448\u2010450. That this was not the doctrine of John the\n Baptist would appear from Josephus, Ant., 18:5:2, who in speaking\n of John\u2019s baptism says: \u201cBaptism appears acceptable to God, not in\n order that those who were baptized might get free from certain\n sins, but in order that the body might be sanctified, because the\n soul beforehand had already been purified through righteousness.\u201d\n\n Disciples acknowledge no formal creed, and they differ so greatly\n among themselves that we append the following statements of their\n founder and of later representatives. Alexander Campbell,\n Christianity Restored, 138 (in The Christian Baptist, 5:100): \u201cIn\n and by the act of immersion, as soon as our bodies are put under\n water, at that very instant our former or old sins are washed\n away.... Immersion and regeneration are Bible names for the same\n act.... It is not our faith in God\u2019s promise of remission, but our\n going down into the water, that obtains the remission of sins.\u201d W.\n E. Garrison, Alexander Campbell\u2019s Theology, 247\u2010299\u2014\u201cBaptism, like\n naturalization, is the formal oath of allegiance by which an alien\n becomes a citizen. In neither case does the form in itself effect\n any magical change in the subject\u2019s disposition. In both cases a\n change of opinion and of affections is presupposed, and the form\n is the culmination of a process.... It is as easy for God to\n forgive our sins in the act of immersion as in any other way.\u201d All\n work of the Spirit is through the word, only through sensible\n means, emotions being no criterion. God is transcendent; all\n authority is external, enforced only by appeal to happiness\u2014a\n thoroughly utilitarian system.\n\n Isaac Erret is perhaps the most able of recent Disciples. In his\n tract entitled \u201cOur Position,\u201d published by the Christian\n Publishing Company, St. Louis, he says: \u201cAs to the _design_ of\n baptism, we part company with Baptists, and find ourselves more at\n home on the other side of the house; yet we cannot say that our\n position is just the same with that of any of them. Baptists say\n they baptize believers _because they are forgiven_, and they\n insist that they shall have the evidence of pardon before they are\n baptized. But the language used in the Scriptures declaring what\n baptism is for, is so plain and unequivocal that the great\n majority of Protestants as well as the Roman Catholics admit it in\n their creeds to be, in some sense, for the remission of sins. The\n latter, however, and many of the former, attach to it the idea of\n regeneration, and insist that in baptism regeneration by the Holy\n Spirit is actually conferred. Even the Westminster Confession\n squints strongly in this direction, albeit its professed adherents\n of the present time attempt to explain away its meaning. We are as\n far from this ritualistic extreme as from the anti\u2010ritualism into\n which the Baptists have been driven. With us, regeneration must be\n so far accomplished before baptism that the subject is changed in\n heart, and in faith and penitence must have yielded up his heart\n to Christ\u2014otherwise baptism is nothing but an empty form. But\n _forgiveness_ is something distinct from _regeneration_.\n Forgiveness is an act of the Sovereign\u2014not a change of the\n sinner\u2019s heart; and while it is extended in view of the sinner\u2019s\n faith and repentance, it needs to be offered in a sensible and\n tangible form, such that the sinner can seize it and appropriate\n it with unmistakable definiteness. In baptism he _appropriates\n God\u2019s promise of forgiveness_, relying on the divine testimonies:\n \u2018He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved\u2019; \u2018Repent and be\n baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ, for the\n remission of sins, and you shall receive the gift of the Holy\n Spirit.\u2019 He thus lays hold of the promise of Christ and\n appropriates it as his own. He does not _merit_ it, nor _procure_\n it, nor _earn_ it, in being baptized; but he _appropriates_ what\n the mercy of God has provided and offered in the gospel. We\n therefore teach all who are baptized that, if they bring to their\n baptism a heart that renounces sin and implicitly trusts the power\n of Christ to save, they should rely on the Savior\u2019s own\n promise\u2014\u2019He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved.\u2019\u201d\n\n All these utterances agree in making forgiveness chronologically\n distinct from regeneration, as the concluding point is distinct\n from the whole. Regeneration is not entirely the work of God,\u2014it\n must be completed by man. It is not wholly a change of heart, it\n is also a change in outward action. We see in this system of\n thought the beginnings of sacramentalism, and we regard it as\n containing the same germs of error which are more fully developed\n in pedobaptist doctrine. Shakespeare represents this view in Henry\n V, 1:2\u2014\u201cWhat you speak is in your conscience washed As pure as sin\n with baptism\u201d; Othello, 2:3\u2014Desdemona could \u201cWin the Moor\u2014were\u2019t\n to renounce his baptism\u2014All seals and symbols of redeemed sin.\u201d\n\n Dr. G. W. Lasher, in the Journal and Messenger, holds that _Mat.\n 3:11_\u2014\u201c_I indeed baptize you in water unto (\u03b5\u1f30\u03c2) repentance_\u201d\u2014does\n not imply that baptism effects the repentance; the baptism was\n _because_ of the repentance, for John refused to baptize those who\n did not give evidence of repentance before baptism. _Mat.\n 10:42_\u2014\u201c_whosoever shall give ... a cup of cold water only, in\n (\u03b5\u1f30\u03c2) the name of a disciple_\u201d\u2014the cup of cold water does not put\n one into the name of a disciple, or make him a disciple. _Mat.\n 12:41_\u2014\u201c_The men of Nineveh ... repented at (\u03b5\u1f30\u03c2) the preaching of\n Jonah_\u201d = because of. Dr. Lasher argues that, in all these cases,\n the meaning of \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 is \u201cin respect to,\u201d \u201cwith reference to.\u201d So he\n would translate _Acts 2:38_\u2014\u201c_Repent ye, and be baptized ... with\n respect to, in reference to, the remission of sins._\u201d This is also\n the view of Meyer. He maintains that \u03b2\u03b1\u03c0\u03c4\u03af\u03b6\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 always means\n \u201c_baptize with reference to_\u201d (_cf._ _Mat. 28:19; 1 Cor. 10:12;\n Gal. 3:27; Acts 2:38; 8:16; 19:5_). We are brought through\n baptism, he would say, into fellowship with his death, so that we\n have a share ethically in his death, through the cessation of our\n life to sin.\n\n The better parallel, however, in our judgment, is found in _Rom.\n 10:10_\u2014\u201c_with the heart man believeth unto (\u03b5\u1f30\u03c2) righteousness;\n and with the mouth confession is made unto (\u03b5\u1f30\u03c2)\n salvation,_\u201d\u2014where evidently salvation is the end _to_ which works\n the whole change and process, including both faith and confession.\n So Broadus makes John\u2019s \u201c_baptism unto repentance_\u201d mean baptism\n in order to repentance, repentance including both the purpose of\n the heart and the outward expression of it, or baptism in order to\n complete and thorough repentance. Expositor\u2019s Greek Testament, on\n _Acts 2:38_\u2014\u201c_unto the remission of your sins_\u201d: \u201c\u03b5\u1f30\u03c2, _unto_,\n signifying the aim.\u201d For the High Church view, see Sadler, Church\n Doctrine, 41\u2010124. On F. W. Robertson\u2019s view of Baptismal\n Regeneration, see Gordon, in Bap. Quar., 1869:405. On the whole\n matter of baptism for the remission of sins, see Gates, Baptists\n and Disciples (advocating the Disciple view); Willmarth, in Bap.\n Quar., 1877:1\u201026 (verging toward the Disciple view); and _per\n contra_, Adkins, Disciples and Baptists, booklet pub. by Am. Bap.\n Pub. Society (the best brief statement of the Baptist position);\n Bap. Quar., 1877:476\u2010489; 1872:214; Jacob, Eccl. Pol. of N. T.,\n 255, 256.\n\n\n(_b_) As the profession of a spiritual change already wrought, baptism is\nprimarily the act, not of the administrator, but of the person baptized.\n\nUpon the person newly regenerate the command of Christ first terminates;\nonly upon his giving evidence of the change within him does it become the\nduty of the church to see that he has opportunity to follow Christ in\nbaptism. Since baptism is primarily the act of the convert, no lack of\nqualification on the part of the administrator invalidates the baptism, so\nlong as the proper outward act is performed, with intent on the part of\nthe person baptized to express the fact of a preceding spiritual renewal\n(Acts 2:37, 38).\n\n\n _Acts 2:37, 38_\u2014\u201c_Brethren, what shall we do?... Repent ye and be\n baptized._\u201d If baptism be primarily the act of the administrator\n or of the church, then invalidity in the administrator or the\n church renders the ordinance itself invalid. But if baptism be\n primarily the act of the person baptized\u2014an act which it is the\n church\u2019s business simply to scrutinize and further, then nothing\n but the absence of immersion, or of an intent to profess faith in\n Christ, can invalidate the ordinance. It is the erroneous view\n that baptism is the act of the administrator which causes the\n anxiety of High Church Baptists to deduce their Baptist lineage\n from regularly baptized ministers all the way back to John the\n Baptist, and which induces many modern endeavors of pedobaptists\n to prove that the earliest Baptists of England and the Continent\n did not immerse. All these solicitudes are unnecessary. We have no\n need to prove a Baptist apostolic succession. If we can derive our\n doctrine and practice from the New Testament, it is all we\n require.\n\n The Council of Trent was right in its Canon: \u201cIf any one saith\n that the baptism which is even given by heretics in the name of\n the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost, with the\n intention of doing what the church doeth, is not true baptism, let\n him be anathema.\u201d Dr. Norman Fox: \u201cIt is no more important who\n baptizes a man than who leads him to Christ.\u201d John Spilsbury,\n first pastor of the church of Particular Baptists, holding to a\n limited atonement, in London, was newly baptized in 1633, on the\n ground that \u201cbaptizedness is not essential to the administrator,\u201d\n and he repudiated the demand for apostolic succession, as leading\n logically to the \u201cpopedom of Rome.\u201d In 1641, immersion followed,\n though two or three years before this, or in March, 1639, Roger\n Williams was baptized by Ezekiel Holliman in Rhode Island.\n Williams afterwards doubted its validity, thus clinging still to\n the notion of apostolic succession.\n\n\n(_c_) As intrusted with the administration of the ordinances, however, the\nchurch is, on its part, to require of all candidates for baptism credible\nevidence of regeneration.\n\nThis follows from the nature of the church and its duty to maintain its\nown existence as an institution of Christ. The church which cannot\nrestrict admission into its membership to such as are like itself in\ncharacter and aims must soon cease to be a church by becoming\nindistinguishable from the world. The duty of the church to gain credible\nevidence of regeneration in the case of every person admitted into the\nbody involves its right to require of candidates, in addition to a\nprofession of faith with the lips, some satisfactory proof that this\nprofession is accompanied by change in the conduct. The kind and amount of\nevidence which would have justified the reception of a candidate in times\nof persecution may not now constitute a sufficient proof of change of\nheart.\n\n\n If an Odd Fellows\u2019 Lodge, in order to preserve its distinct\n existence, must have its own rules for admission to membership,\n much more is this true of the church. The church may make its own\n regulations with a view to secure credible evidence of\n regeneration. Yet it is bound to demand of the candidate no more\n than reasonable proof of his repentance and faith. Since the\n church is to be convinced of the candidate\u2019s fitness before it\n votes to receive him to its membership, it is generally best that\n the experience of the candidate should be related before the\n church. Yet in extreme cases, as of sickness, the church may hear\n this relation of experience through certain appointed\n representatives.\n\n Baptism is sometimes figuratively described as \u201cthe door into the\n church.\u201d The phrase is unfortunate, since if by the church is\n meant the spiritual kingdom of God, then Christ is its only door;\n if the local body of believers is meant, then the faith of the\n candidate, the credible evidence of regeneration which he gives,\n the vote of the church itself, are all, equally with baptism, the\n door through which he enters. The door, in this sense, is a double\n door, one part of which is his confession of faith, and the other\n his baptism.\n\n\n(_d_) As the outward expression of the inward change by which the believer\nenters into the kingdom of God, baptism is the first, in point of time, of\nall outward duties.\n\nRegeneration and baptism, although not holding to each other the relation\nof effect and cause, are both regarded in the New Testament as essential\nto the restoration of man\u2019s right relations to God and to his people. They\nproperly constitute parts of one whole, and are not to be unnecessarily\nseparated. Baptism should follow regeneration with the least possible\ndelay, after the candidate and the church have gained evidence that a\nspiritual change has been accomplished within him. No other duty and no\nother ordinance can properly precede it.\n\n\n Neither the pastor nor the church should encourage the convert to\n wait for others\u2019 company before being baptized. We should aim\n continually to deepen the sense of individual responsibility to\n Christ, and of personal duty to obey his command of baptism just\n so soon as a proper opportunity is afforded. That participation in\n the Lord\u2019s Supper cannot properly precede Baptism, will be shown\n hereafter.\n\n\n(_e_) Since regeneration is a work accomplished once for all, the baptism\nwhich symbolizes this regeneration is not to be repeated.\n\nEven where the persuasion exists, on the part of the candidate, that at\nthe time of baptism he was mistaken in thinking himself regenerated, the\nordinance is not to be administered again, so long as it has once been\nsubmitted to, with honest intent, as a profession of faith in Christ. We\nargue this from the absence of any reference to second baptisms in the New\nTestament, and from the grave practical difficulties attending the\nopposite view. In Acts 19:1\u20105, we have an instance, not of rebaptism, but\nof the baptism for the first time of certain persons who had been wrongly\ntaught with regard to the nature of John the Baptist\u2019s doctrine, and so\nhad ignorantly submitted to an outward rite which had in it no reference\nto Jesus Christ and expressed no faith in him as a Savior. This was not\nJohn\u2019s baptism, nor was it in any sense true baptism. For this reason Paul\ncommanded them to be \u201cbaptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.\u201d\n\n\n In the respect of not being repeated, Baptism is unlike the Lord\u2019s\n Supper, which symbolizes the continuous sustaining power of\n Christ\u2019s death, while baptism symbolizes its power to begin a new\n life within the soul. In _Acts 19:1\u20105_, Paul instructs the new\n disciples that the real baptism of John, to which they erroneously\n supposed they had submitted, was not only a baptism of repentance,\n but a baptism of faith in the coming Savior. \u201c_And when they heard\n this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus_\u201d\u2014as they\n had not been before. Here there was no rebaptism, for the mere\n outward submersion in water to which they had previously\n submitted, with no thought of professing faith in Christ, was no\n baptism at all\u2014whether Johannine or Christian. See Brooks, in\n Baptist Quarterly, April, 1867, art.: Rebaptism.\n\n Whenever it is clear, as in many cases of Campbellite immersion,\n that the candidate has gone down into the water, not with intent\n to profess a previously existing faith, but in order to be\n regenerated, baptism is still to be administered if the person\n subsequently believes on Christ. But wherever it appears that\n there was intent to profess an already existing faith and\n regeneration, there should be no repetition of the immersion, even\n though the ordinance has been administered by the Campbellites.\n\n To rebaptize whenever a Christian\u2019s faith and joy are rekindled so\n that he begins to doubt the reality of his early experiences,\n would, in the case of many fickle believers, require many\n repetitions of the ordinance. The presumption is that, when the\n profession of faith was made by baptism, there was an actual faith\n which needed to be professed, and therefore that the baptism,\n though followed by much unbelief and many wanderings, was a valid\n one. Rebaptism, in the case of unstable Christians, tends to bring\n reproach upon the ordinance itself.\n\n\n(_f_) So long as the mode and the subjects are such as Christ has\nenjoined, mere accessories are matters of individual judgment.\n\nThe use of natural rather than of artificial baptisteries is not to be\nelevated into an essential. The formula of baptism prescribed by Christ is\n\u201cinto the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.\u201d\n\n\n _Mat. 28:19_\u2014\u201c_baptizing them into the name of the Father and of\n the Son and of the Holy Spirit_\u201d; _cf._ _Acts 8:16_\u2014\u201c_they had\n been baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus_\u201d; _Rom. 6:3_\u2014\u201c_Or\n are ye ignorant that all we who were baptized into Christ Jesus\n were baptized into his death?_\u201d _Gal. 3:27_\u2014\u201c_For as many of you\n as were baptized into Christ did put on Christ._\u201d Baptism is\n immersion into God, into the presence, communion, life of the\n Trinity; see Com. of Clark, and of Lange, on _Mat. 28:19_; also C.\n E. Smith, in Bap. Rev., 1881:305\u2010311. President Wayland and the\n Revised Version read, \u201c_into the name_.\u201d _Per contra_, see Meyer\n (transl., 1:281, note) on _Rom. 6:3;_ _cf._ _Mat. 10:41; 18:20_;\n in all which passages, as well as in _Mat. 28:19_, he claims that\n \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f78 \u1f44\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03b1 signifies \u201cwith reference to the name.\u201d In _Acts\n 2:38_, and _10:48_, we have \u201c_in the name_.\u201d For the latter\n translation of _Mat. 28:19_, see Conant, Notes on Mat., 171. On\n the whole subject of this section, see Dagg, Church Order, 13\u201073;\n Ingham, Subjects of Baptism.\n\n\nC. Infant Baptism.\n\n\nThis we reject and reprehend, for the following reasons:\n\n\n(a) Infant baptism is without warrant, either express or implied, in the\nScripture.\n\n\nFirst,\u2014there is no express command that infants should be baptized.\nSecondly,\u2014there is no clear example of the baptism of infants.\nThirdly,\u2014the passages held to imply infant baptism contain, when fairly\ninterpreted, no reference to such a practice. In Mat. 19:14, none would\nhave \u201cforbidden,\u201d if Jesus and his disciples had been in the habit of\nbaptizing infants. From Acts 16:15, _cf._ 40, and Acts 16:33, _cf._ 34,\nNeander says that we cannot infer infant baptism. For 1 Cor. 16:15 shows\nthat the whole family of Stephanas, baptized by Paul, were adults (1 Cor.\n1:16). It is impossible to suppose a whole heathen household baptized upon\nthe faith of its head. As to 1 Cor. 7:14, Jacobi calls this text \u201ca sure\ntestimony against infant baptism, since Paul would certainly have referred\nto the baptism of children as a proof of their holiness, if infant baptism\nhad been practised.\u201d Moreover, this passage would in that case equally\nteach the baptism of the unconverted husband of a believing wife. It\nplainly proves that the children of Christian parents were no more\nbaptized and had no closer connection with the Christian church, than the\nunbelieving partners of Christians.\n\n\n _Mat. 19:14_\u2014\u201c_Suffer the little children, and forbid them not, to\n come unto me: for to such belongeth the kingdom of heaven_\u201d; _Acts\n 16:15_\u2014\u201c_And when she_ [Lydia] _was baptized, and her household_\u201d;\n _cf._ _40_\u2014\u201c_And they went out of the prison, and entered into the\n house of Lydia: and when they had seen the brethren, they\n comforted them, and departed._\u201d _Acts 16:33_\u2014The jailor \u201c_was\n baptized, he and all his, immediately_\u201d; _cf._ _34_\u2014\u201c_And he\n brought them up into his house, and set food before them, and\n rejoiced greatly, with all his house, having believed in God_\u201d; _1\n Cor. 16:15_\u2014\u201c_ye know the house of Stephanas, that it is the\n firstfruits of Achaia, and that they have set themselves to\n minister unto the saints_\u201d; _1:16_\u2014\u201c_And I baptized also the\n household of Stephanas_\u201d; _7:14_\u2014\u201c_For the unbelieving husband is\n sanctified in the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified in\n the brother: else were your children unclean; but now are they\n holy_\u201d\u2014here the sanctity or holiness attributed to unbelieving\n members of the household is evidently that of external connection\n and privilege, like that of the O. T. Israel.\n\n Broadus, Am. Com., on _Mat. 19:14_\u2014\u201cNo Greek Commentator mentions\n infant baptism in connection with this passage, though they all\n practised that rite.\u201d Schleiermacher, Glaubenslehre, 2:383\u2014\u201cAll\n the traces of infant baptism which it has been desired to find in\n the New Testament must first be put into it.\u201d Pfleiderer,\n Grundriss, 184\u2010187\u2014\u201cInfant baptism cannot be proved from the N.\n T., and according to _1 Cor. 7:14_ it is antecedently improbable;\n yet it was the logical consequence of the command, _Mat. 28:19_\n _sq._, in which the church consciousness of the 2d century\n prophetically expressed Christ\u2019s appointment that it should be the\n universal church of the nations.... Infant baptism represents one\n side of the Biblical sacrament, the side of the divine grace; but\n it needs to have the other side, appropriation of that grace by\n personal freedom, added in confirmation.\u201d\n\n Dr. A. S. Crapsey, formerly an Episcopal rector in Rochester, made\n the following statement in the introduction to a sermon in defence\n of infant baptism: \u201cNow in support of this custom of the church,\n we can bring no express command of the word of God, no certain\n warrant of holy Scripture, nor can we be at all sure that this\n usage prevailed during the apostolic age. From a few obscure hints\n we may conjecture that it did, but it is only conjecture after\n all. It is true St. Paul baptized the household of Stephanas, of\n Lydia, and of the jailor at Philippi, and in these households\n there may have been little children; but we do not know that there\n were, and these inferences form but a poor foundation upon which\n to base any doctrine. Better say at once, and boldly, that infant\n baptism is not expressly taught in holy Scripture. Not only is the\n word of God silent on this subject, but those who have studied the\n subject tell us that Christian writers of the very first age say\n nothing about it. It is by no means sure that this custom obtained\n in the church earlier than in the middle of the second or the\n beginning of the third century.\u201d Dr. C. M. Mead, in a private\n letter, dated May 27, 1895\u2014\u201cThough a Congregationalist, I cannot\n find any Scriptural authorization of pedobaptism, and I admit also\n that immersion seems to have been the prevalent, if not the\n universal, form of baptism at the first.\u201d\n\n A review of the passages held by pedobaptists to support their\n views leads us to the conclusion expressed in the North British\n Review, Aug. 1852:211, that infant baptism is utterly unknown to\n Scripture. Jacob, Eccl. Polity of N. T., 270\u2010275\u2014\u201cInfant baptism\n is not mentioned in the N. T. No instance of it is recorded there;\n no allusion is made to its effects; no directions are given for\n its administration.... It is not an apostolic ordinance.\u201d See also\n Neander\u2019s view, in Kitto, Bib. Cyclop., art.: Baptism; Kendrick,\n in Christian Rev., April, 1863; Curtis, Progress of Baptist\n Principles, 96; Wayland, Principles and Practices of Baptists,\n 125; Cunningham, lect. on Baptism, in Croall Lectures for 1886.\n\n\n(b) Infant baptism is expressly contradicted.\n\n\nFirst,\u2014by the Scriptural prerequisites of faith and repentance, as signs\nof regeneration. In the great commission, Matthew speaks of baptizing\ndisciples, and Mark of baptizing believers; but infants are neither of\nthese. Secondly,\u2014by the Scriptural symbolism of the ordinance. As we\nshould not bury a person before his death, so we should not symbolically\nbury a person by baptism until he has in spirit died to sin. Thirdly,\u2014by\nthe Scriptural constitution of the church. The church is a company of\npersons whose union with one another presupposes and expresses a previous\nconscious and voluntary union of each with Jesus Christ. But of this\nconscious and voluntary union with Christ infants are not capable.\nFourthly,\u2014by the Scriptural prerequisites for participation in the Lord\u2019s\nSupper. Participation in the Lord\u2019s Supper is the right only of those who\ncan discern the Lord\u2019s body (1 Cor. 11:29). No reason can be assigned for\nrestricting to intelligent communicants the ordinance of the Supper, which\nwould not equally restrict to intelligent believers the ordinance of\nBaptism.\n\n\n Infant baptism has accordingly led in the Greek church to infant\n communion. This course seems logically consistent. If baptism is\n administered to unconscious babes, they should participate in the\n Lord\u2019s Supper also. But if confirmation or any intelligent\n profession of faith is thought necessary before communion, why\n should not such confirmation or profession be thought necessary\n before baptism? On Jonathan Edwards and the Halfway Covenant, see\n New Englander, Sept. 1884:601\u2010614; G. L. Walker, Aspects of\n Religious Life of New England, 61\u201082; Dexter, Congregationalism,\n 487, note\u2014\u201cIt has been often intimated that President Edwards\n opposed and destroyed the Halfway Covenant. He did oppose\n Stoddardism, or the doctrine that the Lord\u2019s Supper is a\n converting ordinance, and that unconverted men, because they are\n such, should be encouraged to partake of it.\u201d The tendency of his\n system was adverse to it; but, for all that appears in his\n published writings, he could have approved and administered that\n form of the Halfway Covenant then current among the churches. John\n Fiske says of Jonathan Edwards\u2019s preaching: \u201cThe prominence he\n gave to spiritual conversion, or what was called \u2018change of\n heart,\u2019 brought about the overthrow of the doctrine of the Halfway\n Covenant. It also weakened the logical basis of infant baptism,\n and led to the winning of hosts of converts by the Baptists.\u201d\n\n Other pedobaptist bodies than the Greek Church save part of the\n truth, at the expense of consistency, by denying participation in\n the Lord\u2019s Supper to those baptized in infancy until they have\n reached years of understanding and have made a public profession\n of faith. Dr. Charles E. Jefferson, at the International\n Congregational Council of Boston, September, 1899, urged that the\n children of believers are already church members, and that as such\n they are entitled, not only to baptism, but also to the Lord\u2019s\n Supper\u2014\u201can assertion that started much thought\u201d! Baptists may well\n commend Congregationalists to the teaching of their own Increase\n Mather, The Order of the Gospel (1700), 11\u2014\u201cThe Congregational\n Church discipline is not suited for a worldly interest or for a\n formal generation of professors. It will stand or fall as\n godliness in the power of it does prevail, or otherwise.... If the\n begun Apostacy should proceed as fast the next thirty years as it\n has done these last, surely it will come that in New England\n (except the gospel itself depart with the order of it) that the\n most conscientious people therein will think themselves concerned\n _to gather churches out of churches_.\u201d\n\n How much of Judaistic externalism may linger among nominal\n Christians is shown by the fact that in the Armenian Church animal\n sacrifices survived, or were permitted to converted heathen\n priests, in order they might not lose their livelihood. These\n sacrifices continued in other regions of Christendom, particularly\n in the Greek church, and Pope Gregory the Great permitted them;\n see Conybeare, in Am. Jour. Theology, Jan. 1893:62\u201090. In The Key\n of Truth, a manual of the Paulician Church of Armenia, whose date\n in its present form is between the seventh and the ninth\n centuries, we have the Adoptianist view of Christ\u2019s person, and of\n the subjects and the mode of baptism: \u201cThus also the Lord, having\n learned from the Father, proceeded to teach us to perform baptism\n and all other commandments at the age of full growth and at no\n other time.... For some have broken and destroyed the holy and\n precious canons which by the Father Almighty were delivered to our\n Lord Jesus Christ, and have trodden them underfoot with their\n devilish teaching, ... baptizing those who are irrational, and\n communicating the unbelieving.\u201d\n\n Minority is legally divided into three septennates: 1. From the\n first to the seventh year, the age of complete irresponsibility,\n in which the child cannot commit a crime; 2. from the seventh to\n the fourteenth year, the age of partial responsibility, in which\n intelligent consciousness of the consequences of actions is not\n assumed to exist, but may be proved in individual instances; 3.\n from the fourteenth to the twenty\u2010first year, the age of\n discretion, in which the person is responsible for criminal\n action, may choose a guardian, make a will, marry with consent of\n parents, make business contracts not wholly void, but is not yet\n permitted fully to assume the free man\u2019s position in the State.\n The church however is not bound by these hard and fast rules.\n Wherever it has evidence of conversion and of Christian character,\n it may admit to baptism and church membership, even at a very\n tender age.\n\n\n(c) The rise of infant baptism in the history of the church.\n\n\nThe rise of infant baptism in the history of the church is due to\nsacramental conceptions of Christianity, so that all arguments in its\nfavor from the writings of the first three centuries are equally arguments\nfor baptismal regeneration.\n\n\n Neander\u2019s view may be found in Kitto, Cyclop\u00e6dia, 1:287\u2014\u201cInfant\n baptism was established neither by Christ nor by his apostles.\n Even in later times Tertullian opposed it, the North African\n church holding to the old practice.\u201d The newly discovered Teaching\n of the Apostles, which Bryennios puts at 140\u2010160 A.D., and\n Lightfoot at 80\u2010110 A. D., seems to know nothing of infant\n baptism.\n\n Professor A. H. Newman, in Bap. Rev., Jan. 1884\u2014\u201cInfant baptism\n has always gone hand in hand with State churches. It is difficult\n to conceive how an ecclesiastical establishment could be\n maintained without infant baptism or its equivalent. We should\n think, if the facts did not show us so plainly the contrary, that\n the doctrine of justification by faith alone would displace infant\n baptism. But no. The _establishment_ must be maintained. The\n rejection of infant baptism implies insistence upon a baptism of\n believers. Only the baptized are properly members of the church.\n Even adults would not all receive baptism on professed faith,\n unless they were actually compelled to do so. Infant baptism must\n therefore be retained as the necessary concomitant of a State\n church.\n\n \u201cBut what becomes of the justification by faith? Baptism, if it\n symbolizes anything, symbolizes regeneration. It would be\n ridiculous to make the symbol to forerun the fact by a series of\n years. Luther saw the difficulty; but he was sufficient for the\n emergency. \u2018Yes,\u2019 said he, \u2018justification is by faith alone. No\n outward rite, apart from faith, has any efficacy.\u2019 Why, it was\n against _opera operata_ that he was laying out all his strength.\n Yet baptism is the symbol of regeneration, and baptism must be\n administered to infants, or the State church falls. With an\n audacity truly sublime, the great reformer declares that infants\n are regenerated in connection with baptism, and that they are\n _simultaneously justified by personal faith_. An infant eight days\n old believe? \u2018Prove the contrary if you can!\u2019 triumphantly\n ejaculates Luther, and his point is gained. If this kind of\n personal faith is said to justify infants, is it wonderful that\n those of maturer years learned to take a somewhat superficial view\n of the faith that justifies?\u201d\n\n Yet Luther had written: \u201cWhatever is without the word of God is by\n that very fact against God\u201d; see his Briefe, ed. DeWette, II:292;\n J. G. Walch, De Fide in Utero. There was great discordance between\n Luther as reformer, and Luther as conservative churchman. His\n Catholicism, only half overcome, broke into all his views of\n faith. In his early years, he stood for reason and Scripture; in\n his later years he fought reason and Scripture in the supposed\n interest of the church.\n\n _Mat. 18:10_\u2014\u201c_See that ye despise not one of these little\n ones_\u201d\u2014which refers not to little children but to childlike\n believers, Luther adduces as a proof of infant baptism, holding\n that the child is said to believe\u2014\u201c_little ones that believe on\n me_\u201d (_verse 6_)\u2014because it has been circumcised and received into\n the number of the elect. \u201cAnd so, through baptism, children become\n believers. How else could the children of Turks and Jews be\n distinguished from those of Christians?\u201d Does this involve the\n notion that infants dying unbaptized are lost? To find the very\n apostle of justification by faith saying that a little child\n becomes a _believer_ by being baptized, is humiliating and\n disheartening (so Broadus. Com. on Matthew, page 384, note).\n\n Pfleiderer, Philos. Religion, 2:342\u2010345, quotes from Lang as\n follows: \u201cBy mistaking and casting down the Protestant spirit\n which put forth its demands on the time in Carlstadt, Zwingle, and\n others, Luther made Protestantism lose its salt; he inflicted\n wounds upon it from which it has not yet recovered to\u2010day; and the\n ecclesiastical struggle of the present is just a struggle of\n spiritual freedom against Lutherism.\u201d E. G. Robinson: \u201cInfant\n baptism is a rag of Romanism. Since regeneration is always through\n the truth, baptismal regeneration is an absurdity.\u201d See Christian\n Review, Jan. 1851; Neander, Church History, 1:311, 313; Coleman,\n Christian Antiquities, 258\u2010260; Arnold, in Bap. Quarterly,\n 1869:32; Hovey, in Bap. Quarterly, 1871:75.\n\n\n(d) The reasoning by which it is supported is unscriptural, unsound, and\ndangerous in its tendency.\n\n\nFirst,\u2014in assuming the power of the church to modify or abrogate a command\nof Christ. This has been sufficiently answered above. Secondly,\u2014in\nmaintaining that infant baptism takes the place of circumcision under the\nAbrahamic covenant. To this we reply that the view contradicts the New\nTestament idea of the church, by making it a hereditary body, in which\nfleshly birth, and not the new birth, qualifies for membership. \u201cAs the\nnational Israel typified the spiritual Israel, so the circumcision which\nimmediately followed, not preceded, natural birth, bids us baptize\nchildren, not before, but after spiritual birth.\u201d Thirdly,\u2014in declaring\nthat baptism belongs to the infant because of an organic connection of the\nchild with the parent, which permits the latter to stand for the former\nand to make profession of faith for it,\u2014faith already existing germinally\nin the child by virtue of this organic union, and certain for the same\nreason to be developed as the child grows to maturity. \u201cA law of organic\nconnection as regards character subsisting between the parent and the\nchild,\u2014such a connection as induces the conviction that the character of\nthe one is actually included in the character of the other, as the seed is\nformed in the capsule.\u201d We object to this view that it unwarrantably\nconfounds the personality of the child with that of the parent;\npractically ignores the necessity of the Holy Spirit\u2019s regenerating\ninfluences in the case of children of Christian parents; and presumes in\nsuch children a gracious state which facts conclusively show not to exist.\n\n\n What takes the place of circumcision is not baptism but\n regeneration. Paul defeated the attempt to fasten circumcision on\n the church, when he refused to have that rite performed on Titus.\n But later Judaizers succeeded in perpetuating circumcision under\n the form of infant baptism, and afterward of infant sprinkling\n (McGarvey, Com. on Acts). E. G. Robinson: \u201cCircumcision is not a\n type of baptism: 1. It is purely a gratuitous assumption that it\n is so. There is not a word in Scripture to authorize it; 2.\n Circumcision was a national, a theocratic, and not a personal,\n religious rite; 3. If circumcision be a type, why did Paul\n circumcise Timothy? Why did he not explain, on an occasion so\n naturally calling for it, that circumcision was replaced by\n baptism?\u201d\n\n On the theory that baptism takes the place of circumcision, see\n Pepper, Baptist Quarterly, April, 1857; Palmer, in Baptist\n Quarterly, 1871:314. The Christian Church is either a natural,\n _hereditary_ body, or it was merely _typified_ by the Jewish\n people. In the former case, baptism belongs to all children of\n Christian parents, and the church is indistinguishable from the\n world. In the latter case, it belongs only to spiritual\n descendants, and therefore only to true believers. \u201cThat Jewish\n Christians, who of course had been circumcised, were also\n baptized, and that a large number of them insisted that Gentiles\n who had been baptized should also be circumcised, shows\n conclusively that baptism did not take the place of\n circumcision.... The notion that the family is the unit of society\n is a relic of barbarism. This appears in the Roman law, which was\n good for property but not for persons. It left none but a servile\n station to wife or son, thus degrading society at the fountain of\n family life. To gain freedom, the Roman wife had to accept a form\n of marriage which opened the way for unlimited liberty of\n divorce.\u201d\n\n Hereditary church\u2010membership is of the same piece with hereditary\n priesthood, and both are relics of Judaism. J. J. Murphy, Nat.\n Selection and Spir. Freedom, 81\u2014\u201cThe institution of hereditary\n priesthood, which was so deeply rooted in the religions of\n antiquity and was adopted into Judaism, has found no place in\n Christianity; there is not, I believe, any church whatever calling\n itself by the name of Christ, in which the ministry is\n hereditary.\u201d Yet there is a growing disposition to find in infant\n baptism the guarantee of hereditary church membership. Washington\n Gladden, What is Left? 252\u2010254\u2014\u201cSolidarity of the generations\n finds expression in infant baptism. Families ought to be Christian\n and not individuals only. In the Society of Friends every one born\n of parents belonging to the Society is a birthright member.\n Children of Christian parents are heirs of the kingdom. The State\n recognizes that our children are organically connected with it.\n When parents are members of the State, children are not aliens.\n They are not called to perform duties of citizenship until a\n certain age, but the rights and privileges of citizenship are\n theirs from the moment of their birth. The State is the mother of\n her children; shall the church be less motherly than the State?...\n Baptism does not make the child God\u2019s child; it simply recognizes\n and declares the fact.\u201d\n\n Another illustration of what we regard as a radically false view\n is found in the sermon of Bishop Grafton of Fond du Lac, at the\n consecration of Bishop Nicholson in Philadelphia: \u201cBaptism is not\n like a function in the natural order, like the coronation of a\n king, an acknowledgment of what the child already is. The child,\n truly God\u2019s loved offspring by way of creation, is in baptism\n translated into the new creation and incorporated into the\n Incarnate One, and made his child.\u201d Yet, as the great majority of\n the inmates of our prisons and the denizens of the slums have\n received this \u201cbaptism,\u201d it appears that this \u201cloved offspring\u201d\n very early lost its \u201cnew creation\u201d and got \u201ctranslated\u201d in the\n wrong direction. We regard infant baptism as only an ancient\n example of the effort to bring in the kingdom of God by externals,\n the protest against which brought Jesus to the cross. Our modern\n methods of salvation by sociology and education and legislation\n are under the same indictment, as crucifying the Son of God afresh\n and putting him to open shame.\n\n Prof. Moses Stuart urged that the form of baptism was immaterial,\n but that the temper of heart was the thing of moment. Francis\n Wayland, then a student of his, asked: \u201cIf such is the case, with\n what propriety can baptism be administered to those who cannot be\n supposed to exercise any temper of heart at all, and with whom the\n form must be everything?\u201d\u2014The third theory of organic connection\n of the child with its parents is elaborated by Bushnell, in his\n Christian Nurture, 90\u2010223. _Per contra_, see Bunsen, Hippolytus\n and his Times, 179, 211; Curtis, Progress of Baptist Principles,\n 262. Hezekiah\u2019s son Manasseh was not godly; and it would be rash\n to say that all the drunkard\u2019s children are presumptively\n drunkards.\n\n\n(e) The lack of agreement among pedobaptists.\n\n\nThe lack of agreement among pedobaptists as to the warrant for infant\nbaptism and as to the relation of baptized infants to the church, together\nwith the manifest decline of the practice itself, are arguments against\nit.\n\nThe propriety of infant baptism is variously argued, says Dr. Bushnell,\nupon the ground of \u201cnatural innocence, inherited depravity, and federal\nholiness; because of the infant\u2019s own character, the parent\u2019s piety, and\nthe church\u2019s faith; for the reason that the child is an heir of salvation\nalready, and in order to make it such.... No settled opinion on infant\nbaptism and on Christian nurture has ever been attained to.\u201d\n\n\n Quot homines, tot sententi\u00e6. The belated traveler in a\n thunderstorm prayed for a little more light and less noise.\n Bushnell, Christian Nurture, 9\u201089, denies original sin, denies\n that hereditary connection can make a child guilty. But he seems\n to teach transmitted righteousness, or that hereditary connection\n can make a child holy. He disparages \u201csensible experiences\u201d and\n calls them \u201cexplosive conversions.\u201d But because we do not know the\n time of conversion, shall we say that there never was a time when\n the child experienced God\u2019s grace? See Bib. Sac., 1872:665.\n Bushnell said: \u201cI don\u2019t know what right we have to say that a\n child can\u2019t be born again before he is born the first time.\u201d Did\n not John the Baptist preach Christ before he was born? (_Luke\n 1:15, 41, 44_). The answer to Bushnell is simply this, that\n regeneration is through the truth, and an unborn child cannot know\n the truth. To disjoin regeneration from the truth, is to make it a\n matter of external manipulation in which the soul is merely\n passive and the whole process irrational. There is a secret work\n of God in the soul, but it is always accompanied by an awakening\n of the soul to perceive the truth and to accept Christ.\n\n Are baptized infants members of the Presbyterian Church? We answer\n by citing the following standards: 1. The Confession of Faith,\n 25:2\u2014\u201cThe visible church ... consists of all those throughout the\n world, that profess the true religion, together with their\n children.\u201d 2. The Larger Catechism, 62\u2014\u201cThe visible church is a\n society made up of all such as in all ages and places of the world\n do profess the true religion, and of their children.\u201d 166\u2014\u201cBaptism\n is not to be administered to any that are not of the visible\n church ... till they profess their faith in Christ and obedience\n to him: but infants descending from parents either both or but one\n of them professing faith in Christ and obedience to him are in\n that respect within the covenant and are to be baptized.\u201d 3. The\n Shorter Catechism, 96\u2014\u201cBaptism is not to be administered to any\n that are out of the visible church, till they profess their faith\n in Christ and obedience to him: but the infants of such as are\n members of the visible church are to be baptized.\u201d 4. Form of\n Government, 3\u2014\u201cA particular church consists of a number of\n professing Christians, with their offspring.\u201d 5. Directory for\n Worship, 1\u2014\u201cChildren born within the pale of the visible church\n and dedicated to God in baptism are under the inspection and\n government of the church.... When they come to years of\n discretion, if they be free from scandal, appear sober and steady,\n and to have sufficient knowledge to discern the Lord\u2019s body, they\n ought to be informed it is their duty and their privilege to come\n to the Lord\u2019s Supper.\u201d\n\n The Maplewood Congregational Church of Malden, Mass., enrolls as\n members all children baptized by the church. The relation\n continues until they indicate a desire either to continue it or to\n dissolve it. The list of such members is kept distinct from that\n of the adults, but they are considered as members under the care\n of the church. Dr. W. G. T. Shedd: \u201cThe infant of a believer is\n born into the church as the infant of a citizen is born into the\n State. A baptized child in adult years may renounce his baptism,\n become an infidel, and join the synagogue of Satan, but until he\n does this, he must be regarded as a member of the church of\n Christ.\u201d\n\n On the Decline of Infant Baptism, see Vedder, in Baptist Review,\n April, 1882:173\u2010189, who shows that in fifty years past the\n proportion of infant baptisms to communicants in general has\n decreased from one in seven to one in eleven; among the Reformed,\n from one in twelve to one in twenty; among the Presbyterians, from\n one in fifteen to one in thirty\u2010three; among the Methodists, from\n one in twenty\u2010two to one in twenty\u2010nine; among the\n Congregationalists, from one in fifty to one in seventy\u2010seven.\n\n\n(f) The evil effects of infant baptism.\n\n\nFirst,\u2014in forestalling the voluntary act of the child baptized, and thus\npractically preventing his personal obedience to Christ\u2019s commands.\n\n\n The person baptized in infancy has never performed any act with\n intent to obey Christ\u2019s command to be baptized, never has put\n forth a single volition looking toward obedience to that command;\n see Wilkinson, The Baptist Principle, 40\u201046. Every man has the\n right to choose his own wife. So every man has the right to choose\n his own Savior.\n\n\nSecondly,\u2014in inducing superstitious confidence in an outward rite as\npossessed of regenerating efficacy.\n\n\n French parents still regard infants before baptism as only animals\n (Stanley). The haste with which the minister is summoned to\n baptize the dying child shows that superstition still lingers in\n many an otherwise evangelical family in our own country. The\n English Prayerbook declares that in baptism the infant is \u201cmade a\n child of God and an inheritor of the kingdom of heaven.\u201d Even the\n Westminster Assembly\u2019s Catechism, 28:6, holds that grace is\n actually conferred in baptism, though the efficacy of it is\n delayed till riper years. Mercersburg Review: \u201cThe objective\n medium or instrumental cause of regeneration is baptism. Men are\n not regenerated outside the church and then brought into it for\n preservation, but they are regenerated by being incorporated with\n or engrafted into the church through the sacrament of baptism.\u201d\n Catholic Review: \u201cUnbaptized, these little ones go into darkness;\n but baptized, they rejoice in the presence of God forever.\u201d\n\n Dr. Beebe of Hamilton went after a minister to baptize his sick\n child, but before he returned the child died. Reflection made him\n a Baptist, and the Editor of The Examiner. Baptists unhesitatingly\n permit converts to die unbaptized, showing plainly that they do\n not regard baptism as essential to salvation. Baptism no more\n makes one a Christian, than putting a crown on one\u2019s head makes\n him a king. Zwingle held to a symbolic interpretation of the\n Lord\u2019s Supper, but he clung to the sacramental conception of\n Baptism. E. H. Johnson, Uses and Abuses of Ordinances, 33, claims\n that, while baptism is not a justifying or regenerating ordinance,\n it is a sanctifying ordinance,\u2014sanctifying, in the sense of\n setting apart. Yes, we reply, but only as church going and prayer\n are sanctifying; the efficacy is not in the outward act but in the\n spirit which accompanies it. To make it signify more is to admit\n the sacramental principle.\n\n In the Roman Catholic Church the baptism of bells and of rosaries\n shows how infant baptism has induced the belief that grace can be\n communicated to irrational and even material things. In Mexico\n people bring caged birds, cats, rabbits, donkeys, and pigs, for\n baptism. The priest kneels before the altar in prayer, reads a few\n words in Latin, then sprinkles the creature with holy water. The\n sprinkling is supposed to drive out any evil spirit that may have\n vexed the bird or beast. In Key West, Florida, a town of 22,000\n inhabitants, infant baptism has a stronger hold than anywhere else\n at the South. Baptist parents had sometimes gone to the Methodist\n preachers to have their children baptized. To prevent this, the\n Baptist pastors established the custom of laying their hands upon\n the heads of infants in the congregation, and \u201cblessing\u201d them, _i.\n e._, asking God\u2019s blessing to rest upon them. But this custom came\n to be confounded with christening, and was called such. Now the\n Baptist pastors are having a hard struggle to explain and limit\n the custom which they themselves have introduced. Perverse human\n nature will take advantage of even the slightest additions to N.\n T. prescriptions, and will bring out of the germs of false\n doctrine a fearful harvest of evil. Obsta principiis\u2014\u201cResist\n beginnings.\u201d\n\n\nThirdly,\u2014in obscuring and corrupting Christian truth with regard to the\nsufficiency of Scripture, the connection of the ordinances, and the\ninconsistency of an impenitent life with church\u2010membership.\n\n\n Infant baptism in England is followed by confirmation, as a matter\n of course, whether there has been any conscious abandonment of sin\n or not. In Germany, a man is always understood to be a Christian\n unless he expressly states to the contrary\u2014in fact, he feels\n insulted if his Christianity is questioned. At the funerals even\n of infidels and debauchees the pall used may be inscribed with the\n words: \u201cBlessed are the dead that die in the Lord.\u201d Confidence in\n one\u2019s Christianity and hopes of heaven based only on the fact of\n baptism in infancy, are a great obstacle to evangelical preaching\n and to the progress of true religion.\n\n Wordsworth, The Excursion, 596, 602 (book 5)\u2014\u201cAt the baptismal\n font. And when the pure And consecrating element hath cleansed The\n original stain, the child is thus received Into the second ark,\n Christ\u2019s church, with trust That he, from wrath redeemed therein\n shall float Over the billows of this troublesome world To the fair\n land of everlasting life.... The holy rite That lovingly consigns\n the babe to the arms Of Jesus and his everlasting care.\u201d Infant\n baptism arose in the superstitious belief that there lay in the\n water itself a magical efficacy for the washing away of sin, and\n that apart from baptism there could be no salvation. This was and\n still remains the Roman Catholic position. Father Doyle, in Anno\n Domini, 2:182\u2014\u201cBaptism regenerates. By means of it the child is\n born again into the newness of the supernatural life.\u201d Theodore\n Parker was baptized, but not till he was four years old, when his\n \u201cOh, don\u2019t!\u201d\u2014in which his biographers have found prophetic\n intimation of his mature dislike for all conventional forms\u2014was\n clearly the small boy\u2019s dislike of water on his face; see\n Chadwick, Theodore Parker, 6, 7. \u201cHow do you know, my dear, that\n you have been christened?\u201d \u201cPlease, mum, \u2019cos I\u2019ve got the marks\n on my arm now, mum!\u201d\n\n\nFourthly,\u2014in destroying the church as a spiritual body, by merging it in\nthe nation and the world.\n\n\n Ladd, Principles of Church Polity: \u201cUnitarianism entered the\n Congregational churches of New England through the breach in one\n of their own avowed and most important tenets, namely, that of a\n regenerate church\u2010membership. Formalism, indifferentism, neglect\n of moral reforms, and, as both cause and results of these, an\n abundance of unrenewed men and women, were the causes of their\n seeming disasters in that sad epoch.\u201d But we would add, that the\n serious and alarming decline of religion which culminated in the\n Unitarian movement in New England had its origin in infant\n baptism. This introduced into the Church a multitude of\n unregenerate persons and permitted them to determine its doctrinal\n position.\n\n W. B. Matteson: \u201cNo one practice of the church has done so much to\n lower the tone of its life and to debase its standards. The first\n New England churches were established by godly and regenerated\n men. They received into their churches, through infant baptism,\n children presumptively, but alas not actually, regenerated. The\n result is well known\u2014swift, startling, seemingly irresistible\n decline. \u2018The body of the rising generation,\u2019 writes Increase\n Mother, \u2018is a poor perishing, inconverted, and, except the Lord\n pour out his Spirit, an undone generation.\u2019 The \u2018Halfway Covenant\u2019\n was at once a token of preceding, and a cause of further, decline.\n If God had not indeed poured out his Spirit in the great awakening\n under Edwards, New England might well, as some feared, \u2018be lost\n even to New England and buried in its own ruins.\u2019 It was the new\n emphasis on personal religion\u2014an emphasis which the Baptists of\n that day largely contributed\u2014that gave to the New England churches\n a larger life and a larger usefulness. Infant baptism has never\n since held quite the same place in the polity of those churches.\n It has very generally declined. But it is still far from extinct,\n even among evangelical Protestants. The work of Baptists is not\n yet done. Baptists have always stood, but they need still to\n stand, for a believing and regenerated church\u2010membership.\u201d\n\n\nFifthly,\u2014in putting into the place of Christ\u2019s command a commandment of\nmen, and so admitting the essential principle of all heresy, schism, and\nfalse religion.\n\n\n There is therefore no logical halting\u2010place between the Baptist\n and the Romanist positions. The Roman Catholic Archbishop Hughes\n of New York, said well to a Presbyterian minister: \u201cWe have no\n controversy with you. Our controversy is with the Baptists.\u201d Lange\n of Jena: \u201cWould the Protestant church fulfil and attain to its\n final destiny, the baptism of infants must of necessity be\n abolished.\u201d The English Judge asked the witness what his religious\n belief was. Reply: \u201cI haven\u2019t any.\u201d \u201cWhere do you attend church?\u201d\n \u201cNowhere.\u201d \u201cPut him down as belonging to the Church of England.\u201d\n The small child was asked where her mother was. Reply: \u201cShe has\n gone to a Christian and devil meeting.\u201d The child meant a\n Christian Endeavor meeting. Some systems of doctrine and ritual,\n however, answer her description, for they are a mixture of\n paganism and Christianity. The greatest work favoring the doctrine\n which we here condemn is Wall\u2019s History of Infant Baptism. For the\n Baptist side of the controversy see Arnold, in Madison Avenue\n Lectures, 160\u2010182; Curtis, Progress of Baptist Principles, 274,\n 275; Dagg, Church Order, 144\u2010202.\n\n\n\nII. The Lord\u2019s Supper.\n\n\nThe Lord\u2019s Supper is that outward rite in which the assembled church eats\nbread broken and drinks wine poured forth by its appointed representative,\nin token of its constant dependence on the once crucified, now risen\nSavior, as source of its spiritual life; or, in other words, in token of\nthat abiding communion of Christ\u2019s death and resurrection through which\nthe life begun in regeneration is sustained and perfected.\n\n\n Norman Fox, Christ in the Daily Meal, 31, 33, says that the\n Scripture nowhere speaks of the wine as \u201cpoured forth\u201d; and in _1\n Cor. 11:24_\u2014\u201c_my body which is broken for you,_\u201d the Revised\n Version omits the word \u201c_broken_\u201d; while on the other hand the\n Gospel according to John (_19:36_) calls especial attention to the\n fact that Christ\u2019s body was _not_ broken. We reply that Jesus, in\n giving his disciples the cup, did speak of his blood as \u201c_poured\n out_\u201d (_Mark 14:24_); and it was not the body, but \u201c_a bone of\n him_,\u201d which was not to be broken. Many ancient manuscripts add\n the word \u201c_broken_\u201d in _1 Cor. 11:24_. On the Lord\u2019s Supper in\n general, see Weston, in Madison Avenue Lectures, 183\u2010195; Dagg,\n Church Order, 203\u2010214.\n\n\n1. The Lord\u2019s Supper an ordinance instituted by Christ.\n\n\n(_a_) Christ appointed an outward rite to be observed by his disciples in\nremembrance of his death. It was to be observed after his death; only\nafter his death could it completely fulfil its purpose as a feast of\ncommemoration.\n\n\n _Luke 22:19_\u2014\u201c_And be took bread, and when he had given thanks, he\n brake it, and gave to them, saying, This is my body which is given\n for you: this do in remembrance of me. And the cup in like manner\n after supper, saying, This cup is the new covenant in my blood,\n even that which is poured out for you_\u201d; _1 Cor. 11:23\u201025_\u2014\u201c_For I\n received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that\n the Lord Jesus in the night in which he was betrayed took bread;\n and when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, This is my\n body, which is for you: this do in remembrance of me. In like\n manner also the cup, after supper, saying, This cup is the new\n covenant in my blood: this do, as often as ye drink it, in\n remembrance of me._\u201d Observe that this communion was Christian\n communion before Christ\u2019s death, just as John\u2019s baptism was\n Christian baptism before Christ\u2019s death.\n\n\n(_b_) From the apostolic injunction with regard to its celebration in the\nchurch until Christ\u2019s second coming, we infer that it was the original\nintention of our Lord to institute a rite of perpetual and universal\nobligation.\n\n\n _1 Cor. 11:26_\u2014\u201c_For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink the\n cup, ye proclaim the Lord\u2019s death till he come_\u201d; _cf._ _Mat.\n 26:29_\u2014\u201c_But I say unto you, I shall not drink henceforth of this\n fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in\n my Father\u2019s kingdom_\u201d; _Mark 14:25_\u2014\u201c_Verily I say unto you, I\n will no more drink of the fruit of the vine, until that day when I\n drink it new in the kingdom of God._\u201d As the paschal supper\n continued until Christ came the first time in the flesh, so the\n Lord\u2019s Supper is to continue until he comes the second time with\n all the power and glory of God.\n\n\n(_c_) The uniform practice of the N. T. churches, and the celebration of\nsuch a rite in subsequent ages by almost all churches professing to be\nChristian, is best explained upon the supposition that the Lord\u2019s Supper\nis an ordinance established by Christ himself.\n\n\n _Acts 2:42_\u2014\u201c_And they continued stedfastly in the apostles\u2019\n teaching and fellowship, in the breaking of bread and the\n prayers_\u201d; _46_\u2014\u201c_And day by day, continuing stedfastly with one\n accord in the temple, and breaking bread at home, they took their\n food with gladness and singleness of heart_\u201d\u2014on the words here\n translated \u201c_at home_\u201d (\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1fbd \u03bf\u1f36\u03ba\u03bf\u03bd), but meaning, as Jacob\n maintains, \u201cfrom one worship\u2010room to another,\u201d see page 961. _Acts\n 20:7_\u2014\u201c_And upon the first day of the week, when we were gathered\n together to break bread, Paul discoursed with them_\u201d; _1 Cor.\n 10:16_\u2014\u201c_The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a communion\n of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a\n communion of the body of Christ? seeing that we, who art many, are\n one bread, one body: for we all partake of the one bread._\u201d\n\n\n2. The Mode of administering the Lord\u2019s Supper.\n\n\n(_a_) The elements are bread and wine.\n\n\n Although the bread which Jesus broke at the institution of the\n ordinance was doubtless the unleavened bread of the Passover,\n there is nothing in the symbolism of the Lord\u2019s Supper which\n necessitates the Romanist use of the wafer. Although the wine\n which Jesus poured out was doubtless the ordinary fermented juice\n of the grape, there is nothing in the symbolism of the ordinance\n which forbids the use of unfermented juice of the grape,\u2014obedience\n to the command \u201c_This do in remembrance of me_\u201d (_Luke 22:19_)\n requires only that we should use the \u201c_fruit of the vine_\u201d (_Mat.\n 26:29_).\n\n Huguenots and Roman Catholics, among Parkman\u2019s Pioneers of France\n in the New World, disputed whether the sacramental bread could be\n made of the meal of Indian corn. But it is only as food, that the\n bread is symbolic. Dried fish is used in Greenland. The bread only\n symbolizes Christ\u2019s life and the wine only symbolizes his death.\n Any food or drink may do the same. It therefore seems a very\n conscientious but unnecessary literalism, when Adoniram Judson\n (Life by his Son, 352) writes from Burma: \u201cNo wine to be procured\n in this place, on which account we are unable to meet with the\n other churches this day in partaking of the Lord\u2019s Supper.\u201d For\n proof that Bible wines, like all other wines, are fermented, see\n Presb. Rev., 1881:80\u2010114; 1882:78\u2010108, 394\u2010399, 586; Hovey, in\n Bap. Quar. Rev., April, 1887:152\u2010180. _Per contra_, see Samson,\n Bible Wines. On the Scripture Law of Temperance, see Presb. Rev.,\n 1882:287\u2010324.\n\n\n(_b_) The communion is of both kinds,\u2014that is, communicants are to partake\nboth of the bread and of the wine.\n\n\n The Roman Catholic Church withholds the wine from the laity,\n although it considers the whole Christ to be present under each of\n the forms. Christ, however, says: \u201c_Drink ye all of it_\u201d (_Mat.\n 26:27_). To withhold the wine from any believer is disobedience to\n Christ, and is too easily understood as teaching that the laity\n have only a portion of the benefits of Christ\u2019s death. Calvin: \u201cAs\n to the bread, he simply said \u2018_Take, eat_.\u2019 Why does he expressly\n bid them _all_ drink? And why does Mark explicitly say that \u2018_they\n all drank of it_\u2019 (_Mark 14:23_)?\u201d Bengel: Does not this suggest\n that, if communion in \u201cone kind alone were sufficient, it is the\n cup which should be used? The Scripture thus speaks, foreseeing\n what Rome would do.\u201d See Expositor\u2019s Greek Testament on _1 Cor.\n 11:27_. In the Greek Church the bread and wine are mingled and are\n administered to communicants, not to infants only but also to\n adults, with a spoon.\n\n\n(_c_) The partaking of these elements is of a festal nature.\n\n\n The Passover was festal in its nature. Gloom and sadness are\n foreign to the spirit of the Lord\u2019s Supper. The wine is the symbol\n of the death of Christ, but of that death by which we live. It\n reminds us that he drank the cup of suffering in order that we\n might drink the wine of joy. As the bread is broken to sustain our\n physical life, so Christ\u2019s body was broken by thorns and nails and\n spear to nourish our spiritual life.\n\n _1 Cor. 11:29_\u2014\u201c_For he that eateth and drinketh, eateth and\n drinketh judgment onto himself, if he discern not the body._\u201d Here\n the Authorized Version wrongly had \u201cdamnation\u201d instead of\n \u201c_judgment_.\u201d Not eternal condemnation, but penal judgment in\n general, is meant. He who partakes \u201c_in an unworthy manner_\u201d\n (_verse 27_), _i. e._, in hypocrisy, or merely to satisfy bodily\n appetites, and not discerning the body of Christ of which the\n bread is the symbol (_verse 29_), draws down upon him God\u2019s\n judicial sentence. Of this judgment, the frequent sickness and\n death in the church at Corinth was a token. See _verses 30\u201034_,\n and Meyer\u2019s Com.; also Gould, in Am. Com. on _1 Cor.\n 11:27_\u2014\u201c_unworthily_\u201d\u2014\u201cThis is not to be understood as referring\n to the unworthiness of the person himself to partake, but to the\n unworthy manner of partaking.... The failure to recognize\n practically the symbolism of the elements, and hence the treatment\n of the Supper as a common meal, is just what the apostle has\n pointed out as the fault of the Corinthians, and it is what he\n characterizes as an unworthy eating and drinking.\u201d The Christian\n therefore should not be deterred from participation in the Lord\u2019s\n Supper by any feeling of his personal unworthiness, so long as he\n trusts Christ and aims to obey him, for \u201cAll the fitness he\n requireth Is to feel our need of him.\u201d\n\n\n(_d_) The communion is a festival of commemoration,\u2014not simply bringing\nChrist to our remembrance, but making proclamation of his death to the\nworld.\n\n\n _1 Cor. 11:24, 26_\u2014\u201c_this do in remembrance of me.... For as often\n as ye eat this bread and drink this cup, ye proclaim the Lord\u2019s\n death till he come._\u201d As the Passover commemorated the deliverance\n of Israel from Egypt, and as the Fourth of July commemorates our\n birth as a nation, so the Lord\u2019s Supper commemorates the birth of\n the church in Christ\u2019s death and resurrection. As a mother might\n bid her children meet over her grave and commemorate her, so\n Christ bids his people meet and remember him. But subjective\n remembrance is not its only aim. It is public proclamation also.\n Whether it brings perceptible blessing to us or not, it is to be\n observed as a means of confessing Christ, testifying our faith,\n and publishing the fact of his death to others.\n\n\n(_e_) It is to be celebrated by the assembled church. It is not a solitary\nobservance on the part of individuals. No \u201cshowing forth\u201d is possible\nexcept in company.\n\n\n _Acts 20:7_\u2014\u201c_gathered together to break bread_\u201d; _1 Cor. 11:18,\n 20, 22, 33, 34_\u2014\u201c_when ye come together in the church ... assemble\n yourselves together ... have ye not houses to eat and to drink in?\n or despise ye the church of God, and put them to shame that have\n not? ... when ye come together to eat.... If any man is hungry,\n let him eat at home; that your coming together be not unto\n judgment._\u201d\n\n Jacob, Eccl. Polity of N. T., 191\u2010194, claims that in _Acts\n 2:46_\u2014\u201c_breaking bread at home_\u201d\u2014where we have \u03bf\u1f36\u03ba\u03bf\u03c2, not \u03bf\u1f36\u03ba\u03af\u03b1,\n \u03bf\u1f36\u03ba\u03bf\u03c2 is not a private house, but a \u201cworship\u2010room,\u201d and that the\n phrase should be translated \u201cbreaking bread from one worship\u2010room\n to another,\u201d or \u201cin various worship\u2010rooms.\u201d This meaning seems\n very apt in _Acts 5:42_\u2014\u201c_And every day, in the temple and at\n home_ [rather, \u2018_in various worship\u2010rooms_\u2019], they ceased not to\n teach and to preach Jesus as the Christ\u201d; _8:3_\u2014\u201c_But Saul laid\n waste the church, entering into every house_ [rather, \u2018_every\n worship\u2010room_\u2019] _and dragging men and women committed them to\n prison_\u201d; _Rom. 16:5_\u2014\u201c_salute the church that is in their house_\n [rather, \u2018_in their worship\u2010room_\u2019]\u201d; _Titus 1:11_\u2014\u201c_men who\n overthrow whole houses_ [rather, \u2018_whole worship\u2010rooms_\u2019],\n _teaching things which they ought not, for filthy lucre\u2019s sake._\u201d\n _Per contra_, however, see _1 Cor. 11:34_\u2014\u201c_let him eat at home,_\u201d\n where \u03bf\u1f36\u03ba\u03bf\u03c2 is contrasted with the place of meeting; so also _1\n Cor. 14:35_ and _Acts 20:20_, where \u03bf\u1f36\u03ba\u03bf\u03c2 seems to mean a private\n house.\n\n The celebration of the Lord\u2019s Supper in each family by itself is\n not recognized in the New Testament. Stanley, in Nineteenth\n Century, May, 1878, tells us that as infant communion is forbidden\n in the Western Church, and evening communion is forbidden by the\n Roman Church, so solitary communion is forbidden by the English\n Church, and death\u2010bed communion by the Scottish Church. E. G.\n Robinson: \u201cNo single individual in the New Testament ever\n celebrates the Lord\u2019s Supper by himself.\u201d Mrs. Browning recognized\n the essentially social nature of the ordinance, when she said that\n truth was like the bread at the Sacrament\u2014to be passed on. In this\n the Supper gives us a type of the proper treatment of all the\n goods of life, both temporal and spiritual.\n\n Dr. Norman Fox, Christ in the Daily Meal, claims that the Lord\u2019s\n Supper is no more an exclusively church ordinance than is singing\n or prayer; that the command to observe it was addressed, not to an\n organized church, but only to individuals; that every meal in the\n home was to be a Lord\u2019s Supper, because Christ was remembered in\n it. But we reply that Paul\u2019s letter with regard to the abuses of\n the Lord\u2019s Supper was addressed, not to individuals, but to \u201c_the\n church of God which is at Corinth._\u201d (_1 Cor. 1:2_). Paul reproves\n the Corinthians because in the Lord\u2019s Supper each ate without\n thought of others: \u201c_What, have ye not houses to eat and to drink\n in? or despise ye the church of God, and put them to shame that\n have not?_\u201d (_11:22_). Each member having appeased his hunger at\n home, the members of the church \u201c_come together to eat_\u201d\n (_11:30_), as the spiritual body of Christ. All this shows that\n the celebration of the Lord\u2019s Supper was not an appendage to every\n ordinary meal.\n\n In _Acts 20:7_\u2014\u201c_upon the first day of the week, when we were\n gathered together to break bread, Paul discoursed with them_\u201d\u2014the\n natural inference is that the Lord\u2019s Supper was a sacred rite,\n observed apart from any ordinary meal, and accompanied by\n religious instruction. Dr. Fox would go back of these later\n observances to the original command of our Lord. He would\n eliminate all that we do not find in Mark, the earliest gospel.\n But this would deprive us of the Sermon on the Mount, the parable\n of the Prodigal Son, and the discourses of the fourth gospel.\n McGiffert gives A. D. 52, as the date of Paul\u2019s first letter to\n the Corinthians, and this ante\u2010dates Mark\u2019s gospel by at least\n thirteen years. Paul\u2019s account of the Lord\u2019s Supper at Corinth is\n therefore an earlier authority than Mark.\n\n\n(_f_) The responsibility of seeing that the ordinance is properly\nadministered rests with the church as a body; and the pastor is, in this\nmatter, the proper representative and organ of the church. In cases of\nextreme exigency, however, as where the church has no pastor and no\nordained minister can be secured, it is competent for the church to\nappoint one from its own number to administer the ordinance.\n\n\n _1 Cor. 11:2, 23_\u2014\u201c_Now I praise you that ye remember me in all\n things, and hold fast the traditions, even as I delivered them to\n you.... For I received of the Lord that which also I delivered\n unto you, that the Lord Jesus in the night in which he was\n betrayed took bread._\u201d Here the responsibility of administering\n the Lord\u2019s Supper is laid upon the body of believers.\n\n\n(_g_) The frequency with which the Lord\u2019s Supper is to be administered is\nnot indicated either by the N. T. precept or by uniform N. T. example. We\nhave instances both of its daily and of its weekly observance. With\nrespect to this, as well as with respect to the accessories of the\nordinance, the church is to exercise a sound discretion.\n\n\n _Acts 2:46_\u2014\u201c_And day by day, continuing stedfastly with one\n accord in the temple, and breaking bread at home_ [or perhaps,\n \u2018_in various worship\u2010rooms_\u2019]\u201d; _20:7_\u2014\u201c_And upon the first day of\n the week, when we were gathered together to break bread._\u201d In\n 1878, thirty\u2010nine churches of the Establishment in London held\n daily communion; in two churches it was held twice each day. A few\n churches of the Baptist faith in England and America celebrate the\n Lord\u2019s Supper on each Lord\u2019s day. Carlstadt would celebrate the\n Lord\u2019s Supper only in companies of twelve, and held also that\n every bishop must marry. Reclining on couches, and meeting in the\n evening, are not commanded; and both, by their inconvenience,\n might in modern times counteract the design of the ordinance.\n\n\n3. The Symbolism of the Lord\u2019s Supper.\n\n\nThe Lord\u2019s Supper sets forth, in general, the death of Christ as the\nsustaining power of the believer\u2019s life.\n\n\nA. Expansion of this statement.\n\n\n(_a_) It symbolizes the death of Christ for our sins.\n\n\n _1 Cor. 11:26_\u2014\u201c_For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink the\n cup, ye proclaim the Lord\u2019s death till he come_\u201d; _cf._ _Mark\n 14:24_\u2014\u201c_This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for\n many_\u201d\u2014the blood upon which the covenant between God and Christ,\n and so between God and us who are one with Christ, from eternity\n past was based. The Lord\u2019s Supper reminds us of the covenant which\n ensures our salvation, and of the atonement upon which the\n covenant was based; _cf._ _Heb. 13:20_\u2014\u201c_blood of an eternal\n covenant._\u201d\n\n Alex. McLaren: \u201cThe suggestion of a violent death, implied in the\n _doubling_ of the symbols, by which the body is separated from\n that of the blood, and still further implied in the _breaking_ of\n the bread, is made prominent in the words in reference to the cup.\n It symbolizes the blood of Jesus which is \u2018shed.\u2019 That shed blood\n is covenant blood. By it the New Covenant, of which Jeremiah had\n prophesied, one article of which was, \u2018Their sins and iniquities I\n will remember no more,\u2019 is sealed and ratified, not for Israel\n only but for an indefinite \u2018many,\u2019 which is really equivalent to\n all. Could words more plainly declare that Christ\u2019s death was a\n sacrifice? Can we understand it, according to his own\n interpretation of it, unless we see in his words here a reference\n to his previous words (_Mat. 20:28_) and recognize that in\n shedding his blood \u2018for many,\u2019 he \u2018gave his life a ransom for\n many\u2019? The Lord\u2019s Supper is the standing witness, voiced by Jesus\n himself, that he regarded his death as the very centre of his\n work, and that he regarded it not merely as a martyrdom, but as a\n sacrifice by which he put away sins forever. Those who reject that\n view of that death are sorely puzzled what to make of the Lord\u2019s\n Supper.\u201d\n\n\n(_b_) It symbolizes our personal appropriation of the benefits of that\ndeath.\n\n\n _1 Cor. 11:24_\u2014\u201c_This is my body, which is for you_\u201d; _cf._ _1\n Cor. 5:7_\u2014\u201c_Christ our passover is sacrificed for us_\u201d; or R.\n V.\u2014\u201c_our passover also hath been sacrificed, even Christ_\u201d; here\n it is evident not only that the showing forth of the Lord\u2019s death\n is the primary meaning of the ordinance, but that our partaking of\n the benefits of that death is as clearly taught as the Israelites\u2019\n deliverance was symbolized in the paschal supper.\n\n\n(_c_) It symbolizes the method of this appropriation, through union with\nChrist himself.\n\n\n _1 Cor. 10:16_\u2014\u201c_The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a\n communion of_ [marg.: \u2018_participation in_\u2019] _the blood of Christ?\n The bread which we break, is it not a communion of_ [marg.:\n \u2018_participation in_\u2019] _the body of Christ?_\u201d Here \u201c_is it not a\n participation_\u201d = \u201cdoes it not symbolize the participation?\u201d So\n _Mat. 26:26_\u2014\u201c_this is my body_\u201d = \u201cthis symbolizes my body.\u201d\n\n\n(_d_) It symbolizes the continuous dependence of the believer for all\nspiritual life upon the once crucified, now living, Savior, to whom he is\nthus united.\n\n\n _Cf._ _John 6:53_\u2014\u201c_Verily, verily, I say unto you, except ye eat\n the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, ye have not life\n in yourselves_\u201d\u2014here is a statement, not with regard to the Lord\u2019s\n Supper, but with regard to spiritual union with Christ, which the\n Lord\u2019s Supper only symbolizes; see page 965, (_a_). Like Baptism,\n the Lord\u2019s Supper presupposes and implies evangelical faith,\n especially faith in the Deity of Christ; not that all who partake\n of it realize its full meaning, but that this participation\n logically implies the five great truths of Christ\u2019s pre\u00ebxistence,\n his supernatural birth, his vicarious atonement, his literal\n resurrection, and his living presence with his followers. Because\n Ralph Waldo Emerson perceived that the Lord\u2019s Supper implied\n Christ\u2019s omnipresence and deity, he would no longer celebrate it,\n and so broke with his church and with the ministry.\n\n\n(_e_) It symbolizes the sanctification of the Christian through a\nspiritual reproduction in him of the death and resurrection of the Lord.\n\n\n _Rom. 8:10_\u2014\u201c_And if Christ is in you, the body is dead because of\n sin; but the spirit is life because of righteousness_\u201d; _Phil.\n 3:10_\u2014\u201c_that I may know him, and the power of his resurrection,\n and the fellowship of his sufferings, becoming conformed unto his\n death; if by any means I may attain unto the resurrection from the\n dead._\u201d The bread of life nourishes; but it transforms me, not I\n it.\n\n\n(_f_) It symbolizes the consequent union of Christians in Christ, their\nhead.\n\n\n _1 Cor. 10:17_\u2014\u201c_seeing that we, who are many, are one bread, one\n body: for we all partake of the one bread._\u201d The Roman Catholic\n says that bread is the unity of many kernels, the wine the unity\n of many berries, and all are changed into the body of Christ. We\n can adopt the former part of the statement, without taking the\n latter. By being united to Christ, we become united to one\n another; and the Lord\u2019s Supper, as it symbolizes our common\n partaking of Christ, symbolizes also the consequent oneness of all\n in whom Christ dwells. Teaching of the Twelve Apostles, IX\u2014\u201cAs\n this broken bread was scattered upon the mountains, and being\n gathered together became one, so may thy church be gathered\n together from the ends of the earth into thy kingdom.\u201d\n\n\n(_g_) It symbolizes the coming joy and perfection of the kingdom of God.\n\n\n _Luke 22:18_\u2014\u201c_for I say unto you, I shall not drink from\n henceforth of the fruit of the vine, until the kingdom of God\n shall come_\u201d; _Mark 14:25_\u2014\u201c_Verily I say unto you, I will no more\n drink of the fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new\n in the kingdom of God_\u201d; _Mat. 26:29_\u2014\u201c_But I say unto you, I\n shall not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that\n day when I drink it new with you in my Father\u2019s kingdom._\u201d\n\n Like Baptism, which points forward to the resurrection, the Lord\u2019s\n Supper is anticipatory also. It brings before us, not simply\n death, but life; not simply past sacrifice, but future glory. It\n points forward to the great festival, \u201c_the marriage supper of the\n Lamb_\u201d (_Rev. 19:9_). Dorner: \u201cThen Christ will keep the Supper\n anew with us, and the hours of highest solemnity in this life are\n but a weak foretaste of the powers of the world to come.\u201d See\n Madison Avenue Lectures, 176\u2010216; The Lord\u2019s Supper, a Clerical\n Symposium, by Pressens\u00e9, Luthardt, and English Divines.\n\n\nB. Inferences from this statement.\n\n\n(_a_) The connection between the Lord\u2019s Supper and Baptism consists in\nthis, that they both and equally are symbols of the death of Christ. In\nBaptism, we show forth the death of Christ as the procuring cause of our\nnew birth into the kingdom of God. In the Lord\u2019s Supper, we show forth the\ndeath of Christ as the sustaining power of our spiritual life after it has\nonce begun. In the one, we honor the sanctifying power of the death of\nChrist, as in the other we honor its regenerating power. Thus both are\nparts of one whole,\u2014setting before us Christ\u2019s death for men in its two\ngreat purposes and results.\n\n\n If baptism symbolized purification only, there would be no point\n of connection between the two ordinances. Their common reference\n to the death of Christ binds the two together.\n\n\n(_b_) The Lord\u2019s Supper is to be often repeated,\u2014as symbolizing Christ\u2019s\nconstant nourishment of the soul, whose new birth was signified in\nBaptism.\n\n\n Yet too frequent repetition may induce superstitious confidence in\n the value of communion as a mere outward form.\n\n\n(_c_) The Lord\u2019s Supper, like Baptism, is the symbol of a previous state\nof grace. It has in itself no regenerating and no sanctifying power, but\nis the symbol by which the relation of the believer to Christ, his\nsanctifier, is vividly expressed and strongly confirmed.\n\n\n We derive more help from the Lord\u2019s Supper than from private\n prayer, simply because it is an _external_ rite, impressing the\n sense as well as the intellect, celebrated in company with other\n believers whose faith and devotion help our own, and bringing\n before us the profoundest truths of Christianity\u2014the death of\n Christ, and our union with Christ in that death.\n\n\n(_d_) The blessing received from participation is therefore dependent\nupon, and proportioned to, the faith of the communicant.\n\n\n In observing the Lord\u2019s Supper, we need to discern the body of the\n Lord (_1 Cor. 11:29_)\u2014that is, to recognize the spiritual meaning\n of the ordinance, and the presence of Christ, who through his\n deputed representatives gives to us the emblems, and who nourishes\n and quickens our souls as these material things nourish and\n quicken the body. The faith which thus discerns Christ is the gift\n of the Holy Spirit.\n\n\n(_e_) The Lord\u2019s Supper expresses primarily the fellowship of the\nbeliever, not with his brethren, but with Christ, his Lord.\n\n\n The Lord\u2019s Supper, like Baptism, symbolizes fellowship with the\n brethren only as consequent upon, and incidental to, fellowship\n with Christ. Just as we are all baptized \u201c_into one body_\u201d (_1\n Cor. 12:13_) only by being \u201c_baptized into Christ_\u201d (_Rom. 6:3_),\n so we commune with other believers in the Lord\u2019s Supper, only as\n we commune with Christ. Christ\u2019s words: \u201c_this do in remembrance\n of me_\u201d (_1 Cor. 11:24_), bid us think, not of our brethren, but\n of the Lord. Baptism is not a test of personal worthiness. Nor is\n the Lord\u2019s Supper a test of personal worthiness, either our own or\n that of others. It is not primarily an expression of Christian\n fellowship. Nowhere in the New Testament is it called a communion\n of Christians with one another. But it is called a communion of\n the body and blood of Christ (_1 Cor. 10:16_)\u2014or, in other words,\n a participation in him. Hence there is not a single cup, but many:\n \u201c_divide it among yourselves_\u201d (_Luke 22:17_). Here is warrant for\n the individual communion\u2010cup. Most churches use more than one cup:\n if more than one, why not many?\n\n _1 Cor. 11:26_\u2014\u201c_as often as ye eat ... ye proclaim the Lord\u2019s\n death_\u201d\u2014the Lord\u2019s Supper is a teaching ordinance, and is to be\n observed, not simply for the good that comes to the communicant\n and to his brethren, but for the sake of the witness which it\n gives to the world that the Christ who died for its sins now lives\n for its salvation. A. H. Ballard, in The Standard, Aug. 18, 1900,\n on _1 Cor. 11:29_\u2014\u201c_eateth and drinketh judgment unto himself, if\n he discern not the body_\u201d\u2014\u201cHe who eats and drinks, and does not\n discern that he is redeemed by the offering of the body of Jesus\n Christ once for all, eats and drinks a double condemnation,\n because he does not discern the redemption which is symbolized by\n the things which he eats and drinks. To turn his thought away from\n that sacrificial body to the company of disciples assembled is a\n grievous error\u2014the error of all those who exalt the idea of\n fellowship or communion in the celebration of the ordinance.\u201d\n\n The offence of a Christian brother, therefore, even if committed\n against myself, should not prevent me from remembering Christ and\n communing with the Savior. I could not commune at all, if I had to\n vouch for the Christian character of all who sat with me. This\n does not excuse the church from effort to purge its membership\n from unworthy participants; it simply declares that the church\u2019s\n failure to do this does not absolve any single member of it from\n his obligation to observe the Lord\u2019s Supper. See Jacob, Eccl.\n Polity of N. T., 285.\n\n\n4. Erroneous views of the Lord\u2019s Supper.\n\n\nA. The Romanist view.\n\n\nThe Romanist view,\u2014that the bread and wine are changed by priestly\nconsecration into the very body and blood of Christ; that this\nconsecration is a new offering of Christ\u2019s sacrifice; and that, by a\nphysical partaking of the elements, the communicant receives saving grace\nfrom God. To this doctrine of \u201ctransubstantiation\u201d we reply:\n\n(_a_) It rests upon a false interpretation of Scripture. In Mat. 26:26,\n\u201cthis is my body\u201d means: \u201cthis is a symbol of my body.\u201d Since Christ was\nwith the disciples in visible form at the institution of the Supper, he\ncould not have intended them to recognize the bread as being his literal\nbody. \u201cThe body of Christ is present in the bread, just as it had been in\nthe passover lamb, of which the bread took the place\u201d (John 6:53 contains\nno reference to the Lord\u2019s Supper, although it describes that spiritual\nunion with Christ which the Supper symbolizes; _cf._ 63. In 1 Cor. 10:16,\n17, \u03ba\u03bf\u03b9\u03bd\u03c9\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c3\u03ce\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03a7\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 is a figurative expression for the\nspiritual partaking of Christ. In Mark 8:33, we are not to infer that\nPeter was actually \u201cSatan,\u201d nor does 1 Cor. 12:12 prove that we are all\nChrists. _Cf._ Gen. 41:26; 1 Cor. 10:4).\n\n\n _Mat. 26:28_\u2014\u201c_This is my blood ... which is poured out,_\u201d cannot\n be meant to be taken literally, since Christ\u2019s blood was not yet\n shed. Hence the Douay version (Roman Catholic), without warrant,\n changes the tense and reads, \u201cwhich shall be shed.\u201d At the\n institution of the Supper, it is not conceivable that Christ\n should hold his body in his own hands, and then break it to the\n disciples. There were not two bodies there. Zwingle: \u201cThe words of\n institution are not the mandatory \u2018become\u2019: they are only an\n explanation of the sign.\u201d When I point to a picture and say: \u201cThis\n is George Washington,\u201d I do not mean that the veritable body and\n blood of George Washington are before me. So when a teacher points\n to a map and says: \u201cThis is New York,\u201d or when Jesus refers to\n John the Baptist, and says: \u201c_this is Elijah, that is to come_\u201d\n (_Mat. 11:14_). Jacob, The Lord\u2019s Supper, Historically\n Considered\u2014\u201cIt originally marked, not a real presence, but a real\n absence, of Christ as the Son of God made man\u201d\u2014that is, a real\n absence of his _body_. Therefore the Supper, reminding us of his\n body, is to be observed in the church \u201c_till he come_\u201d (_1 Cor.\n 11:26_).\n\n _John 6:53_\u2014\u201c_Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink\n his blood, ye have not life in yourselves_\u201d must be interpreted by\n _verse 63_\u2014\u201c_It is the spirit that giveth life; the flesh\n profiteth nothing: the words that I have spoken unto you are\n spirit, and are life._\u201d _1 Cor. 10:16_\u2014\u201c_The cup of blessing which\n we bless, is it not a communion of_ [marg.: \u2018_participation in_\u2019]\n _the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a\n communion of_ [marg. \u2018_participation in_\u2019] _the body of\n Christ?_\u201d\u2014see Expositor\u2019s Greek Testament, _in loco_; _Mark\n 8:33_\u2014\u201c_But he turning about, and seeing his disciples, rebuked\n Peter, and saith, Get thee behind me, Satan_\u201d; _1 Cor.\n 12:12_\u2014\u201c_For the body is one, and hath many members, and all the\n members of the body, being many, are one body; so also is\n Christ._\u201d _cf._ _Gen. 41:26_\u2014\u201c_The seven good kine are seven\n years; and the seven good ears are seven years: the dream is\n one;_\u201d _1 Cor. 10:4_\u2014\u201c_they drank of a spiritual rock that\n followed them: and the rock was Christ._\u201d\n\n Queen Elizabeth: \u201cChrist was the Word that spake it: He took the\n bread and brake it; And what that Word did make it, That I believe\n and take it.\u201d Yes, we say; but what does the Lord make it? Not his\n body, but only a symbol of his body. Sir Thomas More went back to\n the doctrine of transubstantiation which the wisdom of his age was\n almost unanimous in rejecting. In his Utopia, written to earlier\n years, he had made deism the ideal religion. Extreme Romanism was\n his reaction from this former extreme. Bread and wine are mere\n remembrancers, as were the lamb and bitter herbs at the Passover.\n The partaker is spiritually affected by the bread and wine, only\n as was the pious Israelite in receiving the paschal symbols; see\n Norman Fox, Christ in the Daily Meal, 25, 42.\n\n E. G. Robinson: \u201cThe greatest power in Romanism is its power of\n visible representation. Ritualism is only elaborate symbolism. It\n is interesting to remember that this prostration of the priest\n before the consecrated wafer is no part of even original Roman\n Catholicism.\u201d Stanley, Life and Letters, 2:213\u2014\u201cThe pope, when he\n celebrates the communion, always stands in exactly the opposite\n direction [to that of modern ritualists], not with his back but\n with his face to the people, no doubt following the primitive\n usage.\u201d So in Raphael\u2019s picture of the Miracle of Bolsina, the\n priest is at the north end of the table, in the very attitude of a\n Protestant clergyman. Pfleiderer, Philos. Religion, 2:211\u2014\u201cThe\n unity of the bread, of which each enjoys a part, represents the\n unity of the body of Christ, which consists in the community of\n believers. If we are to speak of a presence of the body of Christ\n in the Lord\u2019s Supper, that can only be thought of, in the sense of\n Paul, as pertaining to the mystical body, _i. e._, the Christian\n Community. Augustine and Zwingle, who have expressed most clearly\n this meaning of the Supper, have therefore caught quite correctly\n the sense of the Apostle.\u201d\n\n Norman Fox, Christ in the Daily Meal, 40\u201053\u2014\u201cThe phrase\n \u2018consecration of the elements\u2019 is unwarranted. The leaven and the\n mustard seed were in no way consecrated when Jesus pronounced them\n symbols of divine things. The bread and wine are not arbitrarily\n appointed remembrancers, they are remembrancers in their very\n nature. There is no change in them. So every other loaf is a\n symbol, as well as that used in the Supper. When St. Patrick held\n up the shamrock as the symbol of the Trinity, he meant that every\n such sprig was the same. Only the bread of the daily meal is\n Christ\u2019s body. Only the washing of dirty feet is the fulfilment of\n Christ\u2019s command. The loaf not eaten to satisfy hunger is not\n Christ\u2019s symbolic body at all.\u201d Here we must part company with Dr.\n Fox. We grant the natural fitness of the elements for which he\n contends. But we hold also to a divine appointment of the bread\n and wine for a special and sacred use, even as the \u201c_bow in the\n cloud_\u201d (_Gen. 9:13_), because it was a natural emblem, was\n consecrated to a special religious use.\n\n\n(_b_) It contradicts the evidence of the senses, as well as of all\nscientific tests that can be applied. If we cannot trust our senses as to\nthe unchanged material qualities of bread and wine, we cannot trust them\nwhen they report to us the words of Christ.\n\n\n Gibbon was rejoiced at the discovery that, while the real presence\n is attested by only a single sense\u2014our sight [as employed in\n reading the words of Christ]\u2014the real presence is disproved by\n three of our senses, sight, touch, and taste. It is not well to\n purchase faith in this dogma at the price of absolute scepticism.\n Stanley, on Baptism, in his Christian Institutions, tells us that,\n in the third and fourth centuries, the belief that the water of\n baptism was changed into the blood of Christ was nearly as firmly\n and widely fixed as the belief that the bread and wine of the\n communion were changed into his flesh and blood. D\u00f6llinger: \u201cWhen\n I am told that I must swear to the truth of these doctrines [of\n papal infallibility and apostolic succession], my feeling is just\n as if I were asked to swear that two and two make five, and not\n four.\u201d Teacher: \u201cWhy did Henry VIII quarrel with the pope?\u201d\n Scholar: \u201cBecause the pope had commanded him to put away his wife\n on pain of transubstantiation.\u201d The transubstantiation of Henry\n VIII is quite as rational as the transubstantiation of the bread\n and wine in the Eucharist.\n\n\n(_c_) It involves the denial of the completeness of Christ\u2019s past\nsacrifice, and the assumption that a human priest can repeat or add to the\natonement made by Christ once for all (Heb. 9:28\u2014\u1f05\u03c0\u03b1\u03be \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03b5\u03bd\u03b5\u03c7\u03b8\u03b5\u03af\u03c2). The\nLord\u2019s Supper is never called a sacrifice, nor are altars, priests, or\nconsecrations ever spoken of, in the New Testament. The priests of the old\ndispensation are expressly contrasted with the ministers of the new. The\nformer \u201cministered about sacred things,\u201d _i. e._, performed sacred rites\nand waited at the altar; but the latter \u201cpreach the gospel\u201d (1 Cor. 9:13,\n14).\n\n\n _Heb. 9:28_\u2014\u201c_so Christ also, having been once offered_\u201d\u2014here \u1f05\u03c0\u03b1\u03be\n means \u201conce for all,\u201d as in _Jude 3_\u2014\u201c_the faith which was once\n for all delivered unto the saints_\u201d; _1 Cor. 9:13, 14_\u2014\u201c_Know ye\n not that they that minister about sacred things eat of the things\n of the temple, and they that wait upon the altar have their\n portion with the altar? Even so did the Lord ordain that they that\n proclaim the gospel should live of the gospel._\u201d Romanism\n introduces a mediator between the soul and Christ, namely, bread\n and wine,\u2014and the priest besides.\n\n Dorner, Glaubenslehre, 2:680\u2010687 (Syst. Doct., 4: 146\u2010163)\u2014\u201cChrist\n is thought of as at a distance, and as represented only by the\n priest who offers anew his sacrifice. But Protestant doctrine\n holds to a perfect Christ, applying the benefits of the work which\n he long ago and once for all completed upon the cross.\u201d\n Chillingworth: \u201cRomanists hold that the validity of every\n sacrament but baptism depends upon its administration by a priest;\n and without priestly absolution there is no assurance of\n forgiveness. But the intention of the priest is essential in\n pronouncing absolution, and the intention of the bishop is\n essential in consecrating the priest. How can any human being know\n that these conditions are fulfilled?\u201d In the New Testament, on the\n other hand, Christ appears as the only priest, and each human soul\n has direct access to him.\n\n Norman Fox, Christ in the Daily Meal, 22\u2014\u201cThe adherence of the\n first Christians to the Mosaic law makes it plain that they did\n not hold the doctrine of the modern Church of Rome that the bread\n of the Supper is a sacrifice, the table an altar, and the minister\n a priest. For the old altar, the old sacrifice, and the old\n priesthood still remained, and were still in their view appointed\n media of atonement with God. Of course they could not have\n believed in two altars, two priesthoods and two contemporaneous\n sets of sacrifices.\u201d Christ is the only priest. A. A. Hodge,\n Popular Lectures, 257\u2014\u201cThe three central dangerous errors of\n Romanism and Ritualism are: 1. the perpetuity of the apostolate;\n 2. the priestly character and offices of Christian ministers; 3.\n the sacramental principle, or the depending upon sacraments, as\n the essential, initial, and ordinary channels of grace.\u201d\n \u201cHierarchy,\u201d says another, \u201cis an infraction of the divine order;\n it imposes the weight of an outworn symbolism on the true\n vitalities of the gospel; it is a remnant rent from the shroud of\n the dead past, to enwrap the limbs of the living present.\u201d\n\n\n(_d_) It destroys Christianity by externalizing it. Romanists make all\nother service a mere appendage to the communion. Physical and magical\nsalvation is not Christianity, but is essential paganism.\n\n\n Council of Trent, Session VII, On Sacraments in General, Canon IV:\n \u201cIf any one saith that the sacraments of the New Testament are not\n necessary to salvation, but are superfluous, and that without\n them, and without the desire thereof, men attain of God, through\n faith alone, the grace of justification; though all [the\n sacraments] are not indeed necessary for every individual: let him\n be anathema.\u201d On Baptism, Canon IV: \u201cIf any one saith that the\n baptism which is even given by heretics in the name of the Father,\n Son and Holy Ghost, with the intention of doing what the church\n doth, is not true baptism, let him be anathema.\u201d Baptism, in the\n Romanist system, is necessary to salvation: and baptism, even\n though administered by heretics, is an admission to the church.\n All baptized persons who, through no fault of their own, but from\n lack of knowledge or opportunity, are not connected outwardly with\n the true church, though they are apparently attached to some sect,\n yet in reality belong _to the soul_ of the true church. Many\n belong merely _to the body_ of the Catholic church, and are\n counted as its members, but do not belong _to its soul_. So says\n Archbishop Lynch, of Toronto; and Pius IX extended the doctrine of\n invincible ignorance, so as to cover the case of every dissentient\n from the church whose life shows faith working by love.\n\n Adoration of the Host (Latin _hostia_, victim) is a regular part\n of the service of the Mass. If the Romanist view were correct that\n the bread and wine were actually changed into the body and blood\n of Christ, we could not call this worship idolatry. Christ\u2019s body\n in the sepulchre could not have been a proper object of worship,\n but it was so after his resurrection, when it became animated with\n a new and divine life. The Romanist error is that of holding that\n the priest has power to transform the elements; the worship of\n them follows as a natural consequence, and is none the less\n idolatrous for being based upon the false assumption that the\n bread and wine are really Christ\u2019s body and blood.\n\n The Roman Catholic system involves many absurdities, but the\n central absurdity is that of making religion a matter of machinery\n and outward manipulation. Dr. R. S. MacArthur calls sacramentalism\n \u201cthe pipe\u2010line conception of grace.\u201d There is no patent Romanist\n plumbing. Dean Stanley said that John Henry Newman \u201cmade\n immortality the consequence of frequent participation of the Holy\n Communion.\u201d Even Faber made game of the notion, and declared that\n it \u201cdegraded celebrations to be so many breadfruit trees.\u201d It is\n this transformation of the Lord\u2019s Supper into the Mass that turns\n the church into \u201cthe Church of the Intonement.\u201d \u201cCardinal\n Gibbons,\u201d it was once said, \u201cmakes his own God\u2014the wafer.\u201d His\n error is at the root of the super\u2010sanctity and celibacy of the\n Romanist clergy, and President Garrett forgot this when he made\n out the pass on his railway for \u201cCardinal Gibbons and wife.\u201d Dr.\n C. H. Parkhurst: \u201cThere is no more place for an altar in a\n Christian church than there is for a golden calf.\u201d On the word\n \u201cpriest\u201d in the N. T., see Gardiner, in O. T. Student, Nov.\n 1889:285\u2010291; also Bowen, in Theol. Monthly, Nov. 1889:316\u2010329.\n For the Romanist view, see Council of Trent, session XIII, canon\n III: _per contra_, see Calvin, Institutes, 2:585\u2010602; C. Hebert,\n The Lord\u2019s Supper: History of Uninspired Teaching.\n\n\nB. The Lutheran and High Church view.\n\n\nThe Lutheran and High Church view,\u2014that the communicant, in partaking of\nthe consecrated elements, eats the veritable body and drinks the veritable\nblood of Christ in and with the bread and wine, although the elements\nthemselves do not cease to be material. To this doctrine of\n\u201cconsubstantiation\u201d we object:\n\n(_a_) That the view is not required by Scripture.\u2014All the passages cited\nin its support may be better interpreted as referring to a partaking of\nthe elements as symbols. If Christ\u2019s body be ubiquitous, as this theory\nholds, we partake of it at every meal, as really as at the Lord\u2019s Supper.\n\n(_b_) That the view is inseparable from the general sacramental system of\nwhich it forms a part.\u2014In imposing physical and material conditions of\nreceiving Christ, it contradicts the doctrine of justification only by\nfaith; changes the ordinance from a sign, into a means, of salvation;\ninvolves the necessity of a sacerdotal order for the sake of properly\nconsecrating the elements; and logically tends to the Romanist conclusions\nof ritualism and idolatry.\n\n(_c_) That it holds each communicant to be a partaker of Christ\u2019s\nveritable body and blood, whether he be a believer or not,\u2014the result, in\nthe absence of faith, being condemnation instead of salvation. Thus the\nwhole character of the ordinance is changed from a festival occasion to\none of mystery and fear, and the whole gospel method of salvation is\nobscured.\n\n\n Encyc. Britannica, art.: Luther, 15:81\u2014\u201cBefore the peasants\u2019 war,\n Luther regarded the sacrament as a secondary matter, compared with\n the right view of faith. In alarm at this war and at Carlstadt\u2019s\n mysticism, he determined to abide by the tradition of the church,\n and to alter as little as possible. He could not accept\n transubstantiation, and he sought a _via media_. Occam gave it to\n him. According to Occam, matter can be present in two ways, first,\n when it occupies a distinct place by itself, excluding every other\n body, as two stones mutually exclude each other; and, secondly,\n when it occupies the same space as another body at the same time.\n Everything which is omnipresent must occupy the same space as\n other things, else it could not be ubiquitous. Hence\n consubstantiation involved no miracle. Christ\u2019s body was in the\n bread and wine naturally, and was not brought into the elements by\n the priest. It brought a blessing, not because of Christ\u2019s\n presence, but because of God\u2019s promise that this particular\n presence of the body of Christ should bring blessings to the\n faithful partaker.\u201d Broadus, Am. Com. on Mat., 529\u2014\u201cLuther does\n not say how Christ is in the bread and wine, but his followers\n have compared his presence to that of heat or magnetism in iron.\n But how then could this presence be in the bread and wine\n separately?\u201d\n\n For the view here combated, see Gerhard, x: 352\u2014\u201cThe bread, apart\n from the sacrament instituted by Christ, is not the body of\n Christ, and therefore it is \u1f00\u03c1\u03c4\u03bf\u03bb\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u03af\u03b1 (bread\u2010worship) to adore\n the bread in these solemn processions\u201d (of the Roman Catholic\n church). 397\u2014\u201cFaith does not belong to the substance of the\n Eucharist; hence it is not the faith of him who partakes that\n makes the bread a communication of the body of Christ; nor on\n account of unbelief in him who partakes does the bread cease to be\n a communication of the body of Christ.\u201d See also Sadler, Church\n Doctrine, 124\u2010199; Pusey, Tract No. 90, of the Tractarian Series;\n Wilberforce, New Birth; Nevins, Mystical Presence.\n\n _Per contra_, see Calvin, Institutes, 2:525\u2010584; G. P. Fisher, in\n Independent, May 1, 1884\u2014\u201cCalvin differed from Luther, in holding\n that Christ is received only by the believer. He differed from\n Zwingle, in holding that Christ is truly, though spiritually,\n received.\u201d See also E. G. Robinson, in Baptist Quarterly,\n 1869:85\u2010109; Rogers, Priests and Sacraments. Consubstantiation\n accounts for the doctrine of apostolic succession and for the\n universal ritualism of the Lutheran Church. Bowing at the name of\n Jesus, however, is not, as has been sometimes maintained, a relic\n of the papal worship of the Real Presence, but is rather a\n reminiscence of the fourth century, when controversies about the\n person of Christ rendered orthodox Christians peculiarly anxious\n to recognize Christ\u2019s deity.\n\n \u201cThere is no \u2018corner\u2019 in divine grace\u201d (C. H. Parkhurst). \u201cAll\n notions of a needed \u2018priesthood,\u2019 to bring us into connection with\n Christ, must yield to the truth that Christ is ever with us\u201d (E.\n G. Robinson). \u201cThe priest was the conservative, the prophet the\n progressive. Hence the conflict between them. Episcopalians like\n the idea of a priesthood, but do not know what to do with that of\n prophet.\u201d Dr. A. J. Gordon: \u201cRitualism, like eczema in the human\n body, is generally a symptom of a low state of the blood. As a\n rule, when the church becomes secularized, it becomes ritualized,\n while great revivals, pouring through the church, have almost\n always burst the liturgical bands and have restored it to the\n freedom of the Spirit.\u201d\n\n Puseyism, as defined by Pusey himself, means: \u201c1. high thoughts of\n the two sacraments; 2. high estimate of Episcopacy as God\u2019s\n ordinance; 3. high estimate of the visible church as the body\n wherein we are made and continue to be members of Christ; 4.\n regard for ordinances as directing our devotions and disciplining\n us, such as daily public prayers, fasts and feasts; 5. regard for\n the visible part of devotion, such as the decoration of the house\n of God, which acts insensibly on the mind; 6. reverence for and\n deference to the ancient church, instead of the reformers, as the\n ultimate expounder of the meaning of our church.\u201d Pusey declared\n that he and Maurice worshiped different Gods.\n\n\n5. Prerequisites to Participation in the Lord\u2019s Supper.\n\n\nA. There are prerequisites.\n\n\nThis we argue from the fact:\n\n(_a_) That Christ enjoined the celebration of the Supper, not upon the\nworld at large, but only upon his disciples; (_b_) that the apostolic\ninjunctions to Christians, to separate themselves from certain of their\nnumber, imply a limitation of the Lord\u2019s Supper to a narrower body, even\namong professed believers; (_c_) that the analogy of Baptism, as belonging\nonly to a specified class of persons, leads us to believe that the same is\ntrue of the Lord\u2019s Supper.\n\n\n The analogy of Baptism to the Lord\u2019s Supper suggests a general\n survey of the connections between the two ordinances: 1. Both\n ordinances symbolize primarily the death of Christ; then\n secondarily our spiritual death to sin because we are one with\n him; it being absurd, where there is no such union, to make our\n Baptism the symbol of his death. 2. We are merged in Christ first\n in Baptism; then in the Supper Christ is more and more taken into\n us; Baptism = we in Christ, the Supper = Christ in us. 3. As\n regeneration is instantaneous and sanctification continues in\n time, so Baptism should be for once, the Lord\u2019s Supper often; the\n first single, the second frequent. 4. If one ordinance, the\n Supper, requires discernment of the Lord\u2019s body, so does the\n other, the ordinance of Baptism; the subject of Baptism should\n know the meaning of his act. 5. The order of the ordinances\n teaches Christian doctrine, as the ordinances do; to partake of\n the Lord\u2019s Supper before being baptized is to say in symbol that\n one can be sanctified without being regenerated. 6. Both\n ordinances should be public, as both \u201cshow forth\u201d the Lord\u2019s death\n and are teaching ordinances; no celebration of either one is to be\n permitted in private. 7. In both the administrator does not act at\n his own option, but is the organ of the church; Philip acts as\n organ of the church at Jerusalem when he baptizes the eunuch. 8.\n The ordinances stand by themselves, and are not to be made\n appendages of other meetings or celebrations; they belong, not to\n associations or conventions, but to the local church. 9. The\n Lord\u2019s Supper needs scrutiny of the communicant\u2019s qualifications\n as much as Baptism; and only the local church is the proper judge\n of these qualifications. 10. We may deny the Lord\u2019s Supper to one\n whom we know to be a Christian, when he walks disorderly or\n disseminates false doctrine, just as we may deny Baptism to such a\n person. 11. Fencing the tables, or warning the unqualified not to\n partake of the Supper, may, like instruction with regard to\n Baptism, best take place before the actual administration of the\n ordinance; and the pastor is not a special policeman or detective\n to ferret out offences. See Expositor\u2019s Greek Testament on _1 Cor.\n 10:1\u20106_.\n\n\nB. The prerequisites are those only which are expressly or implicitly laid\ndown by Christ and his apostles.\n\n\n(_a_) The church, as possessing executive but not legislative power, is\ncharged with the duty, not of framing rules for the administering and\nguarding of the ordinance, but of discovering and applying the rules given\nit in the New Testament. No church has a right to establish any terms of\ncommunion; it is responsible only for making known the terms established\nby Christ and his apostles. (_b_) These terms, however, are to be\nascertained not only from the injunctions, but also from the precedents,\nof the New Testament. Since the apostles were inspired, New Testament\nprecedent is the \u201ccommon law\u201d of the church.\n\n\n English law consists mainly of precedent, that is, past decisions\n of the courts. Immemorial customs may be as binding as are the\n formal enactments of a legislature. It is New Testament precedent\n that makes obligatory the observance of the first day, instead of\n the seventh day, of the week. The common law of the church\n consists, however, not of any and all customs, but only of the\n customs of the apostolic church interpreted in the light of its\n principles, or the customs universally binding because sanctioned\n by inspired apostles. Has New Testament precedent the authority of\n a divine command? Only so far, we reply, as it is an adequate,\n complete and final expression of the divine life in Christ. This\n we claim for the ordinances of Baptism and of the Lord\u2019s Supper,\n and for the order of these ordinances. See Proceedings of the\n Baptist Congress, 1896:23.\n\n The Mennonites, thinking to reproduce even the incidental phases\n of N. T. action, have adopted: 1. the washing of feet; 2. the\n marriage only of members of the same faith; 3. non\u2010resistance to\n violence; 4. the use of the ban, and the shunning of expelled\n persons; 5. refusal to take oaths; 6. the kiss of peace; 7. formal\n examination of the spiritual condition of each communicant before\n his participation in the Lord\u2019s Supper; 8. the choice of officials\n by lot. And they naturally break up into twelve sects, dividing\n upon such points as holding all things in common; plainness of\n dress, one sect repudiating buttons and using only hooks upon\n their clothing, whence their nickname of Hookers; the holding of\n services in private houses only; the asserted possession of the\n gift of prophecy (A. S. Carman).\n\n\nC. On examining the New Testament, we find that the prerequisites to\nparticipation in the Lord\u2019s Supper are four.\n\n\nFirst,\u2014Regeneration.\n\n\nThe Lord\u2019s Supper is the outward expression of a life in the believer,\nnourished and sustained by the life of Christ. It cannot therefore be\npartaken of by one who is \u201cdead through ... trespasses and sins.\u201d We give\nno food to a corpse. The Lord\u2019s Supper was never offered by the apostles\nto unbelievers. On the contrary, the injunction that each communicant\n\u201cexamine himself\u201d implies that faith which will enable the communicant to\n\u201cdiscern the Lord\u2019s body\u201d is a prerequisite to participation.\n\n\n _1 Cor. 11:27\u201029_\u2014\u201c_Wherefore whosoever shall eat the bread or\n drink the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner, shall be guilty\n of the body and the blood of the Lord. But let a man prove\n himself, and so let him eat of the bread, and drink of the cup.\n For he that eateth and drinketh, eateth and drinketh judgment unto\n himself, if he discern not the Lord\u2019s body._\u201d Schaff, in his\n Church History, 2:517, tells us that in the Greek Church, in the\n seventh and eighth centuries, the bread was dipped in the wine,\n and both elements were delivered in a spoon. See Edwards, on\n Qualifications for Full Communion, in Works, 1:81.\n\n\nSecondly,\u2014Baptism.\n\n\nIn proof that baptism is a prerequisite to the Lord\u2019s Supper, we urge the\nfollowing considerations:\n\n(_a_) The ordinance of baptism was instituted and administered long before\nthe Supper.\n\n\n _Mat. 21:25_\u2014\u201c_The baptism of John, whence was it? from heaven or\n from men?_\u201d\u2014Christ here intimates that John\u2019s baptism had been\n instituted by God before his own.\n\n\n(_b_) The apostles who first celebrated it had, in all probability, been\nbaptized.\n\n\n _Acts 1:21, 22_\u2014\u201c_Of the men therefore that have companied with us\n all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and went out among us,\n beginning from the baptism of John ... of these must one become a\n witness with us of his resurrection_\u201d; _19:4_\u2014\u201c_John baptized with\n the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people that they should\n believe on him that should come after him, that is, on Jesus._\u201d\n\n Several of the apostles were certainly disciples of John. If\n Christ was baptized, much more his disciples. Jesus recognized\n John\u2019s baptism as obligatory, and it is not probable that he would\n take his apostles from among those who had not submitted to it.\n John the Baptist himself, the first administrator of baptism, must\n have been himself unbaptized. But the twelve could fitly\n administer it, because they had themselves received it at John\u2019s\n hands. See Arnold, Terms of Communion, 17.\n\n\n(_c_) The command of Christ fixes the place of baptism as first in order\nafter discipleship.\n\n\n _Mat. 28:19, 20_\u2014\u201c_Go ye therefore, and make disciples of all the\n nations, baptizing them into the name of the Father and of the Son\n and of the Holy Spirit: teaching them to observe all things\n whatsoever I commanded you_\u201d\u2014here the first duty is to make\n disciples, the second to baptize, the third to instruct in right\n Christian living. Is it said that there is no formal command to\n admit only baptized persons to the Lord\u2019s Supper? We reply that\n there is no formal command to admit only regenerate persons to\n baptism. In both cases, the practice of the apostles and the\n general connections of Christian doctrine are sufficient to\n determine our duty.\n\n\n(_d_) All the recorded cases show this to have been the order observed by\nthe first Christians and sanctioned by the apostles.\n\n\n _Acts 2:41, 46_\u2014\u201c_They then that received his word were\n baptized.... And day by day, continuing stedfastly with one accord\n in the temple, and breaking bread at home_ [rather, \u2018_in various\n worship\u2010rooms_\u2019] _they took their food with gladness and\n singleness of heart_\u201d; _8:12_\u2014\u201c_But when they believed Philip ...\n they were baptized_\u201d; _10:47, 48_\u2014\u201c_Can any man forbid the water,\n that these should not be baptized, who have received the Holy\n Spirit as well as we? And he commanded them to be baptized in the\n name of Jesus Christ_\u201d; _22:16_\u2014\u201c_And now why tarriest thou?\n arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on his\n name._\u201d\n\n\n(_e_) The symbolism of the ordinances requires that baptism should precede\nthe Lord\u2019s Supper. The order of the facts signified must be expressed in\nthe order of the ordinances which signify them; else the world is taught\nthat sanctification may take place without regeneration. Birth must come\nbefore sustenance\u2014\u201c_nascimur_, _pascimur_.\u201d To enjoy ceremonial\nprivileges, there must be ceremonial qualifications. As none but the\ncircumcised could eat the passover, so before eating with the Christian\nfamily must come adoption into the Christian family.\n\n\n As one must be \u201c_born of the Spirit_\u201d before he can experience the\n sustaining influence of Christ, so he must be \u201c_born of water_\u201d\n before he can properly be nourished by the Lord\u2019s Supper. Neither\n the unborn nor the dead can eat bread or drink wine. Only when\n Christ had raised the daughter of the Jewish ruler to life, did he\n say: \u201c_Give her to eat_.\u201d The ordinance which symbolizes\n regeneration, or the impartation of new life, must precede the\n ordinance which symbolizes the strengthening and perfecting of the\n life already begun. The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles, dating\n back to the second half of the second century, distinctly declares\n (9:5, 10)\u2014\u201cLet no one eat or drink of your Eucharist except those\n baptized into the name of the Lord; for as regards this also the\n Lord has said: \u2018Give not that which is holy unto the dogs\u2019.... The\n Eucharist shall be given only to the baptized.\u201d\n\n\n(_f_) The standards of all evangelical denominations, with unimportant\nexceptions, confirm the view that this is the natural interpretation of\nthe Scripture requirements respecting the order of the ordinances.\n\n\n \u201cThe only protest of note has been made by a portion of the\n English Baptists.\u201d To these should be added the comparatively\n small body of the Free Will Baptists in America. Pedobaptist\n churches in general refuse full membership, office\u2010holding, and\n the ministry, to unbaptized persons. The Presbyterian church does\n not admit to the communion members of the Society of Friends. Not\n one of the great evangelical denominations accepts Robert Hall\u2019s\n maxim that the only terms of communion are terms of salvation. If\n individual ministers announce this principle and conform their\n practice to it, it is only because they transgress the standards\n of the churches to which they belong.\n\n See Tyerman\u2019s Oxford Methodists, preface, page vi\u2014\u201cEven in\n Georgia, Wesley excluded dissenters from the Holy Communion, on\n the ground that they had not been properly baptized; and he would\n himself baptize only by immersion, unless the child or person was\n in a weak state of health.\u201d Baptist Noel gave it as his reason for\n submitting to baptism, that to approach the Lord\u2019s Supper\n conscious of not being baptized would be to act contrary to all\n the precedents of Scripture. See Curtis, Progress of Baptist\n Principles, 304.\n\n The dismission of Jonathan Edwards from his church at Northampton\n was due to his opposing the Halfway Covenant, which admitted\n unregenerate persons to the Lord\u2019s Supper as a step on the road to\n spiritual life. He objected to the doctrine that the Lord\u2019s Supper\n was \u201ca converting ordinance.\u201d But these very unregenerated persons\n had been baptized, and he himself had baptized many of them. He\n should have objected to infant baptism, as well as to the Lord\u2019s\n Supper, in the case of the unregenerate.\n\n\n(_g_) The practical results of the opposite view are convincing proof that\nthe order here insisted on is the order of nature as well as of Scripture.\nThe admission of unbaptized persons to the communion tends always to, and\nhas frequently resulted in, the disuse of baptism itself, the obscuring of\nthe truth which it symbolizes, the transformation of Scripturally\nconstituted churches into bodies organized after methods of human\ninvention, and the complete destruction of both church and ordinances as\nChrist originally constituted them.\n\n\n Arnold, Terms of Communion, 76\u2014The steps of departure from\n Scriptural precedent have not unfrequently been the following: (1)\n administration of baptism on a weekday evening, to avoid giving\n offence; (2) reception, without baptism, of persons renouncing\n belief in the baptism of their infancy; (3) giving up of the\n Lord\u2019s Supper as non\u2010essential,\u2014to be observed or not observed by\n each individual, according as he finds it useful; (4) choice of a\n pastor who will not advocate Baptist views; (5) adoption of\n Congregational articles of faith; (6) discipline and exclusion of\n members for propagating Baptist doctrine. John Bunyan\u2019s church,\n once either an open communion church or a mixed church both of\n baptized and unbaptized believers, is now a regular Congregational\n body. Armitage, History of the Baptists, 482 _sq._, claims that it\n was originally a Baptist church. Vedder, however, in Bap. Quar.\n Rev., 1886:289, says that \u201cThe church at Bedford is proved by\n indisputable documentary evidence never to have been a Baptist\n church in any strict sense.\u201d The results of the principle of open\n communion are certainly seen in the Regent\u2019s Park church in\n London, where some of the deacons have never been baptized. The\n doctrine that baptism is not essential to church membership is\n simply the logical result of the previous practice of admitting\n unbaptized persons to the communion table. If they are admitted to\n the Lord\u2019s Supper, then there is no bar to their admission to the\n church. See Proceedings of the Baptist Congress, Boston, November,\n 1902; Curtis, Progress of Baptist Principles, 296\u2010298.\n\n\nThirdly,\u2014Church membership.\n\n\n(_a_) The Lord\u2019s Supper is a church ordinance, observed by churches of\nChrist as such. For this reason, membership in the church naturally\nprecedes communion. Since communion is a family rite, the participant\nshould first be a member of the family.\n\n\n _Acts 2:46 47_\u2014\u201c_breaking bread at home_ [rather, \u2018_in various\n worship\u2010rooms_\u2019]\u201d (see Com. of Meyer); _20:7_\u2014\u201c_upon the first day\n of the week, when we were gathered together to break bread_\u201d; _1\n Cor. 11:18, 22_\u2014\u201c_when ye come together in the church ... have ye\n not houses to eat and to drink in? or despise ye the church of\n God, and put them to shame that have not?_\u201d\n\n\n(_b_) The Lord\u2019s Supper is a symbol of church fellowship. Excommunication\nimplies nothing, if it does not imply exclusion from the communion. If the\nSupper is simply communion of the individual with Christ, then the church\nhas no right to exclude any from it.\n\n\n _1 Cor. 10:17_\u2014\u201c_we, who are many, are one bread, one body: for we\n all partake of the one bread._\u201d Though the Lord\u2019s Supper primarily\n symbolizes fellowship with Christ, it symbolizes secondarily\n fellowship with the church of Christ. Not all believers in Christ\n were present at the first celebration of the Supper, but only\n those organized into a body\u2014the apostles. I can invite proper\n persons to my tea\u2010table, but that does not give them the right to\n come uninvited. Each church, therefore, should invite visiting\n members of sister churches to partake with it. The Lord\u2019s Supper\n is an ordinance by itself, and should not be celebrated at\n conventions and associations, simply to lend dignity to something\n else.\n\n The Panpresbyterian Council at Philadelphia, in 1880, refused to\n observe the Lord\u2019s Supper together, upon the ground that the\n Supper is a church ordinance, to be observed only by those who are\n amenable to the discipline of the body, and therefore not to be\n observed by separate church organizations acting together.\n Substantially upon this ground, the Old School General Assembly\n long before, being invited to unite at the Lord\u2019s table with the\n New School body with whom they had dissolved ecclesiastical\n relations, declined to do so. See Curtis, Progress of Baptist\n Principles, 304; Arnold, Terms of Communion, 36.\n\n\nFourthly,\u2014An orderly walk.\n\n\nDisorderly walking designates a course of life in a church member which is\ncontrary to the precepts of the gospel. It is a bar to participation in\nthe Lord\u2019s Supper, the sign of church fellowship. With Arnold, we may\nclass disorderly walking under four heads:\u2014\n\n(_a_) Immoral conduct.\n\n\n _1 Cor. 5:1\u201013_\u2014Paul commands the Corinthian church to exclude the\n incestuous person: \u201c_I wrote unto you in my epistle to have no\n company with fornicators;... but now I write unto you not to keep\n company, if any man that is named a brother be a fornicator, or\n covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or __ an\n extortioner; with such a one no, not to eat.... Put away the\n wicked man from among yourselves._\u201d\u2014Here it is evident that the\n most serious forms of disorderly walking require exclusion not\n only from church fellowship but from Christian fellowship as well.\n\n\n(_b_) Disobedience to the commands of Christ.\n\n\n _1 Cor. 14:37_\u2014\u201c_If any man thinketh himself to be a prophet, or\n spiritual, let him take knowledge of the things which I write unto\n you, that they are the commandments of the Lord_\u201d; _2 Thess. 3:6,\n 11, 15_\u2014\u201c_Now we command you, brethren,... that ye withdraw\n yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not\n after the tradition which they received of us... For we hear of\n some that walk among you disorderly, that work not at all, but are\n busybodies.... And if any man obeyeth not our word by this\n epistle, note that man, that ye have no company with him, to the\n end that he may be ashamed. And yet count him not as an enemy, but\n admonish him as a brother._\u201d\u2014Here is exclusion from church\n fellowship, and from the Lord\u2019s Supper its sign, while yet the\n offender is not excluded from Christian fellowship, but is still\n counted \u201c_a brother_.\u201d _Versus_ G. B. Stevens, in N. Englander,\n 1887:40\u201047.\n\n In these passages Paul intimates that \u201cnot to walk after the\n tradition received from him, not to obey the word contained in his\n epistles, is the same as disobedience to the commands of Christ,\n and as such involves the forfeiture of church fellowship and its\n privileged tokens\u201d (Arnold, Prerequisites to Communion, 68). Since\n Baptism is a command of Christ, it follows that we cannot properly\n commune with the unbaptized. To admit such to the Lord\u2019s Supper is\n to give the symbol of church fellowship to those who, in spite of\n the fact that they are Christian brethren, are, though perhaps\n unconsciously, violating the fundamental law of the church. To\n withhold protest against plain disobedience to Christ\u2019s commands\n is to that extent to countenance such disobedience. The same\n disobedience which in the church member we should denominate\n disorderly walking must _a fortiori_ destroy all right to the\n Lord\u2019s Supper on the part of those who are not members of the\n church.\n\n\n(_c_) Heresy, or the holding and teaching of false doctrine.\n\n\n _Titus 3:10_\u2014\u201c_A man that is heretical_ [Am. Revisers: \u2018_a\n factious man_\u2019] _after a first and second admonition refuse_\u201d; see\n Ellicott, Com., _in loco_: \u201c\u03b1\u1f31\u03c1\u03b5\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f04\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\u03c0\u03bf\u03c2 = one who gives\n rise to divisions by erroneous teaching, not necessarily of a\n fundamentally heterodox nature, but of the kind just described in\n _verse 9_.\u201d _Cf._ _Acts 20:30_\u2014\u201c_from among your own selves shall\n men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples\n after them_\u201d; _1 John 4:2, 3_\u2014\u201c_Hereby know ye the Spirit of God:\n every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the\n flesh is of God: and every spirit that confesseth not Jesus is not\n of God: and this is the spirit of the antichrist._\u201d B. B.\n Bosworth: \u201cHeresy, in the N. T., does not necessarily mean the\n holding of erroneous opinions,\u2014it may also mean the holding of\n correct opinions in an unbrotherly or divisive spirit.\u201d We grant\n that the word \u201c_heretical_\u201d may also mean \u201c_factious_\u201d; but we\n claim that false doctrine is the chief source of division, and is\n therefore in itself a disqualification for participation in the\n Lord\u2019s Supper. Factiousness is an additional bar, and we treat it\n under the next head of Schism.\n\n The Panpresbyterian Council, mentioned above, refused to admit to\n their body the Cumberland Presbyterians, because, though the\n latter adhere to the Presbyterian form of church government, they\n are Arminian in their views of the doctrines of grace. As we have\n seen, on pages 940\u2010942, that Baptism is a confession of\n evangelical faith, so here we see that the Lord\u2019s Supper also is a\n confession of evangelical faith, and that no one can properly\n participate in it who denies the doctrines of sin, of the deity,\n incarnation and atonement of Christ, and of justification by\n faith, which the Lord\u2019s Supper symbolizes. Such denial should\n exclude from all Christian fellowship as well.\n\n There is heresy which involves exclusion only from church\n fellowship. Since pedobaptists hold and propagate false doctrine\n with regard to the church and its ordinances\u2014doctrines which\n endanger the spirituality of the church, the sufficiency of the\n Scriptures, and the lordship of Christ\u2014we cannot properly admit\n them to the Lord\u2019s Supper. To admit them or to partake with them,\n would be to treat falsehood as if it were truth. Arnold,\n Prerequisites to Communion, 72\u2014\u201cPedobaptists are guilty of\n teaching that the baptized are not members of the church, or that\n membership in the church is not voluntary; that there are two\n sorts of baptism, one of which is a profession of faith of the\n person baptized, and the other is profession of faith of another\n person; that regeneration is given in and by baptism, or that the\n church is composed in great part of persons who do not give, and\n were never supposed to give, any evidence of regeneration; that\n the church has a right to change essentially one of Christ\u2019s\n institutions, or that it is unessential whether it be observed as\n he ordained it or in some other manner; that baptism may be\n rightfully administered in a way which makes much of the language\n in which it is described in the Scriptures wholly unsuitable and\n inapplicable, and which does not at all represent the facts and\n doctrines which baptism is declared in the Scriptures to\n represent; that the Scriptures are not in all religious matters\n the sufficient and only binding rule of faith and practice.\u201d\n\n\n(_d_) Schism, or the promotion of division and dissension in the\nchurch.\u2014This also requires exclusion from church fellowship, and from the\nLord\u2019s Supper which is its appointed sign.\n\n\n _Rom. 16:17_\u2014\u201c_Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them that are\n causing the divisions and occasions of stumbling contrary to the\n doctrine which ye learned: and turn away from them._\u201d Since\n pedobaptists, by their teaching and practice, draw many away from\n Scripturally constituted churches,\u2014thus dividing true believers\n from each other and weakening the bodies organized after the model\n of the New Testament,\u2014it is imperative upon us to separate\n ourselves from them, so far as regards that communion at the\n Lord\u2019s table which is the sign of church fellowship. Mr. Spurgeon\n admits pedobaptists to commune with his church \u201cfor two or three\n months.\u201d Then they are kindly asked whether they are pleased with\n the church, its preaching, doctrine, form of government, _etc._ If\n they say they are pleased, they are asked if they are not disposed\n to be baptized and become members? If so inclined, all is well;\n but if not, they are kindly told that it is not desirable for them\n to commune longer. Thus baptism is held to precede church\n membership and permanent communion, although temporary communion\n is permitted without it.\n\n Arnold, Prerequisites to Communion, 80\u2014\u201cIt may perhaps be objected\n that the passages cited under the four preceding subdivisions\n refer to church fellowship in a general way, without any specific\n reference to the Lord\u2019s Supper. In reply to this objection, I\n would answer, in the first place, that having endeavored\n previously to establish the position that the Lord\u2019s Supper is an\n ordinance to be celebrated in the church, and expressive of church\n fellowship, I felt at liberty to use the passages that enjoin the\n withdrawal of that fellowship as constructively enjoining\n exclusion from the Communion, which is its chief token. I answer,\n secondly, that the principle here assumed seems to me to pervade\n the Scriptural teachings so thoroughly that it is next to\n impossible to lay down _any_ Scriptural terms of communion at the\n Lord\u2019s table, except upon the admission that the ordinance is\n inseparably connected with church fellowship. To treat the subject\n otherwise, would be, as it appears to me, a violent putting\n asunder of what the Lord has joined together. The objection\n suggests an additional argument in favor of our position that the\n Lord\u2019s Supper is a _church_ ordinance.\u201d \u201cWho Christ\u2019s body doth\n divide, Wounds afresh the Crucified; Who Christ\u2019s people doth\n perplex, Weakens faith and comfort wrecks; Who Christ\u2019s order doth\n not see, Works in vain for unity; Who Christ\u2019s word doth take for\n guide, With the Bridegroom loves the Bride.\u201d\n\n\nD. The local church is the judge whether these prerequisites are\nfulfilled.\n\n\nThe local church is the judge whether these prerequisites are fulfilled in\nthe case of persons desiring to partake of the Lord\u2019s Supper.\u2014This is\nevident from the following considerations:\n\n(_a_) The command to observe the ordinance was given, not to individuals,\nbut to a company.\n\n(_b_) Obedience to this command is not an individual act, but is the joint\nact of many.\n\n(_c_) The regular observance of the Lord\u2019s Supper cannot be secured, nor\nthe qualifications of persons desiring to participate in it be\nscrutinized, unless some distinct organized body is charged with this\nresponsibility.\n\n(_d_) The only organized body known to the New Testament is the local\nchurch, and this is the only body, of any sort, competent to have charge\nof the ordinances. The invisible church has no officers.\n\n(_e_) The New Testament accounts indicate that the Lord\u2019s Supper was\nobserved only at regular appointed meetings of local churches, and was\nobserved by these churches as regularly organized bodies.\n\n(_f_) Since the duty of examining the qualifications of candidates for\nbaptism and for membership is vested in the local church and is essential\nto its distinct existence, the analogy of the ordinances would lead us to\nbelieve that the scrutiny of qualifications for participation in the\nLord\u2019s Supper rests with the same body.\n\n(_g_) This care that only proper persons are admitted to the ordinances\nshould be shown, not by open or forcible debarring of the unworthy at the\ntime of the celebration, but by previous public instruction of the\ncongregation, and, if needful in the case of persistent offenders, by\nsubsequent private and friendly admonition.\n\n\n \u201cWhat is everybody\u2019s business is nobody\u2019s business.\u201d If there be\n any power of effective scrutiny, it must be lodged in the local\n church. The minister is not to administer the ordinance of the\n Lord\u2019s Supper at his own option, any more than the ordinance of\n Baptism. He is simply the organ of the church. He is to follow the\n rules of the church as to invitations and as to the mode of\n celebrating the ordinance, of course instructing the church as to\n the order of the New Testament. In the case of sick members who\n desire to communicate, brethren may be deputed to hold a special\n meeting of the church at the private house or sick room, and then\n only may the pastor officiate. If an invitation to the Communion\n is given, it may well be in the following form: \u201cMembers in good\n standing of other churches of like faith and practice are\n cordially invited to partake with us.\u201d But since the comity of\n Baptist churches is universally acknowledged, and since Baptist\n views with regard to the ordinances are so generally understood,\n it should be taken for granted that all proper persons will be\n welcome even if no invitation of any sort is given.\n\n Mr. Spurgeon, as we have seen, permitted unbaptized persons\n temporarily to partake of the Lord\u2019s Supper unchallenged, but if\n there appeared a disposition to make participation habitual, one\n of the deacons in a private interview explained Baptist doctrine\n and urged the duty of baptism. If this advice was not taken,\n participation in the Lord\u2019s Supper naturally ceased. Dr. P. S.\n Henson proposes a middle path between open and close communion, as\n follows: \u201cPreach and urge faith in Jesus and obedience to him.\n Leave choice with participants themselves. It is not wise to set\n up a judgment\u2010seat at the Lord\u2019s table. Always preach the\n Scriptural order\u20141. Faith in Jesus; 2. Obedience in Baptism; 2.\n Observance of the Lord\u2019s Supper.\u201d J. B. Thomas: \u201cObjections to\n strict communion come with an ill grace from pedobaptists who\n withhold communion from their own baptized, whom they have\n forcibly made quasi\u2010members in spite of the only protest they are\n capable of offering, and whom they have retained as subjects of\n discipline without their consent.\u201d\n\n A. H. Strong, Cleveland Sermon on Our Denominational Outlook, May\n 19, 1904\u2014\u201cIf I am asked whether Baptists still hold to restricted\n communion, I answer that our principle has not changed, but that\n many of us apply the principle in a different manner from that of\n our fathers. We believe that Baptism logically precedes the Lord\u2019s\n Supper, as birth precedes the taking of nourishment, and\n regeneration precedes sanctification. We believe that the order of\n the ordinances is an important point of Christian doctrine, and\n itself teaches Christian doctrine. Hence we proclaim it and adhere\n to it, in our preaching and our practice. But we do not turn the\n Lord\u2019s Supper into a judgment\u2010seat, or turn the officers of the\n church into detectives. We teach the truth, and expect that the\n truth will win its way. We are courteous to all who come among us;\n and expect that they in turn will have the courtesy to respect our\n convictions and to act accordingly. But there is danger here that\n we may break from our moorings and drift into indifferentism with\n regard to the ordinances. The recent advocacy of open church\u2010\n membership is but the logical consequence of a previous concession\n of open communion. I am persuaded that this new doctrine is\n confined to very few among us. The remedy for this false\n liberalism is to be found in that same Christ who solves for us\n all other problems. It is this Christ who sets the solitary in\n families, and who makes of one every nation that dwells on the\n face of the earth. Christian denominations are at least\n temporarily his appointment. Loyalty to the body which seems to us\n best to represent his truth is also loyalty to him. Love for\n Christ does not involve the surrender of the ties of family, or\n nation, or denomination, but only consecrates and ennobles them.\n\n \u201cYet Christ is King in Zion. There is but one army of the living\n God, even though there are many divisions. We can emphasize our\n unity with other Christian bodies, rather than the differences\n between us. We can regard them as churches of the Lord Jesus, even\n though they are irregularly constituted. As a marriage ceremony\n may be valid, even though performed without a license and by an\n unqualified administrator; and as an ordination may be valid, even\n though the ordinary laying\u2010on of hands be omitted; so the\n ordinance of the Lord\u2019s Supper as administered in pedobaptist\n churches may be valid, though irregular in its accompaniments and\n antecedents. Though we still protest against the modern\n perversions of the New Testament doctrine as to the subjects and\n mode of Baptism, we hold with regard to the Lord\u2019s Supper that\n irregularity is not invalidity, and that we may recognize as\n churches even those bodies which celebrate the Lord\u2019s Supper\n without having been baptized. Our faith in the larger Christ is\n bringing us out from our denominational isolation into an\n inspiring recognition of our oneness with the universal church of\n God throughout the world.\u201d On the whole subject, see Madison\n Avenue Lectures, 217\u2010260; and A. H. Strong, on Christian Truth and\n its Keepers, in Philosophy and Religion, 238\u2010244.\n\n\nE. Special objections to open communion.\n\n\nThe advocates of this view claim that baptism, as not being an\nindispensable term of salvation, cannot properly be made an indispensable\nterm of communion.\n\n\n Robert Hall, Works, 1:285, held that there can be no proper terms\n of communion which are not also terms of salvation. He claims that\n \u201cwe are expressly commanded to tolerate in the church all those\n diversities of opinion which are not inconsistent with salvation.\u201d\n For the open communion view, see also John M. Mason, Works, 1:369;\n Princeton Review, Oct. 1850; Bib. Sac., 21:449; 24:482; 25:401;\n Spirit of the Pilgrims, 6:103, 142. But, as Curtis remarks, in his\n Progress of Baptist Principles, 292, this principle would utterly\n frustrate the very objects for which visible churches were\n founded\u2014to be \u201c_the pillar and ground of the truth_\u201d (_1 Tim.\n 3:15_); for truth is set forth as forcibly in ordinances as in\n doctrine.\n\n\nIn addition to what has already been said, we reply:\n\n(_a_) This view is contrary to the belief and practice of all but an\ninsignificant fragment of organized Christendom.\n\n\n A portion of the English Baptists, and the Free Will Baptists in\n America, are the only bodies which in their standards of faith\n accept and maintain the principles of open communion. As to the\n belief and practice of the Methodist Episcopal denomination, the\n New York Christian Advocate states the terms of communion as\n being: 1. Discipleship; 2. Baptism; 3. Consistent church life, as\n required in the \u201cDiscipline\u201d; and F. G. Hibbard, Christian\n Baptism, 174, remarks that, \u201cin one principle the Baptist and\n pedobaptist churches agree. They both agree in rejecting from the\n communion at the table of the Lord, and denying the rights of\n church fellowship to all who have not been baptized. Valid\n baptism, they consider, is essential to constitute visible church\n membership. This also we [Methodists] hold.... The charge of close\n communion is no more applicable to the Baptists than to us.\u201d\n\n The Interior states the Presbyterian position as follows: \u201cThe\n difference between our Baptist brethren and ourselves is an\n important difference. We agree with them, however, in saying that\n unbaptized persons should not partake of the Lord\u2019s Supper. Close\n communion, in our judgment, is a more defensible position than\n open communion.\u201d Dr. John Hall: \u201cIf I believed, with the Baptists,\n that none are baptized but those who are immersed on profession of\n faith, I should, with them, refuse to commune with any others.\u201d\n\n As to the views of Congregationalists, we quote from Dwight,\n Systematic Theology, sermon 160\u2014\u201cIt is an indispensable\n qualification for this ordinance that the candidate for communion\n be a member of the visible church of Christ, in full standing. By\n this I intend that he should be a man of piety; that he should\n have made a public profession of religion; and that he should have\n been baptized.\u201d The Independent: \u201cWe have never been disposed to\n charge the Baptist church with any special narrowness or bigotry\n in their rule of admission to the Lord\u2019s table. We do not see how\n it differs from that commonly admitted and established among\n Presbyterian churches.\u201d\n\n The Episcopal standards and authorities are equally plain. The\n Book of Common Prayer, Order of Confirmation, declares: \u201cThere\n shall none be admitted to the holy communion, until such time as\n he be confirmed, or be ready and desirous to be\n confirmed\u201d\u2014confirmation always coming after baptism. Wall, History\n of Infant Baptism, part 2, chapter 9\u2014\u201cNo church ever gave the\n communion to any persons before they were baptized. Among all the\n absurdities that ever were held, none ever maintained that any\n person should partake of the communion before he was baptized.\u201d\n\n\n(_b_) It assumes an unscriptural inequality between the two ordinances.\nThe Lord\u2019s Supper holds no higher rank in Scripture than does Baptism. The\nobligation to commune is no more binding than the obligation to profess\nfaith by being baptized. Open communion, however, treats baptism as if it\nwere optional, while it insists upon communion as indispensable.\n\n\n Robert Hall should rather have said: \u201cNo church has a right to\n establish terms of baptism which are not also terms of salvation,\u201d\n for baptism is most frequently in Scripture connected with the\n things that accompany salvation. We believe faith to be one\n prerequisite, but not the only one. We may hold a person to be a\n Christian, without thinking him entitled to commune unless he has\n been also baptized.\n\n Ezra\u2019s reform in abolishing mixed marriages with the surrounding\n heathen was not narrow nor bigoted nor intolerant. Miss Willard\n said well that from the Gerizim of holy beatitudes there comes a\n voice: \u201cBlessed are the inclusive, for they shall be included,\u201d\n and from Mount Ebal a voice, saying: \u201cSad are the exclusive, for\n they shall be excluded.\u201d True liberality is both Christian and\n wise. We should be just as liberal as Christ himself, and no more\n so. Even Miss Willard would not include rum\u2010sellers in the\n Christian Temperance Union, nor think that town blessed that did\n not say to saloon keepers: \u201cRepent, or go.\u201d The choir is not\n narrow because it does not include those who can only make\n discords, nor is the sheepfold intolerant that refuses to include\n wolves, nor the medical society that excludes quacks, nor the\n church that does not invite the disobedient and schismatic to its\n communion.\n\n\n(_c_) It tends to do away with baptism altogether. If the highest\nprivilege of church membership may be enjoyed without baptism, baptism\nloses its place and importance as the initiatory ordinance of the church.\n\n\n Robert Hall would admit to the Lord\u2019s Supper those who deny\n Baptism to be perpetually binding on the church. A foreigner may\n love this country, but he cannot vote at our elections unless he\n has been naturalized. Ceremonial rites imply ceremonial\n qualifications. Dr. Meredith in Brooklyn said to his great Bible\n Class that a man, though not a Christian, but who felt himself a\n sinner and needing Christ, could worthily partake of the Lord\u2019s\n Supper. This is the logic of open communion. The Supper is not\n limited to baptized persons, nor to church members, nor even to\n converted people, but belongs also to the unconverted world. This\n is not only to do away with Baptism, but to make the Lord\u2019s Supper\n a converting ordinance.\n\n\n(_d_) It tends to do away with all discipline. When Christians offend, the\nchurch must withdraw its fellowship from them. But upon the principle of\nopen communion, such withdrawal is impossible, since the Lord\u2019s Supper,\nthe highest expression of church fellowship, is open to every person who\nregards himself as a Christian.\n\n\n H. F. Colby: \u201cOught we to acknowledge that evangelical\n pedobaptists are qualified to partake of the Lord\u2019s Supper? We are\n ready to admit them on precisely the same terms on which we admit\n ourselves. Our communion bars come to be a protest, but from no\n plan of ours. They become a protest merely as every act of loyalty\n to truth becomes a protest against error.\u201d Constitutions of the\n Holy Apostles, book 2, section 7 (about 250 A. D.)\u2014\u201cBut if they\n [those who have been convicted of wickedness] afterwards repent\n and turn from their error, then we receive them as we receive the\n heathen, when they wish to repent, into the church indeed to hear\n the word, but do not receive them to communion until they have\n received the seal of baptism and are made complete Christians.\u201d\n\n\n(_e_) It tends to do away with the visible church altogether. For no\nvisible church is possible, unless some sign of membership be required, in\naddition to the signs of membership in the invisible church. Open\ncommunion logically leads to open church membership, and a church\nmembership open to all, without reference to the qualifications required\nin Scripture, or without examination on the part of the church as to the\nexistence of these qualifications in those who unite with it, is virtually\nan identification of the church with the world, and, without protest from\nScripturally constituted bodies, would finally result in its actual\nextinction.\n\n\n Dr. Walcott Calkins, in Andover Review: \u201cIt has never been denied\n that the Puritan way of maintaining the purity and doctrinal\n soundness of the churches is to secure a soundly converted\n membership. There is one denomination of Puritans which has never\n deviated a hair\u2019s breadth from this way. The Baptists have always\n insisted that regenerate persons only ought to receive the\n sacraments of the church. And they have depended absolutely upon\n this provision for the purity and doctrinal soundness of their\n churches.\u201d\n\n At the Free Will Baptist Convention at Providence, Oct., 1874, the\n question came up of admitting pedobaptists to membership. This was\n disposed of by resolving that \u201cChristian baptism is a personal act\n of public consecration to Christ, and that believers\u2019 baptism and\n immersion alone, as baptism, are fundamental principles of the\n denomination.\u201d In other words, unimmersed believers would not be\n admitted to membership. But is it not the Lord\u2019s church? Have we a\n right to exclude? Is this not bigotry? The Free Will Baptist\n answers: \u201cNo, it is only loyalty to truth.\u201d\n\n We claim that, upon the same principle, he should go further, and\n refuse to admit to the communion those whom he refuses to admit to\n church membership. The reasons assigned for acting upon the\n opposite principle are sentimental rather than rational. See John\n Stuart Mill\u2019s definition of sentimentality, quoted in Martineau\u2019s\n Essays, 1:94\u2014\u201cSentimentality consists in setting the sympathetic\n aspect of things, or their loveableness, above their \u00e6sthetic\n aspect, their beauty; or above the moral aspect of them, their\n right or wrong.\u201d\n\n OBJECTIONS TO STRICT COMMUNION, AND ANSWERS TO THEM (condensed\n from Arnold, Terms of Communion, 82):\n\n \u201c1st. _Primitive rules are not applicable now._ Reply: (1) The\n laws of Christ are unchangeable. (2) The primitive order ought to\n be restored.\n\n \u201c2d. _Baptism, as an external rite, is of less importance than\n love._ Reply: (1) It is not inconsistent with love, but the mark\n of love, to keep Christ\u2019s commandments. (2) Love for our brethren\n requires protest against their errors.\n\n \u201c3d. _Pedobaptists think themselves baptized._ Reply: (1) This is\n a reason why they should act as if they believed it, not a reason\n why we should act as if it were so. (2) We cannot submit our\n consciences to their views of truth without harming ourselves and\n them.\n\n \u201c4th. _Strict communion is a hindrance to union among Christians._\n Reply: (1) Christ desires only union in the truth. (2) Baptists\n are not responsible for the separation. (3) Mixed communion is not\n a cure but a cause of disunion.\n\n \u201c5th. _The rule excludes from the communion baptized members of\n pedobaptist churches._ Reply: (1) These persons are walking\n disorderly, in promoting error. (2) The Lord\u2019s Supper is a symbol\n of church fellowship, not of fellowship for individuals, apart\n from their church relations.\n\n \u201c6th. _A plea for dispensing with the rule exists in extreme cases\n where persons must commune with us or not at all._ Reply: (1) It\n is hard to fix limits to these exceptions: they would be likely to\n encroach more and more, till the rule became merely nominal. (2)\n It is a greater privilege and means of grace, in such\n circumstances, to abstain from communing, than contrary to\n principle to participate. (3) It is not right to participate with\n others, where we cannot invite them reciprocally.\n\n \u201c7. _Alleged inconsistency of our practice._\u2014(_a_) Since we expect\n to commune in heaven. Reply: This confounds Christian fellowship\n with church fellowship. We do commune with pedobaptists\n spiritually, here as hereafter. We do not expect to partake of the\n Lord\u2019s Supper with them, or with others, in heaven. (_b_) Since we\n reject the better and receive the worse. Reply: We are not at\n liberty to refuse to apply Christ\u2019s outward rule, because we\n cannot equally apply his inward spiritual rule of character.\n Pedobaptists withhold communion from those they regard as\n unbaptized, though they may be more spiritual than some in the\n church. (_c_) Since we recognize pedobaptists as brethren in union\n meetings, exchange of pulpits, _etc._ Reply: None of these acts of\n fraternal fellowship imply the church communion which admission to\n the Lord\u2019s table would imply. This last would recognize them as\n baptized: the former do not.\n\n \u201c8th. _Alleged impolicy of our practice._ Reply: (1) This\n consideration would be pertinent, only if we were at liberty to\n change our practice when it was expedient, or was thought to be\n so. (2) Any particular truth will inspire respect in others in\n proportion as its advocates show that they respect it. In England\n our numbers have diminished, compared with the population, in the\n ratio of 33 per cent; here we have increased 50 per cent. in\n proportion to the ratio of population.\n\n \u201c_Summary._ Open communion must be justified, if at all, on one of\n four grounds: First, that baptism is not prerequisite to\n communion. But this is opposed to the belief and practice of all\n churches. Secondly, that immersion on profession of faith is not\n essential to baptism. But this is renouncing Baptist principles\n altogether. Thirdly, that the individual, and not the church, is\n to be the judge of his qualifications for admission to the\n communion. But this is contrary to sound reason, and fatal to the\n ends for which the church is instituted. For, if the conscience of\n the individual is to be the rule of the action of the church in\n regard to his admission to the Lord\u2019s Supper, why not also with\n regard to his regeneration, his doctrinal belief, and his\n obedience to Christ\u2019s commands generally? Fourthly, that the\n church has no responsibility in regard to the qualifications of\n those who come to her communion. But this is abandoning the\n principle of the independence of the churches, and their\n accountableness to Christ, and it overthrows all church\n discipline.\u201d\n\n See also Hovey, in Bib. Sac., 1862:133; Pepper, in Bap. Quar.,\n 1867:216; Curtis on Communion, 292; Howell, Terms of Communion;\n Williams, The Lord\u2019s Supper; Theodosia Ernest, pub. by Am. Bap.\n Pub. Soc.; Wilkinson, The Baptist Principle. In concluding our\n treatment of Ecclesiology, we desire to call attention to the fact\n that Jacob, the English Churchman, in his Ecclesiastical Polity of\n the N. T., and Cunningham, the Scotch Presbyterian, in his Croall\n Lectures for 1886, have furnished Baptists with much valuable\n material for the defence of the New Testament doctrine of the\n Church and its Ordinances. In fact, a complete statement of the\n Baptist positions might easily be constructed from the concessions\n of their various opponents. See A. H. Strong, on Unconscious\n Assumptions of Communion Polemics, in Philosophy and Religion,\n 245\u2010249.\n\n\n\n\n\nPART VIII. ESCHATOLOGY, OR THE DOCTRINE OF FINAL THINGS.\n\n\nNeither the individual Christian character, nor the Christian church as a\nwhole, attains its destined perfection in this life (Rom. 8:24). This\nperfection is reached in the world to come (1 Cor. 13:10). As preparing\nthe way for the kingdom of God in its completeness, certain events are to\ntake place, such as death, Christ\u2019s second coming, the resurrection of the\nbody, the general judgment. As stages in the future condition of men,\nthere is to be an intermediate and an ultimate state, both for the\nrighteous and for the wicked. We discuss these events and states in what\nappears from Scripture to be the order of their occurrence.\n\n\n _Rom. 8:24_\u2014\u201c_in hope were we saved: but hope that is seen is not\n hope: for who hopeth for that which he seeth?_\u201d _1 Cor.\n 13:10_\u2014\u201c_when that which is perfect is come, that which is in part\n will be done away._\u201d Original sin is not wholly eradicated from\n the Christian, and the Holy Spirit is not yet sole ruler. So, too,\n the church is still in a state of conflict, and victory is\n hereafter. But as the Christian life attains its completeness only\n in the future, so with the life of sin. Death begins here, but\n culminates hereafter. _James 1:15_\u2014\u201c_the sin, when it is full\n grown, bringeth forth death._\u201d The wicked man here has only a\n foretaste of \u201c_the wrath to come_\u201d (_Mat. 3:7_). We may \u201c_lay up\n ... treasures in heaven_\u201d (_Mat. 6:20_), but we may also\n \u201c_treasure up for ourselves wrath_\u201d (_Rom. 2:5_), _i. e._, lay up\n treasures in hell.\n\n Dorner: \u201cTo the actuality of the consummation of the church\n belongs a cessation of reproduction through which there is\n constantly renewed a world which the church must subdue.... The\n mutually external existence of spirit and nature must give way to\n a perfect internal existence. Their externality to each other is\n the ground of the mortality of the natural side, and of its being\n a means of temptation to the spiritual side. For in this\n externality the natural side has still too great independence and\n exerts a determining power over the personality.... Art, the\n beautiful, receives in the future state its special place; for it\n is the way of art to delight in visible presentation, to achieve\n the classical and perfect with unfettered play of its powers.\n Every one morally perfect will thus wed the good to the beautiful.\n In the rest, there will be no inactivity; and in the activity\n also, no unrest.\u201d\n\n Schleiermacher: \u201cEschatology is essentially prophetic; and is\n therefore vague and indefinite, like all unfulfilled prophecy.\u201d\n Schiller\u2019s Thekla: \u201cEvery thought of beautiful, trustful seeming\n Stands fulfilled in Heaven\u2019s eternal day; Shrink not then from\n erring and from dreaming,\u2014Lofty sense lies oft in childish play.\u201d\n Frances Power Cobbe, Peak of Darien, 265\u2014\u201cHuman nature is a ship\n with the tide out; when the tide of eternity comes in, we shall\n see the purpose of the ship.\u201d Eschatology deals with the\n precursors of Christ\u2019s second coming, as well as with the second\n coming itself. We are to labor for the coming of the kingdom of\n God in society as well as in the individual and in the church, in\n the present life as well as in the life to come.\n\n Kidd, in his Principles of Western Civilization, says that\n survives which helps the greatest number. But the greatest number\n is always in the future. The theatre has become too wide for the\n drama. Through the roof the eternal stars appear. The image of God\n in man implies the equality of all men. Political equality implies\n universal suffrage; economic equality implies universal profit.\n Society has already transcended, first, city isolation, and\n secondly, state isolation. The United States presents thus far the\n largest free trade area in history. The next step is the unity of\n the English speaking peoples. The days of separate nationalities\n are numbered. _Laissez faire_ = surviving barbarism. There are\n signs of larger ideas in art, ethics, literature, philosophy,\n science, politics, economics, religion. Competition must be\n moralized, and must take into account the future as well as the\n present. See also Walter Rauschenbusch, Christianity and the\n Social Crisis.\n\n George B. Stevens, in Am. Jour. Theology, Oct. 1902: 666\u2010684,\n asks: \u201cIs there a self\u2010constituted New Testament Eschatology?\u201d He\n answers, for substance, that only three things are sure: 1. The\n certain triumph of the kingdom\u2014this being the kernel of truth in\n the doctrine of Christ\u2019s second coming; 2. the victory of life\n over death\u2014the truth in the doctrine of the resurrection; 3. the\n principle of judgment\u2014the truth at the basis of the belief in\n rewards and punishments in the world to come. This meagre and\n abstract residuum argues denial both of the unity and the\n sufficiency of Scripture. Our view of inspiration, while it does\n not assure us of minute details, does notwithstanding give us a\n broad general outline of the future consummation, and guarantees\n its trustworthiness by the word of Christ and his apostles.\n\n Faith in that consummation is the main incitement to poetic\n utterance and to lofty achievement. Shairp, Province of Poetry,\n 28\u2014\u201cIf poetry be not a river fed from the clear wells that spring\n on the highest summits of humanity, but only a canal to drain off\n stagnant ditches from the flats, it may be a very useful sanitary\n contrivance, but has not, in Bacon\u2019s words, any \u2019participation of\n divineness.\u2019\u201d Shakespeare uses prose for ideas detached from\n emotion, such as the merrymaking of clowns or the maundering of\n fools. But lofty thought with him puts on poetry as its singing\n robe. Savage, Life beyond Death, 1\u20105\u2014\u201cWhen Henry D. Thoreau lay\n dying at Concord, his friend Parker Pillsbury sat by his bedside.\n He leaned over, took him by the hand, and said: \u2018Henry, you are so\n near to the border now, can you see anything on the other side?\u2019\n And Thoreau answered: \u2018One world at a time, Parker!\u2019 But I cannot\n help asking about that other world, and if I belong to a future\n world as well as to this, my life will be a very different one.\u201d\n Jesus knew our need of certain information about the future, and\n therefore he said: \u201c_In my Father\u2019s house are many mansions; if it\n were not so, I would have told you; for I go to prepare a place\n for you_\u201d (_John 14:2_).\n\n Hutton, Essays, 2:211\u2014\u201cImagination may be powerful without being\n fertile; it may summon up past scenes and live in them without\n being able to create new ones. National unity and supernatural\n guidance were beliefs which kept Hebrew poetry from being fertile\n or original in its dealings with human story; for national pride\n is conservative, not inventive, and believers in actual providence\n do not care to live in a world of invention. The Jew saw in\n history only the illustration of these two truths. He was never\n thoroughly stirred by mere individual emotion. The modern poet is\n a student of beauty; the O. T. poet a student of God. To the\n latter all creation is a mere shadow; the essence of its beauty\n and the sustaining power of its life are in the spiritual world.\n Go beyond the spiritual nature of man, and the sympathy of the\n Hebrew poet is dried up at once. His poetry was true and divine,\n but at the expense of variousness of insight and breadth of\n sympathy. It was heliocentric rather than geocentric. Only Job,\n the latest, is a conscious effort of the imagination.\u201d Apocalyptic\n poetry for these reasons was most natural to the Hebrew mind.\n\n Balfour, Foundations of Belief, 66\u2014\u201cSomewhere and for some Being,\n there shines an unchanging splendor of beauty, of which in nature\n and in art we see, each of us from his own standpoint, only\n passing gleams and stray reflections, whose different aspects we\n cannot now co\u00f6rdinate, whose import we cannot fully comprehend,\n but which at least is something other than the chance play of\n subjective sensibility or the far\u2010off echo of ancestral lusts.\u201d\n Dewey, Psychology, 200\u2014\u201cAll products of the creative imagination\n are unconscious testimonials to the unity of spirit which binds\n man to man, and man to nature, in one organic whole.\u201d Tennyson,\n Idylls of the King: \u201cAs from beyond the limit of the world, Like\n the last echo born of a great cry, Sounds, as if some fair city\n were one voice Around a king returning from his wars.\u201d See, on the\n whole subject of Eschatology, Luthardt, Lehre von den letzten\n Dingen, and Saving Truths of Christianity; Hodge, Systematic\n Theology, 3:713\u2010880; Hovey, Biblical Eschatology; Heagle, That\n Blessed Hope.\n\n\n\n\nI. Physical Death.\n\n\nPhysical death is the separation of the soul from the body. We distinguish\nit from spiritual death, or the separation of the soul from God; and from\nthe second death, or the banishment from God and final misery of the\nre\u00fcnited soul and body of the wicked.\n\n\n Spiritual death: _Is. 59:2_\u2014\u201c_but your iniquities have separated\n between you and your God, and your sins have hid his face from\n you, so that he will not hear_\u201d; _Rom. 7:24_\u2014\u201c_Wretched man that I\n am! who shall deliver me out of the body of this death?_\u201d _Eph.\n 2:1_\u2014\u201c_dead through your trespasses and sins._\u201d The second death:\n _Rev. 2:11_\u2014\u201c_He that overcometh shall not be hurt of the second\n death_\u201d; _20:14_\u2014\u201c_And death and Hades were cast into the lake of\n fire. This is the second death, even the lake of fire_\u201d;\n _21:8_\u2014\u201c_But for the fearful, and unbelieving, and abominable, and\n murderers, and fornicators, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all\n liars, their part shall be in the lake that burneth with fire and\n brimstone; which is the second death._\u201d\n\n Julius M\u00fcller, Doctrine of Sin, 2:303\u2014\u201cSpiritual death, the inner\n discord and enslavement of the soul, and the misery resulting\n therefrom, to which belongs that other death, the second death, an\n outward condition corresponding to that inner slavery.\u201d Trench,\n Epistles to the Seven Churches, 151\u2014\u201cThis phrase [\u2018_second\n death_\u2019] is itself a solemn protest against the Sadduceeism and\n Epicureanism which would make natural death the be\u2010all and the\n end\u2010all of existence. As there is a life beyond the present life\n for the faithful, so there is death beyond that which falls under\n our eyes for the wicked.\u201d E. G. Robinson: \u201cThe second death is the\n continuance of spiritual death in another and timeless existence.\u201d\n Hudson, Scientific Demonstration of a Future Life, 222\u2014\u201cIf a man\n has a power that transcends the senses, it is at least presumptive\n evidence that it does not perish when the senses are\n extinguished.... The activity of the subjective mind is in inverse\n proportion to that of the body, though the objective mind weakens\n with the body and perishes with the brain.\u201d\n\n Prof. H. H. Bawden: \u201cConsciousness is simply the growing of an\n organism, while the organism is just that which grows.\n Consciousness is a function, not a thing, not an order of\n existence at all. It is the universe coming to a focus, flowering\n so to speak in a finite centre. Society is an organism in the same\n sense that the human being is an organism. The spatial separation\n of the elements of the social organism is relatively no greater\n than the separation of the unit factors of the body. As the\n neurone cannot deny the consciousness which is the function of the\n body, so the individual member of society has no reason for\n denying the existence of a cosmic life of the organism which we\n call society.\u201d\n\n Emma M. Caillard, on Man in the Light of Evolution, in Contemp.\n Rev., Dec. 1893:878\u2014\u201cMan is nature risen into the consciousness of\n its relationship to the divine. There is no receding from this\n point. When \u2018that which drew from out the boundless deep turns\n again home,\u2019 the persistence of each personal life is\n necessitated. Human life, as it is, includes, though it transcends\n the lower forms through which it has developed. Human life, as it\n will be, must include though it may transcend its present\n manifestation, _viz._, personality.\u201d \u201cSometime, when all life\u2019s\n lessons have been learned, And suns and stars forevermore have\n set, And things which our weak judgments here have spurned, The\n things o\u2019er which we grieved with lashes wet, Will flash before us\n through our life\u2019s dark night, As stars shine most in deepest\n tints of blue: And we shall see how all God\u2019s plans were right,\n And most that seemed reproof was love most true: And if sometimes\n commingled with life\u2019s wine We find the wormwood and rebel and\n shrink, Be sure a wiser hand than yours or mine Pours out this\n portion for our lips to drink. And if some friend we love is lying\n low, Where human kisses cannot reach his face, O do not blame the\n loving Father so, But wear your sorrow with obedient grace; And\n you shall shortly know that lengthened breath Is not the sweetest\n gift God sends his friend, And that sometimes the sable pall of\n death Conceals the fairest boon his love can send. If we could\n push ajar the gates of life, And stand within, and all God\u2019s\n working see, We could interpret all this doubt and strife, And for\n each mystery find a key.\u201d\n\n\nAlthough physical death falls upon the unbeliever as the original penalty\nof sin, to all who are united in Christ it loses its aspect of penalty,\nand becomes a means of discipline and of entrance into eternal life.\n\n\n To the Christian, physical death is not a penalty: _see Ps.\n 116:15_\u2014\u201c_Precious in the sight of Jehovah Is the death of his\n saints_\u201d; _Rom. 8:10_\u2014\u201c_And if Christ is in you, the body is dead\n because of sin; but the spirit is life because of righteousness_\u201d;\n _14:8_\u2014\u201c_For whether we live, we live unto the Lord; or whether we\n die, we die unto the Lord: whether we live therefore, or die, we\n are the Lord\u2019s_\u201d; _1 Cor. 3:22_\u2014\u201c_whether Paul, or Apollos, or\n Cephas, or the world, or life, or death, or things present, or\n things to come; all are yours_\u201d; _15:55_\u2014\u201c_O death, where is thy\n victory? O death, where is thy sting?_\u201d _1 Pet. 4:6_\u2014\u201c_For unto\n this end was the gospel preached even to the dead, that they might\n be judged indeed according to men in the flesh, but live according\n to God in the spirit_\u201d; _cf._ _Rom. 1:18_\u2014\u201c_For the wrath of God\n is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and\n unrighteousness of men, who hinder the truth in unrighteousness_\u201d;\n _8:1, 2_\u2014\u201c_There is therefore now no condemnation to them that are\n in Christ Jesus. For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus\n made me free from the law of sin and of death_\u201d; _Heb. 12:6_\u2014\u201c_For\n whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth._\u201d\n\n Dr. Hovey says that \u201cthe present sufferings of believers are in\n the nature of discipline, with an aspect of retribution; while the\n present sufferings of unbelievers are retributive, with a glance\n toward reformation.\u201d We prefer to say that all penalty has been\n borne by Christ, and that, for him who is justified in Christ,\n suffering of whatever kind is of the nature of fatherly\n chastening, never of judicial retribution; see our discussion of\n the Penalty of Sin, pages 652\u2010660.\n\n \u201cWe see but dimly through the mists and vapors Amid these earthly\n damps; What are to us but sad funereal tapers May be Heaven\u2019s\n distant lamps. There is no death,\u2014what seems so is transition;\n This life of mortal breath Is but a suburb of the life Elysian\n Whose portal men call death.\u201d \u201c\u2019Tis meet that we should pause\n awhile, Ere we put off this mortal coil, And in the stillness of\n old age, Muse on our earthly pilgrimage.\u201d Shakespeare, Romeo and\n Juliet, 4:5\u2014\u201cHeaven and yourself Had part in this fair maid; now\n Heaven hath all, And all the better is it for the maid: Your part\n in her you could not keep from death, But Heaven keeps his part in\n eternal life. The most you sought was her promotion, For \u2019t was\n your heaven she should be advanced; And weep ye now, seeing she is\n advanced Above the clouds, as high as Heaven itself?\u201d Ph\u0153be Cary\u2019s\n Answered: \u201cI thought to find some healing clime For her I loved;\n she found that shore, That city whose inhabitants Are sick and\n sorrowful no more. I asked for human love for her; The Loving knew\n how best to still The infinite yearning of a heart Which but\n infinity could fill. Such sweet communion had been ours, I prayed\n that it might never end; My prayer is more than answered; now I\n have an angel for my friend. I wished for perfect peace to soothe\n The troubled anguish of her breast; And numbered with the loved\n and called She entered on untroubled rest. Life was so fair a\n thing to her, I wept and pleaded for its stay; My wish was granted\n me, for lo! She hath eternal life to\u2010day!\u201d\n\n Victor Hugo: \u201cThe tomb is not a blind alley; it is a thoroughfare.\n It closes with the twilight, to open with the dawn.... I feel that\n I have not said the thousandth part of what is in me.... The\n thirst for infinity proves infinity.\u201d Shakespeare: \u201cNothing is\n here for tears; nothing to wail, Or knock the breast; no weakness,\n no contempt, Dispraise or blame; nothing but well and fair.\u201d O. W.\n Holmes: \u201cBuild thee more stately mansions, O my soul, As the swift\n seasons roll! Leave thy low\u2010vaulted past! Let each new temple,\n nobler than the last Shut thee from heaven with a dome more vast,\n Till thou at length art free, Leaving thine outgrown shell by\n life\u2019s unresting sea!\u201d J. G. Whittier: \u201cSo when Time\u2019s veil shall\n fall asunder, The soul may know No fearful change or sudden\n wonder, Nor sink the weight of mystery under, But with the upward\n rise, and with the vastness grow.\u201d\n\n\nTo neither saint nor sinner is death a cessation of being. This we\nmaintain, against the advocates of annihilation:\n\n\n\n1. Upon rational grounds.\n\n\n(_a_) The metaphysical argument.\u2014The soul is simple, not compounded.\nDeath, in matter, is the separation of parts. But in the soul there are no\nparts to be separated. The dissolution of the body, therefore, does not\nnecessarily work a dissolution of the soul. But, since there is an\nimmaterial principle in the brute, and this argument taken by itself might\nseem to prove the immortality of the animal creation equally with that of\nman, we pass to consider the next argument.\n\n\n The Gnostics and the Manich\u00e6ans held that beasts had knowledge and\n might pray. The immateriality of the brute mind was probably the\n consideration which led Leibnitz, Bishop Butler, Coleridge, John\n Wesley, Lord Shaftesbury, Mary Somerville, James Hogg, Toplady,\n Lamartine, and Louis Agassiz to encourage the belief in animal\n immortality. See Bp. Butler, Analogy, part i, chap. i (Bohn\u2019s ed.,\n 81\u201091); Agassiz, Essay on Classification, 99\u2014\u201cMost of the\n arguments for the immortality of man apply equally to the\n permanency of this principle in other living beings.\u201d Elsewhere\n Agassiz says of animals: \u201cI cannot doubt of their immortality any\n more than I doubt of my own.\u201d Lord Shaftesbury in 1881 remarked:\n \u201cI have ever believed in a happy future for animals; I cannot say\n or conjecture how or where; but sure I am that the love, so\n manifested by dogs especially, is an emanation from the divine\n essence, and as such it can, or rather, it will, never be\n extinguished.\u201d St. Francis of Assisi preached to birds, and called\n sun, moon, earth, fire, water, stones, flowers, crickets, and\n death, his brothers and sisters. \u201cHe knew not if the brotherhood\n His homily had understood; He only knew that to one ear The\n meaning of his words was clear\u201d (Longfellow, The Sermon of St.\n Francis\u2014to the birds). \u201cIf death dissipates the sagacity of the\n elephant, why not that of his captor?\u201d See Buckner, Immortality of\n Animals; William Adams Brown, Christian Theology in Outline, 240.\n\n Mansel, Metaphysics, 371, maintains that all this argument proves\n is that the objector cannot show the soul to be compound, and so\n cannot show that it is destructible. Calderwood, Moral Philosophy,\n 259\u2014\u201cThe facts which point toward the termination of our present\n state of existence are connected with our physical nature, not\n with our mental.\u201d John Fiske, Destiny of the Creature, 110\u2014\u201cWith\n his illegitimate hypothesis of annihilation, the materialist\n transgresses the bounds of experience quite as widely as the poet\n who sings of the New Jerusalem, with its river of life and its\n streets of gold. Scientifically speaking, there is not a particle\n of evidence for either view.\u201d John Fiske, Life Everlasting,\n 80\u201085\u2014\u201cHow could immortal man have been produced through heredity\n from an ephemeral brute? We do not know. Nature\u2019s habit is to make\n prodigious leaps, but only after long preparation. Slowly rises\n the water in the tank, inch by inch through many a weary hour,\n until at length it overflows, and straightway vast systems of\n machinery are awakened into rumbling life. Slowly the ellipse\n becomes eccentric, until suddenly the finite ellipse becomes an\n infinite paraboloid.\u201d\n\n Ladd, Philosophy of Mind, 206\u2014\u201cThe ideas of dividing up or\n splitting off are not applicable to mind. The argument for the\n indestructibility of mind as growing out of its indiscerptibility,\n and the argument by which Kant confuted it, are alike absurd\n within the realm of mental phenomena.\u201d Adeney, Christianity and\n Evolution, 127\u2014\u201cNature, this argument shows, has nothing to say\n against the immortality of that which is above the range of\n physical structure.\u201d Lotze: \u201cEverything which has once originated\n will endure forever so soon as it possesses an unalterable value\n for the coherent system of the world; but it will, as a matter of\n course, in turn cease to be, if this is not the case.\u201d Bowne, Int.\n to Psych. Theory, 315\u2010318\u2014\u201cOf what use would brutes be hereafter?\n We may reply: Of what use are they here?... Those things which\n have perennial significance for the universe will abide.\u201d Bixby,\n Crisis in Morals, 203\u2014\u201cIn living beings there is always a pressure\n toward larger and higher existence.... The plant must grow, must\n bloom, must sow its seeds, or it withers away.... The aim is to\n bring forth consciousness, and in greatest fulness.... Beasts of\n prey and other enemies to the ascending path of life are to be\n swept out of the way.\u201d\n\n But is not the brute a part of that Nature which has been\n subjected to vanity, which groans and travails in pain, and which\n waits to be redeemed? The answer seems to be that the brute is a\n mere appendage to man, has no independent value in the creation,\n is incapable of ethical life or of communion with God the source\n of life, and so has no guarantee of continuance. Man on the other\n hand is of independent value. But this is to anticipate the\n argument which follows. It is sufficient here to point out that\n there is no proof that consciousness is dependent upon the soul\u2019s\n connection with a physical organism. McLane, Evolution in\n Religion, 261\u2014\u201cAs the body may preserve its form and be to a\n degree made to act after the psychic element is lost by removal of\n the brain, so this psychic element may exist, and act according to\n its nature after the physical element ceases to exist.\u201d Hovey,\n Bib. Eschatology, 19\u2014\u201cIf I am in a house, I can look upon\n surrounding objects only through its windows; but open the door\n and let me go out of the house, and the windows are no longer of\n any use to me.\u201d Shaler, Interpretation of Nature, 295\u2014\u201cTo\n perpetuate mind after death is less surprising than to perpetuate\n or transmit mind here by inheritance.\u201d See also Martineau, Study,\n 2:332\u2010337, 363\u2010365.\n\n William James, in his Essay on Human Immortality, argues that\n thought is not necessarily a _productive_ function of the brain;\n it may rather be a permissive or _transmissive_ function. Thought\n is not _made_ in the brain, so that when the brain perishes the\n soul dies. The brain is only the organ for the _transmission_ of\n thought, just as the lens transmits the light which it does not\n produce. There is a spiritual world behind and above the material\n world. Our brains are thin and half transparent places in the\n veil, through which knowledge comes in. Savage, Life after Death,\n 289\u2014\u201cYou may attach a dynamo for a time to some particular\n machine. When you have removed the machine, you have not destroyed\n the dynamo. You may attach it to some other machine and find that\n you have the old time power. So the soul may not be confined to\n one body.\u201d These analogies seem to us to come short of proving\n personal immortality. They belong to \u201cpsychology without a soul,\u201d\n and while they illustrate the persistence of some sort of life,\n they do not render more probable the continuance of my individual\n consciousness beyond the bounds of death. They are entirely\n consistent with the pantheistic theory of a remerging of the\n personal existence in the great whole of which it forms a part.\n Tennyson, In Memoriam: \u201cThat each, who seems a separate whole,\n Should move his rounds and, fusing all The skirts of self again,\n should fall Remerging in the general Soul, Is faith as vague as\n all unsweet.\u201d See Pfleiderer, Die Ritschl\u2019sche Theologie, 12;\n Howison, Limits of Evolution, 279\u2010312.\n\n Seth, Hegelianism: \u201cFor Hegel, immortality is only the permanence\n of the Absolute, the abstract process. This is no more consoling\n than the continued existence of the chemical elements of our\n bodies in new transformations. Human self\u2010consciousness is a spark\n struck in the dark, to die away on the darkness whence it has\n arisen.\u201d This is the only immortality of which George Eliot\n conceived in her poem, The Immortal Choir: \u201cO may I join the choir\n invisible Of those immortal dead who live again In minds made\n better by their presence; live In pulses stirred to generosity, In\n deeds of daring rectitude, in scorn For miserable aims that end in\n self, In thoughts sublime that pierce the night like stars, And\n with their mild persistence urge man\u2019s search To vaster issues.\u201d\n Those who hold to this unconscious immortality concede that death\n is not a separation of parts, but rather a cessation of\n consciousness; and that therefore, while the substance of human\n nature may endure, mankind may ever develop into new forms,\n without individual immortality. To this we reply, that man\u2019s self\u2010\n consciousness and self\u2010determination are different in kind from\n the consciousness and determination of the brute. As man can\n direct his self\u2010consciousness and self\u2010determination to immortal\n ends, we have the right to believe this self\u2010consciousness and\n self\u2010determination to be immortal. This leads us to the next\n argument.\n\n\n(_b_) The teleological argument.\u2014Man, as an intellectual, moral, and\nreligious being, does not attain the end of his existence on earth. His\ndevelopment is imperfect here. Divine wisdom will not leave its work\nincomplete. There must be a hereafter for the full growth of man\u2019s powers,\nand for the satisfaction of his aspirations. Created, unlike the brute,\nwith infinite capacities for moral progress, there must be an immortal\nexistence in which those capacities shall be brought into exercise. Though\nthe wicked forfeit all claim to this future, we have here an argument from\nGod\u2019s love and wisdom to the immortality of the righteous.\n\n\n In reply to this argument, it has been said that many right wishes\n are vain. Mill, Essays on Religion, 294\u2014\u201cDesire for food implies\n enough to eat, now and forever? hence an eternal supply of\n cabbage?\u201d But our argument proceeds upon three presuppositions:\n (1) that a holy and benevolent God exists; (2) that he has made\n man in his image; (3) that man\u2019s true end is holiness and likeness\n to God. Therefore, what will answer the true end of man will be\n furnished; but that is not cabbage\u2014it is holiness and love, _i.\n e._, God himself. See Martineau, Study, 2:370\u2010381.\n\n The argument, however, is valuable only in its application to the\n righteous. God will not treat the righteous as the tyrant of\n Florence treated Michael Angelo, when he bade him carve out of ice\n a statue, which would melt under the first rays of the sun. In the\n case of the wicked, the other law of retribution comes in\u2014the\n taking away of \u201c_even that which he hath_\u201d (_Mat. 25:29_). Since\n we are all wicked, the argument is not satisfactory, unless we\n take into account the further facts of atonement and\n justification\u2014facts of which we learn from revelation alone.\n\n But while, taken by itself, this rational argument might be called\n defective, and could never prove that man may not attain his end\n in the continued existence of the race, rather than in that of the\n individual, the argument appears more valuable as a rational\n supplement to the facts already mentioned, and seems to render\n certain at least the immortality of those upon whom God has set\n his love, and in whom he has wrought the beginnings of\n righteousness.\n\n Lord Erskine: \u201cInferior animals have no instincts or faculties\n which are not subservient to the ends and purposes of their being.\n Man\u2019s reason, and faculties endowed with power to reach the most\n distant worlds, would be useless if his existence were to\n terminate in the grave.\u201d There would be wastefulness in the\n extinction of great minds; see Jackson, James Martineau, 439. As\n water is implied by the organization of the fish, and air by that\n of the bird, so \u201cthe existence of spiritual power within us is\n likewise presumption that some fitting environment awaits the\n spirit when it shall be set free and perfected, and sex and death\n can be dispensed with\u201d (Newman Smyth, Place of Death in Evolution,\n 106). N\u00e4geli, the German botanist, says that Nature tends to\n perfection. Yet the mind hardly begins to awake, ere the bodily\n powers decline (George, Progress and Poverty, 505). \u201cCharacter\n grows firmer and solider as the body ages and grows weaker. Can\n character be vitally implicated in the act of physical\n dissolution?\u201d (Upton, Hibbert Lectures, 353). If a rational and\n moral Deity has caused the gradual evolution in humanity of the\n ideas of right and wrong, and has added to it the faculty of\n creating ethical ideals, must he not have provided some\n satisfaction for the ethical needs which this development has thus\n called into existence? (Balfour, Foundations of Belief, 351).\n\n Royce, Conception of God, 50, quotes Le Conte as follows: \u201cNature\n is the womb _in_ which, and evolution the process _by_ which, are\n generated sons of God. Without immortality this whole process is\n balked\u2014the whole process of cosmic evolution is futile. Shall God\n be so long and at so great pains to achieve a _spirit_, capable of\n communing with himself, and then allow it to lapse again into\n nothingness?\u201d John Fiske, Destiny of Man, 116, accepts the\n immortality of the soul by \u201ca supreme act of faith in the\n reasonableness of God\u2019s work.\u201d If man is the end of the creative\n process and the object of God\u2019s care, then the soul\u2019s career\n cannot be completed with its present life upon the earth (Newman\n Smyth, Place of Death in Evolution, 92, 93). Bowne, Philosophy of\n Theism, 254\u2014\u201cNeither God nor the future life is needed to pay us\n for present virtue, but rather as the condition without which our\n nature falls into irreconcilable discord with itself, and passes\n on to pessimism and despair. High and continual effort is\n impossible without correspondingly high and abiding hopes.... It\n is no more selfish to desire to live hereafter than it is to\n desire to live to\u2010morrow.\u201d Dr. M. B. Anderson used to say that\n there must be a heaven for canal horses, washerwomen, and college\n presidents, because they do not get their deserts in this life.\n\n Life is a series of commencements rather than of accomplished\n ends. Longfellow, on Charles Sumner: \u201cDeath takes us by surprise,\n And stays our hurrying feet; The great design unfinished lies, Our\n lives are incomplete. But in the dark unknown Perfect their\n circles seem, Even as a bridge\u2019s arch of stone Is rounded in the\n stream.\u201d Robert Browning, Abt Vogler: \u201cThere never shall be one\n lost good\u201d; Prospice: \u201cNo work begun shall ever pause for death\u201d;\n \u201cPleasure must succeed to pleasure, else past pleasure turns to\n pain; And this first life claims a second, else I count its good\n no gain\u201d; Old Pictures in Florence: \u201cWe are faulty\u2014why not? We\n have time in store\u201d; Grammarian\u2019s Funeral: \u201cWhat\u2019s time? Leave Now\n for dogs and apes,\u2014Man has Forever.\u201d Robert Browning wrote in his\n wife\u2019s Testament the following testimony of Dante: \u201cThus I\n believe, thus I affirm, thus I am certain it is, that from this\n life I shall pass to another better, there where that lady lives,\n of whom my soul was enamored.\u201d And Browning says in a letter: \u201cIt\n is a great thing\u2014the greatest\u2014that a human being should have\n passed the probation of life, and sum up its experience in a\n witness to the power and love of God.... I see even more reason to\n hold by the same hope.\u201d\n\n\n(_c_) The ethical argument.\u2014Man is not, in this world, adequately punished\nfor his evil deeds. Our sense of justice leads us to believe that God\u2019s\nmoral administration will be vindicated in a life to come. Mere extinction\nof being would not be a sufficient penalty, nor would it permit degrees of\npunishment corresponding to degrees of guilt. This is therefore an\nargument from God\u2019s justice to the immortality of the wicked. The guilty\nconscience demands a state after death for punishment.\n\n\n This is an argument from God\u2019s justice to the immortality of the\n wicked, as the preceding was an argument from God\u2019s love to the\n immortality of the righteous. \u201cHistory defies our moral sense by\n giving a peaceful end to Sulla.\u201d Louis XV and Madame Pompadour\n died in their beds, after a life of extreme luxury. Louis XVI and\n his queen, though far more just and pure, perished by an appalling\n tragedy. The fates of these four cannot be explained by the\n wickedness of the latter pair and the virtue of the former.\n Alexander the Sixth, the worst of the popes, was apparently\n prosperous and happy in his iniquities. Though guilty of the most\n shameful crimes, he was serenely impenitent, and to the last of\n his days he defied both God and man. Since there is not an\n execution of justice here, we feel that there must be a \u201c_judgment\n to come_,\u201d such as that which terrified Felix (_Acts 24:25_).\n Martineau, Study, 2:383\u2010388. Stopford A. Brooke, Justice: \u201cThree\n men went out one summer night, No care had they or aim, And dined\n and drank. \u2018Ere we go home We\u2019ll have,\u2019 they said, \u2018a game.\u2019 Three\n girls began that summer night A life of endless shame, And went\n through drink, disease, and death As swift as racing flame.\n Lawless and homeless, foul, they died; Rich, loved and praised,\n the men: But when they all shall meet with God, And Justice\n speaks,\u2014what then?\u201d See John Caird, Fund. Ideas of Christianity,\n 2:255\u2010297. G. F. Wilkin, Control in Evolution: \u201cBelief in\n immortality is a practical necessity of evolution. If the\n decisions of to\u2010day are to determine our eternal destiny, then it\n is vastly more important to choose and act aright, than it is to\n preserve our earthly life. The martyrs were right. Conscience is\n vindicated. We can live for the ideal of manhood. Immortality is a\n powerful reformatory instrument.\u201d Martineau, Study of Religion,\n 2:388\u2014\u201cIf Death gives a final discharge to the sinner and the\n saint alike, Conscience has told us more lies than it has ever\n called to their account.\u201d Shakespeare, Henry V, 4:2\u2014\u201cIf\n [transgressors] have defeated the law and outrun native\n punishment, though they can outstrip men, they have no wings to\n fly from God\u201d; Henry VI, 2d part, 5:2\u2014\u201cCan we outrun the heavens?\u201d\n Addison, Cato: \u201cIt must be so,\u2014Plato, thou reasonest well.\u2014Else\n whence this pleasing hope, this fond desire, This longing after\n immortality? Or whence this secret dread and inward horror Of\n falling into naught? Why shrinks the soul Back on herself and\n startles at destruction? \u2019Tis the divinity that stirs within us,\n \u2019Tis Heaven itself that points out a hereafter, And intimates\n eternity to man.\u201d\n\n Gildersleeve, in The Independent, March 30, 1899\u2014\u201cPlato in the\n Ph\u00e6do argues for immortality from the alternation of opposites:\n life must follow death as death follows life. But alternation of\n opposites is not generation of opposites. He argues from\n reminiscence. But this involves pre\u2010existence and a cycle of\n incarnations, not the immortality which we crave. The soul abides,\n as the idea abides, but there is no guarantee that it abides\n forever. He argues from the uncompounded nature of the soul. But\n we do not know the soul\u2019s nature, and at most this is an analogy:\n as soul is like God, invisible, it must like God abide. But this\n is analogy, and nothing more.\u201d William James, Will to Believe,\n 87\u2014\u201cThat our whole physical life may lie soaking in a spiritual\n atmosphere, a dimension of being which we at present have no organ\n for apprehending, is vividly suggested to us by the analogy of the\n life of our domestic animals. Our dogs, for example, are _in_ our\n human life, but are not of it. They bite, but do not know what it\n means; they submit to vivisection, and do not know the meaning of\n that.\u201d\n\n George Eliot, walking with Frederic Myers in the Fellows\u2019 Garden\n at Trinity, Cambridge, \u201cstirred somewhat beyond her wont, and\n taking as her text the three words which have been used so often\n as the inspiring trumpet\u2010calls of men\u2014the words God, Immortality,\n Duty\u2014pronounced with terrible earnestness how inconceivable was\n the first, how unbelievable the second, and yet how peremptory and\n absolute the third.\u201d But this idea of the infinite nature of Duty\n is the creation of Christianity\u2014the last infinite would never have\n attained its present range and intensity, had it not been\n indissolubly connected with the other two (Forrest, Christ of\n History and Experience, 16).\n\n This ethical argument has probably more power over the minds of\n men than any other. Men believe in Minos and Rhadamanthus, if not\n in the Elysian Fields. But even here it may be replied that the\n judgment which conscience threatens may be, not immortality, but\n extinction of being. We shall see, however, in our discussion of\n the endlessness of future punishment, that mere annihilation\n cannot satisfy the moral instinct which lies at the basis of this\n argument. That demands a punishment proportioned in each case to\n the guilt incurred by transgression. Extinction of being would be\n the same to all. As it would not admit of degrees, so it would\n not, in any case, sufficiently vindicate God\u2019s righteousness. F.\n W. Newman: \u201cIf man be not immortal, God is not just.\u201d\n\n But while this argument proves life and punishment for the wicked\n after death, it leaves us dependent on revelation for our\n knowledge how long that life and punishment will be. Kant\u2019s\n argument is that man strives equally for morality and for well\u2010\n being; but morality often requires the sacrifice of well\u2010being;\n hence there must be a future reconciliation of the two in the\n well\u2010being or reward of virtue. To all of which it might be\n answered, first, that there is no virtue so perfect as to merit\n reward; and secondly, that virtue is its _own_ reward, and so _is_\n well\u2010being.\n\n\n(_d_) The historical argument.\u2014The popular belief of all nations and ages\nshows that the idea of immortality is natural to the human mind. It is not\nsufficient to say that this indicates only such desire for continued\nearthly existence as is necessary to self\u2010preservation; for multitudes\nexpect a life beyond death without desiring it, and multitudes desire a\nheavenly life without caring for the earthly. This testimony of man\u2019s\nnature to immortality may be regarded as the testimony of the God who made\nthe nature.\n\n\n Testimonies to this popular belief are given in Bartlett, Life and\n Death Eternal, preface: The arrow\u2010heads and earthen vessels laid\n by the side of the dead Indian; the silver obolus put in the mouth\n of the dead Greek to pay Charon\u2019s passage money; the furnishing of\n the Egyptian corpse with the Book of the Dead, the papyrus\u2010roll\n containing the prayer he is to offer and the chart of his journey\n through the unseen world. The Gauls did not hesitate to lend\n money, on the sole condition that he to whom they lent it would\n return it to them in the other life,\u2014so sure were they that they\n should get it again (Valerius Maximus, quoted in Boissier, La\n Religion Romaine, 1:264). The Laplanders bury flint and tinder\n with the dead, to furnish light for the dark journey. The Norsemen\n buried the horse and armor for the dead hero\u2019s triumphant ride.\n The Chinese scatter paper images of sedan porters over the grave,\n to help along in the sombre pilgrimage. The Greenlanders bury with\n the child a dog to guide him (George Dana Boardman, Sermon on\n Immortality).\n\n Savage, Life after Death, 1\u201018\u2014\u201cCandles at the head of the casket\n are the modern representatives of the primitive man\u2019s fire which\n was to light the way of the soul on its dark journey.... Ulysses\n talks in the underworld with the shade of Hercules though the real\n Hercules, a demigod, had been transferred to Olympus, and was\n there living in companionship with the gods.... The Brahman\n desired to escape being reborn. Socrates: \u2018To die and be released\n is better for me.\u2019 Here I am walking on a plank. It reaches out\n into the fog, and I have got to keep walking. I can see only ten\n feet ahead of me. I know that pretty soon I must walk over the end\n of that plank,\u2014I haven\u2019t the slightest idea into what, and I don\u2019t\n believe anybody else knows. And I don\u2019t like it.\u201d Matthew Arnold:\n \u201cIs there no other life? Pitch this one high.\u201d But without\n positive revelation most men will say: \u201c_Let us eat and drink, for\n to\u2010morrow we die_\u201d (_1 Cor. 15:32_).\n\n \u201cBy passionately loving life, we make Loved life unlovely, hugging\n her to death.\u201d Theodore Parker: \u201cThe intuition of mortality is\n written in the heart of man by a Hand that writes no\n falsehoods.... There is evidence of a summer yet to be, in the\n buds which lie folded through our northern winter\u2014efflorescences\n in human nature unaccountable if the end of man is in the grave.\u201d\n But it may be replied that many universal popular impressions have\n proved false, such as belief in ghosts, and in the moving of the\n sun round the earth. While the mass of men have believed in\n immortality, some of the wisest have been doubters. Cyrus said: \u201cI\n cannot imagine that the soul lives only while it remains in this\n mortal body.\u201d But the dying words of Socrates were: \u201cWe part; I am\n going to die, and you to live; which of us goes the better way is\n known to God alone.\u201d Cicero declared: \u201cUpon this subject I\n entertain no more than conjectures;\u201d and said that, when he was\n reading Plato\u2019s argument for immortality, he seemed to himself\n convinced, but when he laid down the book he found that all his\n doubts returned. Farrar, Darkness and Dawn, 134\u2014\u201cThough Cicero\n wrote his Tusculan Disputations to prove the doctrine of\n immortality, he spoke of that doctrine in his letters and speeches\n as a mere pleasing speculation, which might be discussed with\n interest, but which no one practically held.\u201d\n\n Aristotle, Nic. Ethics, 3:9, calls death \u201cthe most to be feared of\n all things ... for it appears to be the end of everything; and for\n the deceased there appears to be no longer either any good or any\n evil.\u201d \u00c6schylus: \u201cOf one once dead there is no resurrection.\u201d\n Catullus: \u201cWhen once our brief day has set, we must sleep one\n everlasting night.\u201d Tacitus: \u201cIf there is a place for the spirits\n of the pious; if, as the wise suppose, great souls do not become\n extinct with their bodies.\u201d \u201cIn that _if_,\u201d says Uhlhorn, \u201clies\n the whole torturing uncertainty of heathenism.\u201d Seneca, Ep.\n liv.\u2014\u201cMors est non esse\u201d\u2014\u201cDeath is not to be\u201d; Troades, V,\n 393\u2014\u201cPost mortem nihil est, ipsaque mors nihil\u201d\u2014\u201cThere is nothing\n after death, and death itself is nothing.\u201d Marcus Aurelius: \u201cWhat\n springs from earth dissolves to earth again, and heavenborn things\n fly to their native seat.\u201d The Emperor Hadrian to his soul:\n \u201cAnimula, vagula, blandula, Hospes comesque corporis, Qu\u00e6 nunc\n abibis in loca? Pallidula, rigida, nudula.\u201d Classic writers might\n have said of the soul at death: \u201cWe know not where is that\n Promethean torch That can its light relume.\u201d\n\n Chadwick, 184\u2014\u201cWith the growth of all that is best in man of\n intelligence and affection, there goes the development of the hope\n of an immortal life. If the hope thus developed is not a valid\n one, then we have a radical contradiction in our moral nature. The\n survival of the fittest points in the same direction.\u201d Andrew\n Marvell (1621\u20101678)\u2014\u201cAt my back I always hear Time\u2019s winged\n chariot hurrying near; And yonder all before us lie Deserts of\n vast Eternity.\u201d Goethe in his last days came to be a profound\n believer in immortality. \u201cYou ask me what are my grounds for this\n belief? The weightiest is this, that we cannot do without it.\u201d\n Huxley wrote in a letter to Morley: \u201cIt is a curious thing that I\n find my dislike to the thought of extinction increasing as I get\n older and nearer the goal. It flashes across me at all sorts of\n time that in 1900 I shall probably know no more of what is going\n on than I did in 1800. I had sooner be in hell, a great deal,\u2014at\n any rate in one of the upper circles, where climate and the\n company are not too trying.\u201d\n\n The book of Job shows how impossible it is for man to work out the\n problem of personal immortality from the point of view of merely\n natural religion. Shakespeare, in Measure for Measure, represents\n Claudio as saying to his sister Isabella: \u201cAye, but to die, and go\n we know not where; To lie in cold obstruction and to rot; This\n sensible warm motion to become A kneaded clod.\u201d Strauss,\n Glaubenslehre, 2:739\u2014\u201cThe other world is in all men the one enemy,\n in its aspect of a future world, however, the last enemy, which\n speculative criticism has to fight, and if possible to overcome.\u201d\n Omar Khayy\u00e1m, Rub\u00e1iy\u00e1t, Stanzas 28\u201035\u2014\u201cI came like Water, and like\n Wind I go.... Up from Earth\u2019s Centre through the seventh gate I\n rose, and on the throne of Saturn sate, And many a knot unravelled\n by the Road, But not the master\u2010knot of human fate. There was the\n Door to which I found no Key; There was the Veil through which I\n might not see: Some little talk awhile of _Me_ and _Thee_ There\n was,\u2014And then no more of _Thee_ and _Me_. Earth could not answer,\n nor the Seas that mourn, In flowing purple, of their Lord forlorn;\n Nor rolling Heaven, with all his signs revealed, And hidden by the\n sleeve of Night and Morn. Then of the _Thee in Me_, who works\n behind The veil, I lifted up my hands to find A Lamp, amid the\n darkness; and I heard As from without\u2014\u2018The Me within Thee blind.\u2019\n Then to the lip of this poor earthen Urn I leaned, the secret of\n my life to learn; And Lip to Lip it murmur\u2019d\u2014\u2018While you live,\n Drink!\u2014for, once dead, you never shall return!\u2019 \u201d So \u201cThe Phantom\n Caravan has reached The Nothing it set out from.\u201d It is a\n demonstration of the hopelessness and blindness and sensuality of\n man, when left without the revelation of God and of the life to\n come.\n\n The most that can be claimed for this fourth argument from popular\n belief is that it indicates a general appentency for continued\n existence after death, and that the idea is congruous with our\n nature. W. E. Forster said to Harriet Martineau that he would\n rather be damned than annihilated; see F. P. Cobbe, Peak of\n Darien, 44. But it may be replied that there is reason enough for\n this desire for life in the fact that it ensures the earthly\n existence of the race, which might commit universal suicide\n without it. There is reason enough in the present life for its\n existence, and we are not necessitated to infer a future life\n therefrom. This objection cannot be fully answered from reason\n alone. But if we take our argument in connection with the\n Scriptural revelation concerning God\u2019s making of man in his image,\n we may regard the testimony of man\u2019s nature as the testimony of\n the God who made it.\n\n\nWe conclude our statement of these rational proofs with the acknowledgment\nthat they rest upon the presupposition that there exists a God of truth,\nwisdom, justice, and love, who has made man in his image, and who desires\nto commune with his creatures. We acknowledge, moreover, that these proofs\ngive us, not an absolute demonstration, but only a balance of probability,\nin favor of man\u2019s immortality. We turn therefore to Scripture for the\nclear revelation of a fact of which reason furnishes us little more than a\npresumption.\n\n\n Everett, Essays, 76, 77\u2014\u201cIn his Tr\u00e4ume eines Geistersehers, Kant\n foreshadows the Method of his Kritik. He gives us a scheme of\n disembodied spirits, and calls it a bit of mystic (_geheimen_)\n philosophy; then the opposite view, which he calls a bit of vulgar\n (_gemeimen_) philosophy. Then he says the scales of the\n understanding are not quite impartial, and the one that has the\n inscription \u2018Hope for the future\u2019 has a mechanical advantage. He\n says he cannot rid himself of this unfairness. He suffers feeling\n to determine the result. This is intellectual agnosticism\n supplemented by religious faith.\u201d The following lines have been\n engraved upon the tomb of Professor Huxley: \u201cAnd if there be no\n meeting past the grave, If all is darkness, silence, yet \u2019tis\n rest. Be not afraid, ye waiting hearts that weep, For God still\n giveth his beloved sleep, And if an endless sleep he wills, so\n best.\u201d Contrast this consolation with: \u201c_Let not your heart be\n troubled: ye believe in God, believe also in me. In my Father\u2019s\n house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you.\n I go to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place\n for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself, that\n where I am, there ye may be also_\u201d (_John 14:1\u20103_).\n\n Dorner: \u201cThere is no rational evidence which compels belief in\n immortality. Immortality has its pledge in God\u2019s making man in his\n image, and in God\u2019s will of love for communion with men.\u201d\n Luthardt, Compendium, 289\u2014\u201cThe truth in these proofs from reason\n is the idea of human personality and its relation to God. Belief\n in God is the universal presupposition and foundation of the\n universal belief in immortality.\u201d When Strauss declared that this\n belief in immortality is the last enemy which is to be destroyed,\n he forgot that belief in God is more ineradicable still. Frances\n Power Cobbe, Life, 92\u2014\u201cThe doctrine of immortality is to me the\n indispensable corollary of that of the goodness of God.\u201d\n\n Hadley, Essays, Philological and Critical, 392\u2010397\u2014\u201cThe claim of\n immortality may be based on one or the other of two assumptions:\n (1) The same organism will be reproduced hereafter, and the same\n functions, or part of them, again manifested in connection with\n it, and accompanied with consciousness of continued identity; or,\n (2) The same functions may be exercised and accompanied with\n consciousness of identity, though not connected with the same\n organism as before; may in fact go on without interruption,\n without being even suspended by death, though no longer manifested\n to us.\u201d The conclusion is: \u201cThe light of nature, when all directed\n to this question, does furnish a presumption in favor of\n immortality, but not so strong a presumption as to exclude great\n and reasonable doubts upon the subject.\u201d\n\n For an excellent synopsis of arguments and objections, see Hase,\n Hutterus Redivivus, 276. See also Bowen, Metaph. and Ethics,\n 417\u2010441; A. M. Fairbairn, on Idea of Immortality, in Studies in\n Philos. of Religion and of History; Wordsworth, Intimations of\n Immortality; Tennyson, Two Voices; Alger, Critical History of\n Doctrine of Future Life, with Appendix by Ezra Abbott, containing\n a Catalogue of Works relating to the Nature, Origin, and Destiny\n of the Soul; Ingersoll Lectures on Immortality, by George A.\n Gordon, Josiah Royce, William James, Dr. Osler, John Fiske, B. I.\n Wheeler, Hyslop, M\u00fcnsterberg, Crothars.\n\n\n\n2. Upon scriptural grounds.\n\n\n(_a_) The account of man\u2019s creation, and the subsequent allusions to it in\nScripture, show that, while the body was made corruptible and subject to\ndeath, the soul was made in the image of God, incorruptible and immortal.\n\n\n _Gen. 1:26, 27_\u2014\u201c_Let us make man in our image_\u201d; _2:7_\u2014\u201c_And\n Jehovah God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed\n into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living\n soul_\u201d\u2014here, as was shown in our treatment of Man\u2019s Original\n State, page 523, it is not the divine image, but the body, that is\n formed of dust; and into this body the soul that possesses the\n divine image is breathed. In the Hebrew records, the animating\n soul is everywhere distinguished from the earthly body. _Gen.\n 3:22, 23_\u2014\u201c_Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good\n and evil; and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of\n the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever: therefore Jehovah\n God sent him forth from the garden of Eden_\u201d\u2014man had immortality\n of soul, and now, lest to this he add immortality of body, he is\n expelled from the tree of life. _Eccl. 12:7_\u2014\u201c_the dust returneth\n to the earth as it was, and the spirit returneth unto God who gave\n it_\u201d; _Zech. 12:1_\u2014\u201c_Jehovah, who stretcheth forth the heavens,\n and layeth the foundation of the earth, and formeth the spirit of\n man within him._\u201d\n\n _Mat. 10:28_\u2014\u201c_And be not afraid of them that kill the body, but\n are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him who is able to\n destroy both soul and body in hell_\u201d; _Acts 7:59_\u2014\u201c_And they\n stoned Stephen, calling upon the Lord, and saying, Lord Jesus,\n receive my spirit_\u201d: _2 Cor. 12:2_\u2014\u201c_I know a man in Christ,\n fourteen years ago (whether in the body, I know not; or whether\n out of the body, I know not; God knoweth), such a one caught up\n even to the third heaven_\u201d; _1 Cor. 15:45, 46_\u2014\u201c_The first man\n Adam became a living soul. The last Adam became a life\u2010giving\n spirit. Howbeit that is not first which is spiritual, but that\n which is natural; then that which is spiritual_\u201d\u2014the first Adam\n was made a being whose body was psychical and mortal\u2014a body of\n flesh and blood, that could not inherit the kingdom of God. So\n Paul says the spiritual is not first, but the psychical; but there\n is no intimation that the soul also was created mortal, and needed\n external appliances, like the tree of life, before it could enter\n upon immortality.\n\n But it may be asked: Is not all this, in _1 Cor. 15_, spoken of\n the regenerate\u2014those to whom a new principle of life has been\n communicated? We answer, yes; but that does not prevent us from\n learning from the passage the natural immortality of the soul; for\n in regeneration the essence is not changed, no new substance is\n imparted, no new faculty or constitutive element is added, and no\n new principle of holiness is infused. The truth is simply that the\n spirit is morally readjusted. For substance of the above remarks,\n see Hovey, State of Impenitent Dead, 1\u201027.\n\n Savage, Life after Death, 46, 53\u2014\u201cThe word translated \u2018soul\u2019, in\n _Gen. 2:7_, is the same word which in other parts of the O. T. is\n used to denote the life\u2010principle of animals. It does not follow\n that soul implies immortality, for then all animals would be\n immortal.... The firmament of the Hebrews was the cover of a\n dinner\u2010platter, solid, but with little windows to let the rain\n through. Above this firmament was heaven where God and angels\n abode, but no people went there. All went below. But growing moral\n sense held that the good could not be imprisoned in Hades. So came\n the idea of resurrection.... If a _force_, a universe with God\n left out, can do all that has been done, I do not see why it\n cannot also continue my existence through what is called death.\u201d\n\n Dr. H. Heath Bawden: \u201cIt is only the creature that is born that\n will die. Monera and Am\u0153b\u00e6 are immortal, as Weismann tells us.\n They do not die, because they never are born. The death of the\n individual as a somatic individual is for the sake of the larger\n future life of the individual in its germinal immortality. So we\n live ourselves spiritually into our children, as well as\n physically. An organism is nothing but a centre or focus through\n which the world surges. What matter if the irrelevant somatic\n portion is lost in what we call death! The only immortality\n possible is the immortality of function. My body has changed\n completely since I was a boy, but I have become a larger self\n thereby. Birth and death simply mark steps or stages in the growth\n of such an individual, which in its very nature does not exclude\n but rather includes within it the lives of all other individuals.\n The individual is more than a passive member, he is an active\n organ of a biological whole. The laws of his life are the social\n organism functioning in one of its organs. He lives and moves and\n has his being in the great spirit of the whole, which comes to a\n focus or flowers out in his conscious life.\u201d\n\n\n(_b_) The account of the curse in Genesis, and the subsequent allusions to\nit in Scripture, show that, while the death then incurred includes the\ndissolution of the body, it does not include cessation of being on the\npart of the soul, but only designates that state of the soul which is the\nopposite of true life, _viz._, a state of banishment from God, of\nunholiness, and of misery.\n\n\n _Gen. 2:17_\u2014\u201c_in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt\n surely die_\u201d; _cf._ _3:8_\u2014\u201c_the man and his wife hid themselves\n from the presence of Jehovah God_\u201d; _16\u201019_\u2014the curse of pain and\n toil: _22\u201024_\u2014banishment from the garden of Eden and from the tree\n of life. _Mat. 8:22_\u2014\u201c_Follow me; and leave the dead to bury their\n own dead_\u201d; _25:41, 46_\u2014\u201c_Depart from me, ye cursed, into the\n eternal fire.... These shall go away into eternal punishment_\u201d;\n _Luke 15:32_\u2014\u201c_this thy brother was dead, and is alive again; and\n was lost, and is found_\u201d; _John 5:24_\u2014\u201c_He that heareth my word,\n and believeth him that sent me, hath eternal life, and cometh not\n into judgment, but hath passed out of death into life_\u201d; _6:47,\n 53, 63_\u2014\u201c_He that believeth hath eternal life.... Except ye eat\n the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, ye have not life\n in yourselves.... the words that I have spoken unto you are\n spirit, and are life_\u201d: _8:51_\u2014\u201c_If a man keep my word, he shall\n never see death._\u201d\n\n _Rom. 5:21_\u2014\u201c_that, as sin reigned in death, even so might grace\n reign through righteousness unto eternal life_\u201d; _8:13_\u2014\u201c_if ye\n live after the flesh, ye must die; but if by the Spirit ye put to\n death the deeds of the body, ye shall live_\u201d; _Eph. 2:1_\u2014\u201c_dead\n through your trespasses and sins_\u201d; _5:14_\u2014\u201c_Awake, thou that\n sleepest, and arise from the dead, and Christ shall shine upon\n thee_\u201d; _James 5:20_\u2014\u201c_he who converteth a sinner from the error\n of his way shall save a soul from death, and shall cover a\n multitude of sins_\u201d; _1 John 3:14_\u2014\u201c_We know that we have passed\n out of death into life, because we love the brethren_\u201d; _Rev.\n 3:1_\u2014\u201c_I know thy works, that thou hast a name that thou livest,\n and thou art dead._\u201d\n\n We are to interpret O. T. terms by the N. T. meaning put into\n them. We are to interpret the Hebrew by the Greek, not the Greek\n by the Hebrew. It never would do to interpret our missionaries\u2019\n use of the Chinese words for \u201cGod\u201d, \u201cspirit\u201d, \u201choliness\u201d, by the\n use of those words among the Chinese before the missionaries came.\n By the later usage of the N. T., the Holy Spirit shows us what he\n meant by the usage of the O. T.\n\n\n(_c_) The Scriptural expressions, held by annihilationists to imply\ncessation of being on the part of the wicked, are used not only in\nconnections where they cannot bear this meaning (Esther 4:16), but in\nconnections where they imply the opposite.\n\n\n _Esther 4:16_\u2014\u201c_if I perish, I perish_\u201d; _Gen. 6:11_\u2014\u201c_And the\n earth was corrupt before God_\u201d\u2014here, in the LXX, the word \u1f10\u03c6\u03b8\u03ac\u03c1\u03b7,\n translated \u201c_was corrupt_,\u201d is the same word which in other places\n is interpreted by annihilationists as meaning extinction of being.\n In _Ps. 119:176_, \u201c_I have gone astray like a lost sheep_\u201d cannot\n mean \u201cI have gone astray like an annihilated sheep.\u201d _Is.\n 49:17_\u2014\u201c_thy destroyers_ [annihilators?] _and they that made thee\n waste shall go forth from thee_\u201d; _57:1, 2_\u2014\u201c_The righteous\n perisheth_ [is annihilated?] _and no man layeth it to heart; and\n merciful men are taken away, none considering that the righteous\n is taken away from the evil to come. He entereth into peace; they\n rest in their beds, each one that walketh in his uprightness_\u201d;\n _Dan. 9:26_\u2014\u201c_And after the three score and two weeks shall the\n anointed one be cut off_ [annihilated?].\u201d\n\n _Mat. 10:6, 39, 42_\u2014\u201c_the lost sheep of the house of Israel ... he\n that loseth his life for my sake shall find it ... he shall in no\n wise lose his reward_\u201d\u2014in these verses we cannot substitute\n \u201cannihilate\u201d for \u201c_lose_\u201d; _Acts 13:41_\u2014\u201c_Behold, ye despisers,\n and wonder, and perish_\u201d; _cf._ _Mat. 6:16_\u2014\u201c_for they disfigure\n their faces_\u201d\u2014where the same word \u1f00\u03c6\u03b1\u03bd\u03af\u03b6\u03c9 is used. _1 Cor.\n 3:17_\u2014\u201c_If any man destroyeth_ [annihilates?] _the temple of God,\n him shall God destroy_\u201d; _2 Cor. 7:2_\u2014\u201c_we corrupted no\n man_\u201d\u2014where the same word \u03c6\u03b8\u03b5\u03af\u03c1\u03c9 is used. _2 Thess. 1:9_\u2014\u201c_who\n shall suffer punishment, even eternal destruction from the face of\n the Lord and from the glory of his might_\u201d = the wicked shall be\n driven out from the presence of Christ. Destruction is not\n annihilation. \u201c_Destruction from_\u201d = separation; (_per contra_,\n see Prof. W. A. Stevens, Com. _in loco_: \u201c_from_\u201d = the source\n from which the \u201c_destruction_\u201d proceeds). \u201cA ship engulfed in\n quicksands is destroyed; a temple broken down and deserted is\n destroyed\u201d; see Lillie, Com. _in loco_. _2 Pet. 3:7_\u2014\u201c_day of\n judgment and destruction of ungodly men_\u201d\u2014here the word\n \u201c_destruction_\u201d (\u1f00\u03c0\u03c9\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2) is the same with that used of the end\n of the present order of things, and translated \u201c_perished_\u201d\n (\u1f00\u03c0\u03ce\u03bb\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf) in _verse 6_. \u201cWe cannot accordingly infer from it that\n the ungodly will cease to exist, but only that there will be a\n great and penal change in their condition\u201d (Plumptre, Com. _in\n loco_).\n\n\n(_d_) The passages held to prove the annihilation of the wicked at death\ncannot have this meaning, since the Scriptures foretell a resurrection of\nthe unjust as well as of the just; and a second death, or a misery of the\nreunited soul and body, in the case of the wicked.\n\n\n _Acts 24:15_\u2014\u201c_there shall be a resurrection both of the just and\n unjust_\u201d; _Rev. 2:11_\u2014\u201c_He that overcometh shall not be hurt of\n the second death_\u201d; _20:14, 15_\u2014\u201c_And death and Hades were cast\n into the lake of fire. This is the second death, even the lake of\n fire. And if any was not found written in the book of life, he was\n cast into the lake of fire_\u201d; _21:8_\u2014\u201c_their part shall be in the\n lake that burneth with fire and brimstone; which is the second\n death._\u201d The \u201c_second death_\u201d is the first death intensified.\n Having one\u2019s \u201c_part in the lake of fire_\u201d is not annihilation.\n\n In a similar manner the word \u201c_life_\u201d is to be interpreted not as\n meaning continuance of being, but as meaning perfection of being.\n As death is the loss not of life, but of all that makes life\n desirable, so life is the possession of the highest good. _1 Tim.\n 5:6_\u2014\u201c_She that giveth herself to pleasure is dead while she\n liveth_\u201d\u2014here the death is spiritual death, and it is implied that\n true life is spiritual life. _John 10:10_\u2014\u201c_I came that they may\n have life, and may have it abundantly_\u201d\u2014implies that \u201c_life_\u201d _is\n not_: 1. mere existence, for they had this before Christ came; nor\n 2. mere motion, as squirrels go in a wheel, without making\n progress; nor 3. mere possessions, \u201c_for a man\u2019s life consisteth\n not in the abundance of things which he possesseth_\u201d (_Luke\n 12:15_). But life _is_: 1. right relation of our powers, or\n holiness; 2. right use of our powers, or love; 3. right number of\n our powers, or completeness; 4. right intensity of our powers, or\n energy of will; 5. right environment of our powers, or society; 6.\n right source of our powers, or God.\n\n\n(_e_) The words used in Scripture to denote the place of departed spirits\nhave in them no implication of annihilation, and the allusions to the\ncondition of the departed show that death, to the writers of the Old and\nthe New Testaments, although it was the termination of man\u2019s earthly\nexistence, was not an extinction of his being or his consciousness.\n\n\n On \u05e9\u05d0\u05d5\u05dc Sheol, Gesenius, Lexicon, 10th ed., says that, though \u05e9\u05d0\u05d5\u05dc\n is commonly explained as infinitive of \u05e9\u05d0\u05dc, to demand, it is\n undoubtedly allied to \u05e9\u05e2\u05dc (root \u05e9\u05dc), to be sunk, and = \u201csinking,\u201d\n \u201cdepth,\u201d or \u201cthe sunken, deep, place.\u201d \u1f09\u03b9\u03b4\u03b7\u03c2, Hades, = not \u201chell,\u201d\n but the \u201cunseen world,\u201d conceived by the Greeks as a shadowy, but\n not as an unconscious, state of being. Genung, Epic of the Inner\n Life, on _Job 7:9_\u2014\u201cSheol, the Hebrew word designating the unseen\n abode of the dead; a neutral word, presupposing neither misery nor\n happiness, and not infrequently used much as we use the word \u2018the\n grave\u2019, to denote the final undefined resting\u2010place of all.\u201d\n\n _Gen. 25:8, 9_\u2014Abraham \u201c_was gathered to his people. And Isaac and\n Ishmael his sons buried him in the cave of Machpelah._\u201d \u201cYet\n Abraham\u2019s father was buried in Haran, and his more remote\n ancestors in Ur of the Chaldees. So Joshua\u2019s generation is said to\n be \u2018_gathered to their fathers_\u2019 though the generation that\n preceded them perished in the wilderness, and previous generations\n died in Egypt\u201d (W. H. Green, in S. S. Times). So of Isaac in _Gen.\n 35:29_, and of Jacob in _19:29, 33_,\u2014all of whom were gathered to\n their fathers before they were buried. _Num. 20:24_\u2014\u201c_Aaron shall\n be gathered unto his people_\u201d\u2014here it is very plain that being\n \u201c_gathered unto his people_\u201d was something different from burial.\n _Deut. 10:6_\u2014\u201c_There Aaron died, and there he was buried._\u201d _Job\n 3:13, 18_\u2014\u201c_For now should I have lain down and been quiet; I\n should have slept; then had I been at rest.... There the prisoners\n are at ease together; They hear not the voice of the taskmaster_\u201d;\n _7:9_\u2014\u201c_As the cloud is consumed and vanisheth away, So he that\n goeth down to Sheol shall come up no more_\u201d; _14:22_\u2014\u201c_But his\n flesh upon him hath pain, And his soul within him mourneth._\u201d\n\n _Ez. 32:21_\u2014\u201c_The strong among the mighty shall speak to him out\n of the midst of Sheol_\u201d; _Luke 16:23_\u2014\u201c_And in Hades he lifted up\n his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and\n Lazarus in his bosom_\u201d; _23:43_\u2014\u201c_To\u2010day shalt thou be with me in\n Paradise_\u201d; _cf._ _1 Sam. 28:19_\u2014Samuel said to Saul in the cave\n of Endor: \u201c_to\u2010morrow shalt thou and thy sons be with\n me_\u201d\u2014evidently not in an unconscious state. Many of these passages\n intimate a continuity of consciousness after death. Though Sheol\n is unknown to man, it is naked and open to God (_Job 26:6_); he\n can find men there to redeem them from thence (_Ps. 49:15_)\u2014proof\n that death is not annihilation. See Girdlestone, O. T. Synonyms,\n 447.\n\n\n(_f_) The terms and phrases which have been held to declare absolute\ncessation of existence at death are frequently metaphorical, and an\nexamination of them in connection with the context and with other\nScriptures is sufficient to show the untenableness of the literal\ninterpretation put upon them by the annihilationists, and to prove that\nthe language is merely the language of appearance.\n\n\n Death is often designated as a \u201c_sleeping_\u201d or a \u201c_falling\n asleep_\u201d; see _John 11:11, 14_\u2014\u201c_Our friend Lazarus is fallen\n asleep; but I go, that I may awake him out of sleep.... Then Jesus\n therefore said unto them plainly, Lazarus is dead._\u201d Here the\n language of appearance is used; yet this language could not have\n been used, if the soul had not been conceived of as alive, though\n sundered from the body; see Meyer on _1 Cor. 1:18_. So the\n language of appearance is used in _Eccl. 9:10_\u2014\u201c_there is no work,\n nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in Sheol whither thou\n goest_\u201d\u2014and in _Ps. 146:4_\u2014\u201c_His breath goeth forth; he returneth\n to his earth; In that very day his thoughts perish._\u201d\n\n See Mozley, Essays, 2:171\u2014\u201cThese passages often describe the\n phenomena of death as it presents itself to our eyes, and so do\n not enter into the reality which takes place beneath it.\u201d\n Bartlett, Life and Death Eternal, 189\u2010358\u2014\u201cBecause the same Hebrew\n word is used for \u2018spirit\u2019 and \u2018breath,\u2019 shall we say that the\n spirit is only breath? \u2018Heart\u2019 in English might in like manner be\n made to mean only the material organ; and David\u2019s heart, panting,\n thirsting, melting within him, would have to be interpreted\n literally. So a man may be \u2018eaten up with avarice,\u2019 while yet his\n being is not only not extinct, but is in a state of frightful\n activity.\u201d\n\n\n(_g_) The Jewish belief in a conscious existence after death is proof that\nthe theory of annihilation rests upon a misinterpretation of Scripture.\nThat such a belief in the immortality of the soul existed among the Jews\nis abundantly evident: from the knowledge of a future state possessed by\nthe Egyptians (Acts 7:22); from the accounts of the translation of Enoch\nand of Elijah (Gen. 5:24; _cf._ Heb. 11:5; 2 K. 2:11); from the invocation\nof the dead which was practised, although forbidden by the law (1 Sam.\n28:7\u201014; _cf._ Lev. 20:28; Deut. 18:10, 11); from allusions in the O. T.\nto resurrection, future retribution, and life beyond the grave (Job\n19:25\u201027; Ps. 16:9\u201011; Is. 26:19; Ez. 37:1\u201014; Dan. 12:2, 3, 13); and from\ndistinct declarations of such faith by Philo and Josephus, as well as by\nthe writers of the N. T. (Mat. 22:31, 32; Acts 23:6; 26:6\u20108; Heb.\n11:13\u201016).\n\n\n The Egyptian coffin was called \u201cthe chest of the living.\u201d The\n Egyptians called their houses \u201chostelries,\u201d while their tombs they\n called their \u201ceternal homes\u201d (Butcher, Aspects of Greek Genius,\n 30). See the Book of the Dead, translated by Birch, in Bunsen\u2019s\n Egypt\u2019s Place, 123\u2010333: The principal ideas of the first part of\n the Book of the Dead are \u201cliving again after death, and being born\n again as the sun,\u201d which typified the Egyptian resurrection (138).\n \u201cThe deceased lived again after death\u201d (134). \u201cThe Osiris lives\n after he dies, like the sun daily; for as the sun died and was\n born yesterday, so the Osiris is born\u201d (164). Yet the immortal\n part, in its continued existence, was dependent for its\n blessedness upon the preservation of the body; and for this reason\n the body was embalmed. Immortality of the body is as important as\n the passage of the soul to the upper regions. Growth or natural\n reparation of the body is invoked as earnestly as the passage of\n the soul. \u201cThere is not a limb of him without a god; Thoth is\n vivifying his limbs\u201d (197).\n\n Maspero, Recueil de Travaux, gives the following readings from the\n inner walls of pyramids twelve miles south of Cairo: \u201cO Unas, thou\n hast gone away dead, but living\u201d; \u201cTeti is the living dead\u201d;\n \u201cArise, O Teti, to die no more\u201d; \u201cO Pepi, thou diest no\n more\u201d;\u2014these inscriptions show that to the Egyptians there was\n life beyond death. \u201cThe life of Unas is duration; his period is\n eternity\u201d; \u201cThey render thee happy throughout all eternity\u201d; \u201cHe\n who has given thee life and eternity is Ra\u201d;\u2014here we see that the\n life beyond death was eternal. \u201cRising at his pleasure, gathering\n his members that are in the tomb, Unas goes forth\u201d; \u201cUnas has his\n heart, his legs, his arms\u201d; this asserts reunion with the body.\n \u201cReunited to thy soul, thou takest thy place among the stars of\n heaven\u201d; \u201cthe soul is thine within thee\u201d;\u2014there was reunion with\n the soul. \u201cA god is born, it is Unas\u201d; \u201cO Ra, thy son comes to\n thee, this Unas comes to thee\u201d; \u201cO Father of Unas, grant that he\n may be included in the number of the perfect and wise gods\u201d; here\n it is taught that the reunited soul and body becomes a god and\n dwells with the gods.\n\n Howard Osgood: \u201cOsiris, the son of gods, came to live on earth.\n His life was a pattern for others. He was put to death by the god\n of evil, but regained his body, lived again, and became, in the\n other world, the judge of all men.\u201d Tiele, Egyptian Religion,\n 280\u2014\u201cTo become like god Osiris, a benefactor, a good being,\n persecuted but justified, judged but pronounced innocent, was\n looked upon as the ideal of every pious man, and as the condition\n on which alone eternal life could be obtained, and as the means by\n which it could be continued.\u201d Ebers, \u00c9tudes Arch\u00e9ologiques,\n 21\u2014\u201cThe texts in the pyramids show us that under the Pharaohs of\n the 5th dynasty (before 2500 B. C.) the doctrine that the deceased\n became god was not only extant, but was developed more thoroughly\n and with far higher flight of imagination than we could expect\n from the simple statements concerning the other world hitherto\n known to us as from that early time.\u201d Revillout, on Egyptian\n Ethics, in Bib. Sac., July, 1890:304\u2014\u201cAn almost absolute\n sinlessness was for the Egyptian the condition of becoming another\n Osiris and enjoying eternal happiness. Of the penitential side, so\n highly developed in the ancient Babylonians and Hebrews, which\n gave rise to so many admirable penitential psalms, we find only a\n trace among the Egyptians. Sinlessness is the rule,\u2014the deceased\n vaunts himself as a hero of virtue.\u201d See Uarda, by Ebers; Dr.\n Howard Osgood, on Resurrection among the Egyptians, in Hebrew\n Student, Feb. 1885. The Egyptians, however, recognized no\n transmigration of souls; see Renouf, Hibbert Lectures, 181\u2010184.\n\n It is morally impossible that Moses should not have known the\n Egyptian doctrine of immortality: _Acts 7:22_\u2014\u201c_And Moses was\n instructed in all the wisdom of the Egyptians._\u201d That Moses did\n not make the doctrine more prominent in his teachings, may be for\n the reason that it was so connected with Egyptian superstitions\n with regard to Osiris. Yet the Jews believed in immortality: _Gen.\n 5:24_\u2014\u201c_and Enoch walked with God: and he was not; for God took\n him_\u201d; _cf._ _Heb. 11:5_\u2014\u201c_By faith Enoch was translated that he\n should not see death_\u201d; _2 Kings 2:11_\u2014\u201c_Elijah went up by a\n whirlwind into heaven_\u201d; _1 Sam. 28:7\u201014_\u2014the invocation of Samuel\n by the woman of Endor; _cf._ _Lev. 20:27_\u2014\u201c_A man also or a woman\n that hath a familiar spirit, or that is a wizard, shall surely be\n put to death_\u201d; _Deut. 18:10, 11_\u2014\u201c_There shall not be found with\n thee ... a consulter with a familiar spirit, or a wizard, or a\n necromancer._\u201d\n\n _Job 19:25\u201027_\u2014\u201c_I know that my Redeemer liveth, And at last he\n will stand up upon the earth: And after my skin, even this body,\n is destroyed, Then without my flesh shall I see God; Whom I, even\n I, shall see, on my side, And mine eyes shall behold, and not as a\n stranger. My heart is consumed within me_\u201d; _Ps.\n 16:9\u201011_\u2014\u201c_Therefore my heart is glad, and my glory rejoiceth: My\n flesh also shall dwell in safety. For thou wilt not leave my soul\n to Sheol; Neither wilt thou suffer thy holy one to see corruption.\n Thou wilt show me the path of life: In thy presence is fulness of\n joy; In thy right hand there are pleasures for evermore_\u201d; _Is.\n 26:19_\u2014\u201c_Thy dead shalt live; my dead bodies shall arise. Awake\n and sing, ye that dwell in the dust; for thy dew is as the dew of\n herbs, and the earth shall cast forth the dead_\u201d; _Ez.\n 37:1\u201014_\u2014the valley of dry bones\u2014\u201c_I will open your graves, and\n cause you to come up out of your graves, O my people_\u201d\u2014a prophecy\n of restoration based upon the idea of immortality and\n resurrection; _Dan. 12:2, 3, 13_\u2014\u201c_And many of them that sleep in\n the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and\n some to shame and everlasting contempt. And they that are wise\n shall shine as the brightness of the firmament; and they that turn\n many to righteousness as the stars for ever and ever.... But go\n thou thy way till the end be: for thou shalt rest, and shalt stand\n in thy lot, at the end of the days._\u201d\n\n Josephus, on the doctrine of the Pharisees, in Antiquities,\n XVIII:1:3, and Wars of the Jews, II:8:10\u201014\u2014\u201cSouls have an\n immortal vigor. Under the earth are rewards and punishments. The\n wicked are detained in an everlasting prison. The righteous shall\n have power to revive and live again. Bodies are indeed\n corruptible, but souls remain exempt from death forever. But the\n doctrine of the Sadducees is that souls die with their bodies.\u201d\n _Mat. 22:31, 32_\u2014\u201c_But as touching the resurrection of the dead,\n have ye not read that which was spoken unto you by God, saying, I\n am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob?\n God is not the God of the dead, but of the living._\u201d\n\n Christ\u2019s argument, in the passage last quoted, rests upon the two\n implied assumptions: first, that love will never suffer the object\n of its affection to die; beings who have ever been the objects of\n God\u2019s love will be so forever; secondly, that body and soul belong\n normally together; if body and soul are temporarily separated,\n they shall be united; Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are living, and\n therefore they shall rise again. It was only an application of the\n same principle, when Robert Hall gave up his early materialism as\n he looked down into his father\u2019s grave: he felt that this could\n not be the end; _cf._ _Ps. 22:26_\u2014\u201c_Your heart shall live\n forever._\u201d _Acts 23:6_\u2014\u201c_I am a Pharisee, a son of Pharisees:\n touching the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in\n question_\u201d; _26:7, 8_\u2014\u201c_And concerning this hope I am accused by\n the Jews, O king! Why is it judged incredible with you, if God\n doth raise the dead?_\u201d _Heb. 11:13\u201016_\u2014the present life was\n reckoned as a pilgrimage; the patriarchs sought \u201c_a better\n country, that is, a heavenly_\u201d; _cf._ _Gen. 47:9_. On Jesus\u2019\n argument for the resurrection, see A. H. Strong, Christ in\n Creation, 406\u2010421.\n\n The argument for immortality itself presupposes, not only the\n existence of a God, but the existence of a truthful, wise, and\n benevolent God. We might almost say that God and immortality must\n be proved together,\u2014like two pieces of a broken crock, when put\n together there is proof of both. And yet logically it is only the\n existence of God that is intuitively certain. Immortality is an\n inference therefrom. Henry More: \u201cBut souls that of his own good\n life partake He loves as his own self; dear as his eye They are to\n him: he\u2019ll never them forsake; When they shall die, then God\n himself shall die; They live, they live in blest eternity.\u201d God\n could not let Christ die, and he cannot let us die. Southey: \u201cThey\n sin who tell us love can die. With life all other passions fly;\n All others are but vanity. In heaven ambition cannot dwell, Nor\n avarice in the vaults of hell; They perish where they had their\n birth; But love is indestructible.\u201d\n\n Emerson, Threnody on the death of his beloved and gifted child:\n \u201cWhat is excellent, As God lives, is permanent: Hearts are dust,\n hearts\u2019 loves remain; Heart\u2019s love will meet thee again.\u201d\n Whittier, Snowbound, 200 _sq._\u2014\u201cYet Love will dream, and Faith\n will trust (Since He who knows our need is just), That somehow,\n somewhere, meet we must. Alas for him who never sees The stars\n shine through his cypress trees! Who hopeless lays his dead away,\n Nor looks to see the breaking day Across his mournful marbles\n play! Who hath not learned, in hours of faith, The truth to flesh\n and sense unknown, That Life is ever lord of death, And Love can\n never lose its own.\u201d Robert Browning, Evelyn Hope: \u201cFor God above\n Is great to grant as mighty to make, And creates the love to\n reward the love; I claim you still for my own love\u2019s sake! Delayed\n it may be for more lives yet, Through worlds I shall traverse not\n a few; Much is to learn and much to forget, Ere the time be come\n for taking you.\u201d\n\n The river St. John in New Brunswick descends seventeen feet\n between the city and the sea, and ships cannot overcome the\n obstacle, but when the tide comes in, it turns the current the\n other way and bears vessels on mightily to the city. So the laws\n of nature bring death, but the tides of Christ\u2019s life counteract\n them, and bring life and immortality (Dr. J. W. A. Stewart).\n Mozley, Lectures, 26\u201059, and Essays, 2:169\u2014\u201cTrue religion among\n the Jews had an evidence of immortality in its possession of God.\n Paganism was hopeless in its loss of friends, because affection\n never advanced beyond its earthly object, and therefore, in losing\n it, lost all. But religious love, which loves the creature in the\n Creator, has that on which to fall back, when its earthly object\n is removed.\u201d\n\n\n(_h_) The most impressive and conclusive of all proofs of immortality,\nhowever, is afforded in the resurrection of Jesus Christ,\u2014a work\naccomplished by his own power, and demonstrating that the spirit lived\nafter its separation from the body (John 2:19, 21; 10:17, 18). By coming\nback from the tomb, he proves that death is not annihilation (2 Tim.\n1:10).\n\n\n _John 2:19, 21_\u2014\u201c_Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this\n temple, and in three days I will raise it up.... But he spake of\n the temple of his body_\u201d; _10:17, 18_\u2014\u201c_Therefore doth the Father\n love me, because I lay down my life, that I may take it again....\n I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again_\u201d;\n _2 Tim. 1:10_\u2014\u201c_our Savior Christ Jesus, who abolished death, and\n brought life and immortality to light through the gospel_\u201d\u2014that\n is, immortality had been a truth dimly recognized, suspected,\n longed for, before Christ came; but it was he who first brought it\n out from obscurity and uncertainty into clear daylight and\n convincing power. Christ\u2019s resurrection, moreover, carries with it\n the resurrection of his people: \u201cWe two are so joined, He\u2019ll not\n be in glory and leave me behind.\u201d\n\n Christ taught immortality: (1) By exhibiting himself the perfect\n conception of a human life. Who could believe that Christ could\n become forever extinct? (2) By actually coming back from beyond\n the grave. There were many speculations about a trans\u2010Atlantic\n continent before 1492, but these were of little worth compared\n with the actual word which Columbus brought of a new world beyond\n the sea. (3) By providing a way through which his own spiritual\n life and victory may be ours; so that, though we pass through the\n valley of the shadow of death, we may fear no evil. (4) By thus\n gaining authority to teach us of the resurrection of the righteous\n and of the wicked, as he actually does. Christ\u2019s resurrection is\n not only the best proof of immortality, but we have no certain\n evidence of immortality without it. Hume held that the same logic\n which proved immortality from reason alone, would also prove\n pre\u00ebxistence. \u201cIn reality,\u201d he said, \u201cit is the Gospel, and the\n Gospel alone, that has brought immortality to light.\u201d It was\n truth, though possibly spoken in jest.\n\n There was need of this revelation. The fear of death, even after\n Christ has come, shows how hopeless humanity is by nature. Krupp,\n the great German maker of cannon, would not have death mentioned\n in his establishment. He ran away from his own dying relatives.\n Yet he died. But to the Christian, death is an exodus, an\n unmooring, a home\u2010coming. Here we are as ships on the stocks; at\n death we are launched into our true element. Before Christ\u2019s\n resurrection, it was twilight; it is sunrise now. Balfour: \u201cDeath\n is the fall of the curtain, not at the end of the piece, but at\n the end of the act.\u201d George Dana Boardman: \u201cChrist is the\n resurrection and the life. Being himself the Son of man\u2014the\n archetypal man, the representative of human nature, the head and\n epitome of mankind\u2014mankind ideally, potentially, virtually rose,\n when the Son of man rose. He is the resurrection, because he is\n the life. The body does not give life to itself, but life takes on\n body and uses it.\u201d\n\n George Adam Smith, Yale Lectures: \u201cSome of the Psalmists have only\n a hope of corporate immortality. But this was found wanting. It\n did not satisfy Israel. It cannot satisfy men to\u2010day. The O. T. is\n of use in reminding us that the hope of immortality is a\n secondary, subordinate, and dispensable element of religious\n experience. Men had better begin and work for God\u2019s sake, and not\n for future reward. The O. T. development of immortality is of use\n most of all because it deduces all immortality from God.\u201d\n Athanasius: \u201cMan is, according to nature, mortal, as a being who\n has been made of things that are perishable. But on account of his\n likeness to God he can by piety ward off and escape from his\n natural mortality and remain indestructible if he retain the\n knowledge of God, or lose his incorruptibility if he lose his life\n in God\u201d (quoted in McConnell, Evolution of Immortality, viii,\n 46\u201048). Justin Martyr, 1 Apol., 17, expects resurrection of both\n just and unjust; but in Dial. Tryph., 5, he expressly denounces\n and dismisses the Platonic doctrine that the soul is immortal.\n Athenagoras and Tertullian hold to native immortality, and from it\n argue to bodily resurrection. So Augustine. But Theophilus,\n Iren\u00e6us, Clemens Alexandrinus, with Athanasius, counted it a pagan\n error. For the annihilation theory, see Hudson, Debt and Grace,\n and Christ our Life; also Dobney, Future Punishment. _Per contra_,\n see Hovey, State of the Impenitent Dead, 1\u201027, and Manual of\n Theology and Ethics, 153\u2010168; Luthardt, Compendium, 289\u2010292;\n Delitzsch, Bib. Psych., 397\u2010407; Herzog, Encyclop., art.: Tod;\n Splittgerber, Schlaf und Tod; Estes, Christian Doctrine of the\n Soul; Baptist Review, 1879:411\u2010439; Presb. Rev., Jan. 1882:203.\n\n\n\n\nII. The Intermediate State.\n\n\nThe Scriptures affirm the conscious existence of both the righteous and\nthe wicked, after death, and prior to the resurrection. In the\nintermediate state the soul is without a body, yet this state is for the\nrighteous a state of conscious joy, and for the wicked a state of\nconscious suffering.\n\nThat the righteous do not receive the spiritual body at death, is plain\nfrom 1 Thess. 4:16,17 and 1 Cor. 15:52, where an interval is intimated\nbetween Paul\u2019s time and the rising of those who slept. The rising was to\noccur in the future, \u201cat the last trump.\u201d So the resurrection of the\nwicked had not yet occurred in any single case (2 Tim. 2:18\u2014it was an\nerror to say that the resurrection was \u201cpast already\u201d); it was yet future\n(John 5:28\u201030\u2014\u201cthe hour cometh\u201d\u2014\u1f14\u03c1\u03c7\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f64\u03c1\u03b1, not \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bd\u1fe6\u03bd \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u03af\u03bd\u2014\u201cnow is,\u201d\nas in verse 25; Acts 24:15\u2014\u201cthere shall be a resurrection\u201d\u2014\u1f00\u03bd\u03ac\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd\n\u03bc\u03ad\u03bb\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u1f14\u03c3\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9). Christ was the firstfruits (1 Cor. 15:20, 23). If the\nsaints had received the spiritual body at death, the patriarchs would have\nbeen raised before Christ.\n\n\n\n1. Of the righteous.\n\n\nOf the righteous, it is declared:\n\n(_a_) That the soul of the believer, at its separation from the body,\nenters the presence of Christ.\n\n\n _2 Cor. 5:1\u20108_\u2014\u201c_if the earthly house of our tabernacle be\n dissolved, we have a building from God, a house not made with\n hands, eternal in the heavens. For verily in this we groan,\n longing to be clothed upon with our habitation which is from\n heaven: if so be that being clothed we shall not be found naked.\n For indeed we that are in this tabernacle do groan, being\n burdened; not for that we would be unclothed, but that we would be\n clothed upon, that what is mortal may be swallowed up of life ...\n willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be at home with\n the Lord_\u201d\u2014Paul hopes to escape the violent separation of soul and\n body\u2014the being \u201c_unclothed_\u201d\u2014by living till the coming of the\n Lord, and then putting on the heavenly body, as it were, over the\n present one (\u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u03bd\u03b4\u03cd\u03c3\u03b1\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9); yet whether he lived till Christ\u2019s\n coming or not, he knew that the soul, when it left the body, would\n be at home with the Lord.\n\n _Luke 23:43_\u2014\u201c_To\u2010day shalt thou be with me in Paradise_\u201d; _John\n 14:3_\u2014\u201c_And if I go and prepare a place for you, I come again, and\n will receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be\n also_\u201d; _2 Tim. 4:18_\u2014\u201c_The Lord will deliver me from every evil\n work, and will save me unto_ [or, \u2018_into_\u2019] _his heavenly\n kingdom_\u201d = will save me and put me into his heavenly kingdom\n (Ellicott), the characteristic of which is the visible presence of\n the King with his subjects. It is our privilege to be with Christ\n here and now. And nothing shall separate us from Christ and his\n love, \u201c_neither death, nor life ... nor things present, nor things\n to come_\u201d (_Rom. 8:38_); for he himself has said: \u201c_Lo, I am with\n you always, even unto the consummation of the age_\u201d (_Mat.\n 28:20_).\n\n\n(_b_) That the spirits of departed believers are with God.\n\n\n _Heb. 12:23_\u2014Ye are come \u201c_to the general assembly and church of\n the firstborn who are enrolled in heaven, and to God the Judge of\n all_\u201d; _cf._ _Eccl. 12:7_\u2014\u201c_the dust returneth to the earth as it\n was, and the spirit returneth unto God who gave it_\u201d; _John\n 20:17_\u2014\u201c_Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended unto the\n Father_\u201d\u2014probably means: \u201cmy body has not yet ascended.\u201d The soul\n had gone to God during the interval between death and the\n resurrection, as is evident from _Luke 23:43, 46_\u2014\u201c_with me in\n Paradise ... Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit._\u201d\n\n\n(_c_) That believers at death enter paradise.\n\n\n _Luke 23:42, 43_\u2014\u201c_And he said, Jesus, remember me when thou\n comest in thy kingdom. And he said unto him, Verily I say unto\n thee, To\u2010day shalt thou be with me in paradise_\u201d; _cf._ _2 Cor.\n 12:4_\u2014\u201c_caught up into Paradise, and heard unspeakable words,\n which it is not lawful for a man to utter_\u201d; _Rev. 2:7_\u2014\u201c_To him\n that overcometh, to him will I give to eat of the tree of life,\n which is in the Paradise of God_\u201d; _Gen. 2:8_\u2014\u201c_And Jehovah God\n planted a garden eastward, in Eden; and there he put the man whom\n he had formed._\u201d Paradise is none other than the abode of God and\n the blessed, of which the primeval Eden was the type. If the\n penitent thief went to Purgatory, it was a Purgatory with Christ,\n which was better than a Heaven without Christ. Paradise is a place\n which Christ has gone to prepare, perhaps by taking our friends\n there before us.\n\n\n(_d_) That their state, immediately after death, is greatly to be\npreferred to that of faithful and successful laborers for Christ here.\n\n\n _Phil. 1:23_\u2014\u201c_I am in a strait betwixt the two, having the desire\n to depart and be with Christ; for it is very far better_\u201d\u2014here\n Hackett says: \u201c\u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03bb\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9 = departing, cutting loose, as if to put\n to sea, followed by \u03c3\u1f7a\u03bd \u03a7\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u1ff7 \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9, as if Paul regarded one\n event as immediately subsequent to the other.\u201d Paul, with his\n burning desire to preach Christ, would certainly have preferred to\n live and labor, even amid great suffering, rather than to die, if\n death to him had been a state of unconsciousness and inaction. See\n Edwards the younger, Works, 2:530, 531; Hovey, Impenitent Dead,\n 61.\n\n\n(_e_) That departed saints are truly alive and conscious.\n\n\n _Mat. 22:32_\u2014\u201c_God is not the God of the dead, but of the\n living_\u201d; _Luke 16:22_\u2014\u201c_carried away by the angels into Abraham\u2019s\n bosom_\u201d; _23:43_\u2014\u201c_To\u2010day shalt thou be with me in\n Paradise_\u201d\u2014\u201c_with me_\u201d = in the same state,\u2014unless Christ slept in\n unconsciousness, we cannot think that the penitent thief did;\n _John 11:26_\u2014\u201c_whosoever liveth and believeth on me shall never\n die_\u201d; _1 Thess. 5:10_\u2014\u201c_who died for us, that, whether we wake or\n sleep, we should live together with him_\u201d; _Rom. 8:10_\u2014\u201c_And if\n Christ is in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the spirit\n is life because of righteousness._\u201d Life and consciousness clearly\n belong to the \u201c_souls under the altar_\u201d mentioned under the next\n head, for they cry: \u201c_How long?_\u201d _Phil. 1:6_\u2014\u201c_he who began a\n good work in you will perfect it until the day of Jesus\n Christ_\u201d\u2014seems to imply a progressive sanctification, through the\n Intermediate State, up to the time of Christ\u2019s second coming. This\n state is: 1. a conscious state (\u201c_God of the living_\u201d); 2. a fixed\n state (no \u201c_passing from thence_\u201d); 3. an incomplete state (\u201c_not\n to be unclothed_\u201d).\n\n\n(_f_) That they are at rest and blessed.\n\n\n _Rev. 6:9\u201011_\u2014\u201c_I saw underneath the altar the souls of them that\n had been slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which\n they held: and they cried with a great voice, saying, How long, O\n Master, the holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our\n blood on them that dwell on the earth? And there was given them to\n each one a white robe; and it was said unto them, that they should\n rest yet for a little time, until their fellow\u2010servants also and\n their brethren, who should be killed even as they were, should\n have fulfilled their course_\u201d; _14:13_\u2014\u201c_Blessed are the dead who\n die in the Lord from henceforth: yea, saith the Spirit, that they\n may rest from their labors; for their works follow with them_\u201d;\n _20:14_\u2014\u201c_And death and Hades were cast into the lake of\n fire_\u201d\u2014see Evans, in Presb. Rev., 1883:303\u2014\u201cThe shadow of death\n lying upon Hades is the penumbra of Hell. Hence Hades is\n associated with death in the final doom.\u201d\n\n\n\n2. Of the wicked.\n\n\nOf the wicked, it is declared:\n\n(_a_) That they are in prison,\u2014that is, are under constraint and guard (1\nPeter 3:19\u2014\u03c6\u03c5\u03bb\u03b1\u03ba\u03ae).\n\n\n _1 Pet. 3:19_\u2014\u201c_In which_ [spirit] _also he went and preached unto\n the spirits in prison_\u201d\u2014there is no need of putting unconscious\n spirits under guard. Hovey: \u201cRestraint implies power of action,\n and suffering implies consciousness.\u201d\n\n\n(_b_) That they are in torment, or conscious suffering (Luke 16:23\u2014\u1f10\u03bd\n\u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03ac\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2).\n\n\n _Luke 16:23_\u2014\u201c_And in Hades he lifted up his eyes, being in\n torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.\n And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send\n Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool\n my tongue; for I am in anguish in this flame._\u201d\n\n Here many unanswerable questions may be asked: Had the rich man a\n body before the resurrection, or is this representation of a body\n only figurative? Did the soul still feel the body from which it\n was temporarily separated, or have souls in the intermediate state\n temporary bodies? However we may answer these questions, it is\n certain that the rich man suffers, while probation still lasts for\n his brethren on earth. Fire is here the source of suffering, but\n not of annihilation. Even though this be a parable, it proves\n conscious existence after death to have been the common view of\n the Jews, and to have been a view sanctioned by Christ.\n\n\n(_c_) That they are under punishment (2 Pet. 2:9\u2014\u03ba\u03bf\u03bb\u03b1\u03b6\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2).\n\n\n _2 Pet. 2:9_\u2014\u201c_the Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly out of\n temptation, and to keep the unrighteous under punishment unto the\n day of judgment_\u201d\u2014here \u201c_the unrighteous_\u201d = not only evil angels,\n but ungodly men; _cf._ _verse 4_\u2014\u201c_For if God spared not angels\n when they sinned, but cast them down to hell, and committed them\n to pits of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment._\u201d\n\n In the parable of the rich man and Lazarus, the body is buried,\n yet still the torments of the soul are described as physical.\n Jesus here accommodates his teaching to the conceptions of his\n time, or, better still, uses material figures to express spiritual\n realities. Surely he does not mean to say that the Rabbinic notion\n of Abraham\u2019s bosom is ultimate truth. \u201cParables,\u201d for this reason\n among others, \u201cmay not be made primary sources and seats of\n doctrine.\u201d Luckock, Intermediate State, 20\u2014\u201cMay the parable of the\n rich man and Lazarus be an anticipatory picture of the final\n state? But the rich man seems to assume that the judgment has not\n yet come, for he speaks of his brethren as still undergoing their\n earthly probation, and as capable of receiving a warning to avoid\n a fate similar to his own.\u201d\n\n\nThe passages cited enable us properly to estimate two opposite errors.\n\nA. They refute, on the one hand, the view that the souls of both righteous\nand wicked sleep between death and the resurrection.\n\nThis view is based upon the assumption that the possession of a physical\norganism is indispensable to activity and consciousness\u2014an assumption\nwhich the existence of a God who is pure spirit (John 4:24), and the\nexistence of angels who are probably pure spirits (Heb. 1:14), show to be\nerroneous. Although the departed are characterized as \u201cspirits\u201d (Eccl.\n12:7; Acts 7:59; Heb. 12:23; 1 Pet. 3:19), there is nothing in this\n\u2019absence from the body\u2019 (2 Cor. 5:8) inconsistent with the activity and\nconsciousness ascribed to them in the Scriptures above referred to. When\nthe dead are spoken of as \u201csleeping\u201d (Dan. 12:2; Mat. 9:24; John 11:11; 1\nCor. 11:30; 15:51; 1 Thess. 4:14; 5:10), we are to regard this as simply\nthe language of appearance, and as literally applicable only to the body.\n\n\n _John 4:24_\u2014\u201c_God is a Spirit_ [or rather, as margin, \u2018_God is\n spirit_\u2019]\u201d; _Heb. 1:14_\u2014\u201c_Are they_ [angels] _not all ministering\n spirits?_\u201d _Eccl. 12:7_\u2014\u201c_the dust returneth to the earth as it\n was, and the spirit returneth unto God who gave it_\u201d; _Acts\n 7:59_\u2014\u201c_And they stoned Stephen, calling upon the Lord, and\n saying, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit_\u201d; _Heb. 12:23_\u2014\u201c_to God the\n Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect_\u201d; _1\n Pet. 3:19_\u2014\u201c_in which also he went and preached unto the spirits\n in prison_\u201d; _2 Cor. 5:8_\u2014\u201c_we are of good courage, I say, and are\n willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be at home with\n the Lord_\u201d; _Dan. 12:2_\u2014\u201c_many of them that sleep in the dust of\n the earth shall awake_\u201d; _Mat. 9:24_\u2014\u201c_the damsel is not dead, but\n sleepeth_\u201d; _John 11:11_\u2014\u201c_Our friend Lazarus is fallen asleep;\n but I go, that I may awake him out of sleep_\u201d; _1 Cor.\n 11:30_\u2014\u201c_For this cause many among you are weak and sickly, and\n not a few sleep_\u201d; _1 Thess. 4:14_\u2014\u201c_For if we believe that Jesus\n died and rose again, even so them also that are fallen asleep in\n Jesus will God bring with him_\u201d; _5:10_\u2014\u201c_who died for us, that,\n whether we wake or sleep, we should live together with him._\u201d\n\n\nB. The passages first cited refute, on the other hand, the view that the\nsuffering of the intermediate state is purgatorial.\n\nAccording to the doctrine of the Roman Catholic church, \u201call who die at\npeace with the church, but are not perfect, pass into purgatory.\u201d Here\nthey make satisfaction for the sins committed after baptism by suffering a\nlonger or shorter time, according to the degree of their guilt. The church\non earth, however, has power, by prayers and the sacrifice of the Mass, to\nshorten these sufferings or to remit them altogether. But we urge, in\nreply, that the passages referring to suffering in the intermediate state\ngive no indication that any true believer is subject to this suffering, or\nthat the church has any power to relieve from the consequences of sin,\neither in this world or in the world to come. Only God can forgive, and\nthe church is simply empowered to declare that, upon the fulfilment of the\nappointed conditions of repentance and faith, he does actually forgive.\nThis theory, moreover, is inconsistent with any proper view of the\ncompleteness of Christ\u2019s satisfaction (Gal. 2:21; Heb. 9:28); of\njustification through faith alone (Rom. 3:28); and of the condition after\ndeath, of both righteous and wicked, as determined in this life (Eccl.\n11:3; Mat. 25:10; Luke 16:26; Heb. 9:27; Rev.22:11).\n\n\n Against this doctrine we quote the following texts: _Gal 2:21_\u2014\u201c_I\n do not make void the grace of God: for if righteousness is through\n the law, then Christ died for nought_\u201d; _Heb. 9:28_\u2014\u201c_so Christ\n also, having been once_ [or, \u2018_once for all_\u2019] _offered to bear\n the sins of many, shall appear a second time, apart from sin, to\n them that wait for him, unto salvation_\u201d; _Rom. 3:28_\u2014\u201c_We reckon\n therefore that a man is justified by faith apart from the works of\n the law_\u201d; _Eccl. 11:3_\u2014\u201c_if a tree fall toward the south or\n toward the north, in the place where the tree falleth there shall\n it be_\u201d; _Mat. 25:10_\u2014\u201c_And while they went away to buy, the\n bridegroom came; and they that were ready went in with him to the\n marriage feast: and the door was shut_\u201d; _Luke 16:26_\u2014\u201c_And\n besides all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed,\n that they that would pass from hence to you may not be able, and\n that none may cross over from thence to us_\u201d; _Heb. 9:27_\u2014\u201c_it is\n appointed unto men once to die, and after this cometh judgment_\u201d;\n _Rev. 22:11_\u2014\u201c_He that is unrighteous, let him do unrighteousness\n still: and he that is filthy, let him be made filthy still: and he\n that is righteous, let him do righteousness still: and he that is\n holy, let him be made holy still._\u201d\n\n Rome teaches that the agonies of purgatory are intolerable. They\n differ from the pains of the damned only in this, that there is a\n limit to the one, not the other. Bellarmine, De Purgatorio,\n 2:14\u2014\u201cThe pains of purgatory are very severe, surpassing any\n endured in this life.\u201d Since none but actual saints escape the\n pains of purgatory, this doctrine gives to the death and the\n funeral of the Roman Catholic a dreadful and repellent aspect.\n Death is not the coming of Christ to take his disciples home, but\n is rather the ushering of the shrinking soul into a place of\n unspeakable suffering. This suffering makes satisfaction for\n guilt. Having paid their allotted penalty, the souls of the\n purified pass into Heaven without awaiting the day of judgment.\n The doctrine of purgatory gives hope that men may be saved after\n death; prayer for the dead has influence; the priest is authorized\n to offer this prayer; so the church sells salvation for money.\n Amory H. Bradford, Ascent of the Soul, 267\u2010287, argues in favor of\n prayers for the dead. Such prayers, he says, help us to keep in\n mind the fact that they are living still. If the dead are free\n beings, they may still choose good or evil, and our prayers may\n help them to choose the good. We should be thankful, he believes,\n to the Roman Catholic Church, for keeping up such prayers. We\n reply that no doctrine of Rome has done so much to pervert the\n gospel and to enslave the world.\n\n For the Romanist doctrine, see Perrone, Pr\u00e6lectiones Theologic\u00e6,\n 2:391\u2010420. _Per contra_, see Hodge, Systematic Theology,\n 3:743\u2010770; Barrows, Purgatory. Augustine, Encheiridion, 69,\n suggests the possibility of purgatorial fire in the future for\n some believers. Whiton, Is Eternal Punishment Endless? page 69,\n says that Tertullian held to a delay of resurrection in the case\n of faulty Christians; Cyprian first stated the notion of a middle\n state of purification; Augustine thought it \u201cnot incredible\u201d;\n Gregory the Great called it \u201cworthy of belief\u201d; it is now one of\n the most potent doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church; that\n church has been, from the third century, for all souls who accept\n her last consolations, practically restorationist. Gore,\n Incarnation, 18\u2014\u201cIn the Church of Rome, the \u2019peradventure\u2019 of an\n Augustine as to purgatory for the imperfect after death\u2014\u2019non\n redarguo\u2019, he says, \u2019quia forsitan verum est,\u2019\u2014has become a\n positive teaching about purgatory, full of exact information.\u201d\n\n Elliott, Hor\u00e6 Apocalyptic\u00e6, 1:410, adopts Hume\u2019s simile, and says\n that purgatory gave the Roman Catholic Church what Archimedes\n wanted, another world on which to fix its lever, that so fixed,\n the church might with it move this world. We must remember,\n however, that the Roman church teaches no radical change of\n character in purgatory,\u2014purgatory is only a purifying process for\n believers. The true purgatory is only in this world,\u2014for only here\n are sins purged away by God\u2019s sanctifying Spirit; and in this\n process of purification, though God chastises, there is no element\n of penalty. On Dante\u2019s Purgatory, see A. H. Strong, Philosophy and\n Religion, 515\u2010518.\n\n Luckock, After Death, is an argument, based upon the Fathers,\n against the Romanist doctrine. Yet he holds to progress in\n sanctification in the intermediate state, though the work done in\n that state will not affect the final judgment, which will be for\n the deeds done in the body. He urges prayer for the departed\n righteous. In his book entitled The Intermediate State, Luckock\n holds to mental and spiritual development in that state, to active\n ministry, mutual recognition, and renewed companionship. He does\n not believe in a second probation, but in a first real probation\n for those who have had no proper opportunities in this life. In\n their reaction against purgatory, the Westminister divines\n obliterated the Intermediate State. In that state there is gradual\n purification, and must be, since not all impurity and sinfulness\n are removed at death. The purging of the will requires time. White\n robes were given to them while they were waiting (_Rev. 6:11_).\n But there is no second probation for those who have thrown away\n their opportunities in this life. Robert Browning, The Ring and\n the Book, 232 (Pope, 2129), makes the Pope speak of following\n Guido \u201cInto that sad, obscure, sequestered state Where God unmakes\n but to remake the soul He else made first in vain; which must not\n be.\u201d But the idea of hell as permitting essential change of\n character is foreign to Roman Catholic doctrine.\n\n\nWe close our discussion of this subject with a single, but an important,\nremark,\u2014this, namely, that while the Scriptures represent the intermediate\nstate to be one of conscious joy to the righteous, and of conscious pain\nto the wicked, they also represent this state to be one of incompleteness.\nThe perfect joy of the saints, and the utter misery of the wicked, begin\nonly with the resurrection and general judgment.\n\n\n That the intermediate state is one of incompleteness, appears from\n the following passages: _Mat. 8:29_\u2014\u201c_What have we to do with\n thee, thou Son of God? art thou come hither to torment us before\n the time?_\u201d _2 Cor. 5:3, 4_\u2014\u201c_if so be that being clothed we shall\n not be found naked. For indeed we that are in this tabernacle do\n groan, being burdened; not for that we would be unclothed, but\n that we would be clothed upon, that what is mortal may be\n swallowed up of life_\u201d; _cf._ _Rom. 8:23_\u2014\u201c_And not only so, but\n ourselves also, who have the first\u2010fruits of the Spirit, even we\n ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for our adoption, to\n wit, the redemption of our body_\u201d; _Phil. 3:11_\u2014\u201c_if by any means\n I may attain unto the resurrection from the dead_\u201d; _2 Pet.\n 2:9_\u2014\u201c_the Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly out of\n temptation, and to keep the unrighteous under punishment unto the\n day of judgment_\u201d; _Rev. 6:10_\u2014\u201c_and they_ [the souls underneath\n the altar] _cried with a great voice, saying, How long, O Master,\n the holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on\n them that dwell on the earth?_\u201d\n\n In opposition to Locke, Human Understanding, 2:1:10, who said that\n \u201cthe soul thinks not always\u201d; and to Turner, Wish and Will, 48,\n who declares that \u201cthe soul need not always think, any more than\n the body always move; the essence of the soul is potentiality for\n activity\u201d; Descartes, Kant, Jouffroy, Sir William Hamilton, all\n maintain that it belongs to mental existence continuously to\n think. Upon this view, the intermediate state would be necessarily\n a state of thought. As to the nature of that thought, Dorner\n remarks in his Eschatology that \u201cin this relatively bodiless\n state, a still life begins, a sinking of the soul into itself and\n into the ground of its being,\u2014what Steffens calls \u2018involution,\u2019\n and Martensen \u2018self\u2010brooding.\u2019 In this state, spiritual things are\n the only realities. In the unbelieving, their impurity, discord,\n alienation from God, are laid bare. If they still prefer sin, its\n form becomes more spiritual, more demoniacal, and so ripens for\n the judgment.\u201d\n\n Even here, Dorner deals in speculation rather than in Scripture.\n But he goes further, and regards the intermediate state as one,\n not only of moral progress, but of elimination of evil; and holds\n the end of probation to be, not at death, but at the judgment, at\n least in the case of all non\u2010believers who are not incorrigible.\n We must regard this as a practical revival of the Romanist theory\n of purgatory, and as contradicted not only by all the\n considerations already urged, but also by the general tenor of\n Scriptural representation that the decisions of this life are\n final, and that character is fixed here for eternity. This is the\n solemnity of preaching, that the gospel is \u201c_a savor from life\n unto life_,\u201d or \u201c_a savor from death unto death_\u201d (_2 Cor. 2:16_).\n\n Descartes: \u201cAs the light always shines and the heat always warms,\n so the soul always thinks.\u201d James, Psychology, 1:164\u2010175, argues\n against unconscious mental states. The states were conscious at\n the time we had them; but they have been forgotten. In the\n Unitarian Review, Sept. 1884, Prof. James denies that eternity is\n given at a stroke to omniscience. Lotze, in his Metaphysics, 268,\n in opposition to Kant, contends for the transcendental validity of\n time. Green, on the contrary, in Prolegomena to Ethics, book 1,\n says that every act of knowledge in the case of man is a timeless\n act. In comparing the different aspects of the stream of\n successive phenomena, the mind must, he says, be itself out of\n time. Upton, Hibbert Lectures, 306, denies this timeless\n consciousness even to God, and apparently agrees with Martineau in\n maintaining that God does not foreknow free human acts.\n\n De Quincey called the human brain a palimpsest. Each new writing\n seems to blot out all that went before. Yet in reality not one\n letter has ever been effaced. Loeb, Physiology of the Brain, 213,\n tells us that associative memory is imitated by machines like the\n phonograph. Traces left by speech can be reproduced in speech.\n Loeb calls memory a matter of physical chemistry. Stout, Manual of\n Psychology, 8\u2014\u201cConsciousness includes not only awareness of our\n own states, but these states themselves whether we are aware of\n them or not. If a man is angry, that is a state of consciousness,\n even though he does not know that he is angry. If he does know\n that he is angry, that is another modification of consciousness,\n and not the same.\u201d On unconscious mental action, see Ladd,\n Philosophy of Mind, 378\u2010382\u2014\u201cCerebration cannot be identified with\n psychical processes. If it could be, materialism would triumph. If\n the brain can do these things, why not do all the phenomena of\n consciousness? Consciousness becomes a mere _epi_phenomenon.\n Unconscious cerebration = wooden iron or unconscious\n consciousness. What then becomes of the soul in its intervals of\n unconsciousness? Answer: Unconscious finite minds exist only in\n the World\u2010ground in which all minds and things have their\n existence.\u201d\n\n On the whole subject, see Hovey, State of Man after Death; Savage,\n Souls of the Righteous; Julius M\u00fcller, Doct. Sin, 2:304\u2010446;\n Neander, Planting and Training, 482\u2010484; Delitzsch, Bib.\n Psychologie, 407\u2010448; Bib. Sac., 13:153; Methodist Rev., 34:240;\n Christian Rev., 20:381; Herzog, Encyclop., art.: Hades; Stuart,\n Essays on Future Punishment; Whately, Future State; Hovey,\n Biblical Eschatology, 79\u2010144.\n\n\n\n\nIII. The Second Coming of Christ.\n\n\nWhile the Scriptures represent great events in the history of the\nindividual Christian, like death, and great events in the history of the\nchurch, like the outpouring of the Spirit at Pentecost and the destruction\nof Jerusalem, as comings of Christ for deliverance or judgment, they also\ndeclare that these partial and typical comings shall be concluded by a\nfinal, triumphant return of Christ, to punish the wicked and to complete\nthe salvation of his people.\n\n\n Temporal comings of Christ are indicated in: _Mat. 24:23, 27,\n 34_\u2014\u201c_Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is the Christ,\n or, Here; believe it not.... For as the lightning cometh forth\n from the east, and is seen even unto the west; so shall be the\n coming of the Son of man.... Verily I say unto you, This\n generation shall not pass away, till all these things be\n accomplished_\u201d; _16:28_\u2014\u201c_Verily I say unto you, There are some of\n them that stand here, who shall in no wise taste of death, till\n they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom_\u201d; _John 14:3,\n 18_\u2014\u201c_And if I go and prepare a place for you, I come again, and\n will receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be\n also.... I will not leave you desolate: I come unto you_\u201d; _Rev.\n 3:20_\u2014\u201c_Behold, I stand at the door and knock: if any man hear my\n voice and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with\n him, and he with me._\u201d So the Protestant Reformation, the modern\n missionary enterprise, the battle against papacy in Europe and\n against slavery in this country, the great revivals under\n Whitefield in England and under Edwards in America, were all\n preliminary and typical comings of Christ. It was a sceptical\n spirit which indited the words: \u201cGod\u2019s new Messiah, some great\n Cause\u201d; yet it is true that in every great movement of\n civilization we are to recognize a new coming of the one and only\n Messiah, \u201c_Jesus Christ, the same yesterday and to\u2010day and\n forever_\u201d (_Heb. 13:8_). Schaff, Hist. Christ. Church, 1:840\u2014\u201cThe\n coming began with his ascension to heaven (_cf._ _Mat.\n 26:64_\u2014\u2018_henceforth_ \u1f00\u03c0\u1fbd \u1f04\u03c1\u03c4\u03b9 [_from now_] _ye shall see the Son\n of man sitting at the right hand of Power, and coming on the\n clouds of heaven_\u2019).\u201d Matheson, Spir. Devel. of St. Paul, 286\u2014\u201cTo\n Paul, in his later letters, this world is already the scene of the\n second advent. The secular is not to vanish away, but to be\n permanent, transfigured, pervaded by the divine life. Paul began\n with the Christ of the resurrection; he ends with the Christ who\n already makes all things new.\u201d See Metcalf, Parousia _vs._ Second\n Advent, in Bib. Sac., Jan. 1907:61\u201065.\n\n The final coming of Christ is referred to in: _Mat. 24:30_\u2014\u201c_they\n shall see the Son of man coming on the clouds of heaven with power\n and great glory. And he shall send forth his angels with a great\n sound of a __ trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect\n from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other_\u201d;\n _25:31_\u2014\u201c_But when the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all\n the angels with him, then shall he sit on the throne of his\n glory_\u201d; _Acts 1:11_\u2014\u201c_Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye looking\n into heaven? this Jesus, who was received up from you into heaven,\n shall so come in like manner as ye beheld him going into heaven_\u201d;\n _1 Thess. 4:16_\u2014\u201c_For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven,\n with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump\n of God_\u201d; _2 Thess. 1:7, 10_\u2014\u201c_the revelation of the Lord Jesus\n from heaven with the angels of his power ... when he shall come to\n be glorified in his saints, and to be marvelled at in all them\n that believed_\u201d; _Heb. 9:28_\u2014\u201c_so Christ also, having been once\n offered to bear the sins of many, shall appear a second time,\n apart from sin, to them that wait for him, unto salvation_\u201d; _Rev.\n 1:7_\u2014\u201c_Behold, he cometh with the clouds; and every eye shall see\n him, and they that pierced him; and all the tribes of the earth\n shall mourn over him._\u201d Dr. A. C. Kendrick, Com. on _Heb.\n 1:6_\u2014\u201c_And when he shall conduct back again into the inhabited\n world the First\u2010born, he saith, And let all the angels of God\n worship him_\u201d\u2014in the glory of the second coming Christ\u2019s\n superiority to angels will be signally displayed\u2014a contrast to the\n humiliation of his first coming.\n\n The tendency of our day is to interpret this second class of\n passages in a purely metaphorical and spiritual way. But prophecy\n can have more than one fulfilment. Jesus\u2019 words are pregnant\n words. The present spiritual coming does not exhaust their\n meaning. His coming in the great movements of history does not\n preclude a final and literal coming, in which \u201c_every eye shall\n see him_\u201d (_Rev. 1:7_). With this proviso, we may assent to much\n of the following quotation from Gould, Bib. Theol. N. T.,\n 44\u201058\u2014\u201cThe last things of which Jesus speaks are not the end of\n the world, but of the age\u2014the end of the Jewish period in\n connection with the destruction of Jerusalem.... After the entire\n statement is in, including both the destruction of Jerusalem and\n the coming of the Lord which is to follow it, it is distinctly\n said that that generation was not to pass away until all these\n things are accomplished. According to this, the coming of the Son\n of man must be something other than a visible coming. In O. T.\n prophecy any divine interference in human affairs is represented\n under the figure of God coming in the clouds of heaven. _Mat.\n 26:64_ says: \u2018_From this time ye shall see the Son of man seated\n ... and coming in the clouds of heaven_.\u2019 Coming and judgment are\n both continuous. The slow growth in the parables of the leaven and\n the mustard seed contradicts the idea of Christ\u2019s early coming.\n \u2018_After a long time the Lord of these servants cometh_\u2019 (_Mat.\n 25:19_). Christ came in one sense at the destruction of Jerusalem;\n in another sense all great crises in the history of the world are\n comings of the Son of man. These judgments of the nations are a\n part of the process for the final setting up of the kingdom. But\n this final act will not be a judgment process, but the final\n entire submission of the will of man to the will of God. The end\n is to be, not judgment, but salvation.\u201d We add to this statement\n the declaration that the final act here spoken of will not be\n purely subjective and spiritual, but will constitute an external\n manifestation of Christ comparable to that of his first coming in\n its appeal to the senses, but unspeakably more glorious than was\n the coming to the manger and the cross. The proof of this we now\n proceed to give.\n\n\n\n1. The nature of this coming.\n\n\nAlthough without doubt accompanied, in the case of the regenerate, by\ninward and invisible influences of the Holy Spirit, the second advent is\nto be outward and visible. This we argue:\n\n(_a_) From the objects to be secured by Christ\u2019s return. These are partly\nexternal (Rom. 8:21, 23). Nature and the body are both to be glorified.\nThese external changes may well be accompanied by a visible manifestation\nof him who \u201cmakes all things new\u201d (Rev. 21:5).\n\n\n _Rom. 8:10\u201023_\u2014\u201c_in hope that the creation also shall be delivered\n from the bondage of corruption into the liberty of the glory of\n the children of God ... waiting for our adoption, to wit, the\n redemption of our body_\u201d; _Rev. 21:5_\u2014\u201c_Behold, I make all things\n new._\u201d A. J. Gordon, Ministry of the Spirit, 49\u2014\u201cWe must not\n confound the _Paraclete_ and the _Parousia_. It has been argued\n that, because Christ came in the person of the Spirit, the\n Redeemer\u2019s advent in glory has already taken place. But in the\n Paraclete Christ comes spiritually and invisibly; in the Parousia\n he comes bodily and gloriously.\u201d\n\n\n(_b_) From the Scriptural comparison of the manner of Christ\u2019s return with\nthe manner of his departure (Acts 1:11)\u2014see Commentary of Hackett, _in\nloco_:\u2014\u201c\u1f42\u03bd \u03c4\u03c1\u03cc\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd = visibly, and in the air. The expression is never\nemployed to affirm merely the certainty of one event as compared with\nanother. The assertion that the meaning is simply that, as Christ had\ndeparted, so also he would return, is contradicted by every passage in\nwhich the phrase occurs.\u201d\n\n\n _Acts 1:11_\u2014\u201c_this Jesus, who was received up from you into\n heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye beheld him going into\n heaven_\u201d; _cf._ _Acts 7:28_\u2014\u201c_wouldest thou kill me, as \u1f42\u03bd \u03c4\u03c1\u03cc\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd\n thou killedst the Egyptian yesterday?_\u201d _Mat. 23:37_\u2014\u201c_how often\n would I have gathered thy children together, even as \u1f42\u03bd \u03c4\u03c1\u03cc\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd a\n hen gathereth her chickens under her wings_\u201d; _2 Tim. 3:8_\u2014\u201c_as \u1f42\u03bd\n \u03c4\u03c1\u03cc\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses, so do these also\n withstand the truth._\u201d Lyman Abbott refers to _Mat. 23:37_, and\n _Luke 13:35_, as showing that, in _Acts 1:11_, \u201c_in like manner_\u201d\n means only \u201c_in like reality_.\u201d So, he says, the Jews expected\n Elijah to return in _form_, according to _Mal. 4:5_, whereas he\n returned only in _spirit_. Jesus similarly returned at Pentecost\n in spirit, and has been coming again ever since. The remark of Dr.\n Hackett, quoted in the text above, is sufficient proof that this\n interpretation is wholly unexegetical.\n\n\n(_c_) From the analogy of Christ\u2019s first coming. If this was a literal and\nvisible coming, we may expect the second coming to be literal and visible\nalso.\n\n\n _1 Thess. 4:16_\u2014\u201c_For the Lord himself_ [= in his own person]\n _shall descend from heaven, with a shout_ [something heard], _with\n the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God_\u201d\u2014see Com.\n of Prof. W. A. Stevens: \u201cSo different from _Luke 17:20_, where\n \u2018_the kingdom of God cometh not with observation_.\u2019 The \u2018_shout_\u2019\n is not necessarily the voice of Christ himself (lit. \u2018_in a\n shout_,\u2019 or \u2018_in shouting_\u2019). \u2018_Voice of the archangel_\u2019 and\n \u2018_trump of God_\u2019 are appositional, not additional.\u201d _Rev.\n 1:7_\u2014\u201c_every eye shall see him_\u201d; as every ear shall hear him:\n _John 5:28, 29_\u2014\u201c_all that are in the tombs shall hear his\n voice_\u201d; _2 Thess. 2:2_\u2014\u201c_to the end that ye be not quickly shaken\n from your mind, nor yet be troubled ... as that the day of the\n Lord is now present_\u201d\u2014they may have \u201cthought that the first\n gathering of the saints to Christ was a quiet, invisible one\u2014a\n stealthy advent, like a thief in the night\u201d (Lillie). _2 John\n 7_\u2014\u201c_For many deceivers are gone forth into the world, even they\n that confess not that Jesus Christ cometh in the flesh_\u201d\u2014here\n denial of a future second coming of Christ is declared to be the\n mark of a deceiver.\n\n Alford and Alexander, in their Commentaries on _Acts 1:11_, agree\n with the view of Hackett quoted above. Warren, Parousia, 61\u201065,\n 106\u2010114, controverts this view and says that \u201can omnipresent\n divine being can _come_, only in the sense of _manifestation_.\u201d He\n regards the parousia, or coming of Christ, as nothing but Christ\u2019s\n spiritual presence. A writer in the Presb. Review, 1883:221,\n replies that Warren\u2019s view is contradicted \u201cby the fact that the\n apostles often spoke of the parousia as an event yet future, long\n after the promise of the Redeemer\u2019s spiritual presence with his\n church had begun to be fulfilled, and by the fact that Paul\n expressly cautions the Thessalonians against the belief that the\n parousia was just at hand.\u201d We do not know how all men at one time\n can see a bodily Christ; but we also do not know the nature of\n Christ\u2019s body. The day exists undivided in many places at the same\n time. The telephone has made it possible for men widely separated\n to hear the same voice,\u2014it is equally possible that all men may\n see the same Christ coming in the clouds.\n\n\n\n2. The time of Christ\u2019s coming.\n\n\n(_a_) Although Christ\u2019s prophecy of this event, in the twenty\u2010fourth\nchapter of Matthew, so connects it with the destruction of Jerusalem that\nthe apostles and the early Christians seem to have hoped for its\noccurrence during their life\u2010time, yet neither Christ nor the apostles\ndefinitely taught when the end should be, but rather declared the\nknowledge of it to be reserved in the counsels of God, that men might ever\nrecognize it as possibly at hand, and so might live in the attitude of\nconstant expectation.\n\n\n _1 Cor. 15:51_\u2014\u201c_We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be\n changed_\u201d; _1 Thess. 4:17_\u2014\u201c_then we that are alive, that are\n left, shall together with them be caught up in the clouds, to meet\n the Lord in the air; and so shall we ever be with the Lord_\u201d; _2\n Tim. 4:8_\u2014\u201c_henceforth there is laid up for me the crown of\n righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give to\n me at that day: and not only to me, but also to all them that have\n loved his appearing_\u201d; _James __ 5:7_\u2014\u201c_Be patient therefore,\n brethren, until the coming of the Lord_\u201d; _1 Pet. 4:7_\u2014\u201c_But the\n end of all things is at hand: be ye therefore of sound mind, and\n be sober unto prayer_\u201d; _1 John 2:18_\u2014\u201c_Little children, it is the\n last hour: and as ye heard that antichrist cometh, even now have\n there risen many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last\n hour._\u201d\n\n _Phil. 4:5_\u2014\u201c_The Lord is at hand (\u1f10\u03b3\u03b3\u03cd\u03c2). In nothing be\n anxious_\u201d\u2014may mean \u201cthe Lord is near\u201d (in space), without any\n reference to the second coming. The passages quoted above,\n expressing as they do the surmises of the apostles that Christ\u2019s\n coming was near, while yet abstaining from all definite fixing of\n the time, are at least sufficient proof that Christ\u2019s advent may\n not be near to our time. We should be no more warranted than they\n were, in inferring from these passages alone the immediate coming\n of the Lord.\n\n Wendt, Teaching of Jesus, 2:349\u2010350, maintains that Jesus expected\n his own speedy second coming and the end of the world. There was\n no mention of the death of his disciples, or the importance of\n readiness for it. No hard and fast organization of his disciples\n into a church was contemplated by him,\u2014_Mat. 16:18_ and _18:17_\n are not authentic. No separation of his disciples from the\n fellowship of the Jewish religion was thought of. He thought of\n the destruction of Jerusalem as the final judgment. Yet his\n doctrine would spread through the earth, like leaven and mustard\n seed, though accompanied by suffering on the part of his\n disciples. This view of Wendt can be maintained only by an\n arbitrary throwing out of the testimony of the evangelist, upon\n the ground that Jesus\u2019 mention of a church does not befit so early\n a stage in the evolution of Christianity. Wendt\u2019s whole treatment\n is vitiated by the presupposition that there can be nothing in\n Jesus\u2019 words which is inexplicable upon the theory of natural\n development. That Jesus did not expect speedily to return to earth\n is shown in _Mat. 25:19_\u2014\u201c_After a long time the Lord of those\n servants cometh_\u201d; and Paul, in _2 Thess._, had to correct the\n mistake of those who interpreted him as having in his first\n Epistle declared an immediate coming of the Lord.\n\n A. H. Strong, Cleveland Sermon, 1904:27\u2014\u201cThe faith in a second\n coming of Christ has lost its hold upon many Christians in our\n day. But it still serves to stimulate and admonish the great body,\n and we can never dispense with its solemn and mighty influence.\n Christ comes, it is true, in Pentecostal revivals and in\n destructions of Jerusalem, in Reformation movements and in\n political upheavals. But these are only precursors of another and\n literal and final return of Christ, to punish the wicked and to\n complete the salvation of his people. That day for which all other\n days are made will be a joyful day for those who have fought a\n good fight and have kept the faith. Let us look for and hasten the\n coming of the day of God. The Jacobites of Scotland never ceased\n their labors and sacrifices for their king\u2019s return. They never\n tasted wine, without pledging their absent prince; they never\n joined in song, without renewing their oaths of allegiance. In\n many a prison cell and on many a battlefield they rang out the\n strain: \u2018Follow thee, follow thee, wha wadna follow thee? Long\n hast thou lo\u2019ed and trusted us fairly: Chairlie, Chairlie, wha\n wadna follow thee? King o\u2019 the Highland hearts, bonnie Prince\n Chairlie!\u2019 So they sang, so they invited him, until at last he\n came. But that longing for the day when Charles should come to his\n own again was faint and weak compared with the longing of true\n Christian hearts for the coming of their King. Charles came, only\n to suffer defeat, and to bring shame to his country. But Christ\n will come, to put an end to the world\u2019s long sorrow, to give\n triumph to the cause of truth, to bestow everlasting reward upon\n the faithful. \u2018Even so, Lord Jesus, come! Hope of all our hopes\n the sum, Take thy waiting people home! Long, so long, the groaning\n earth, Cursed with war and flood and dearth, Sighs for its\n redemption birth. Therefore come, we daily pray; Bring the\n resurrection\u2010day; Wipe creation\u2019s curse away!\u2019 \u201d\n\n\n(_b_) Hence we find, in immediate connection with many of these\npredictions of the end, a reference to intervening events and to the\neternity of God, which shows that the prophecies themselves are expressed\nin a large way which befits the greatness of the divine plans.\n\n\n _Mat. 24:36_\u2014\u201c_But of that day and hour knoweth no one, not even\n the angels of heaven, neither the Son, but the Father only_\u201d;\n _Mark 13:32_\u2014\u201c_But of that day or that hour knoweth no one, not\n even the angels in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father. Take\n ye heed, watch and pray: for ye know not when the time is_\u201d; _Acts\n 1:7_\u2014\u201c_And he said unto them, It is not for you to know times or\n seasons, which the Father hath set within his own authority_\u201d; _1\n Cor. 10:11_\u2014\u201c_Now these things happened unto them by way of\n example; and they were written for our admonition, upon whom the\n ends of the ages are come_\u201d; _16:22_\u2014\u201c_Marana tha_ [marg.: _that\n is, O Lord, come!_]\u201d; _2 Thess. 2:1\u20103_\u2014\u201c_Now we beseech you,\n brethren, touching the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and our\n gathering together unto him; to the end that ye be not quickly\n shaken from your mind, nor yet be troubled ... as that the day of\n the Lord is now present_ [Am. Rev.: \u2018_is just at hand_\u2019]; _let no\n man beguile you in any wise: for it will not be, except the\n falling away come first, and the man of sin be revealed, the son\n of perdition_.\u201d\n\n _James 5:8, 9_\u2014\u201c_Be ye also patient; establish your hearts: for\n the coming of the Lord is at hand. Murmur not, brethren, one\n against another, that ye be not judged: behold, the judge standeth\n before the doors_\u201d; _2 Pet. 3:3\u201012_\u2014\u201c_in the last days mockers\n shall come ... saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for,\n from the day that the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as\n they were from the beginning of the creation. For this they\n wilfully forget, that there were heavens from of old.... But\n forget not this one thing, beloved, that one day is with the Lord\n as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. The Lord is\n not slack concerning his promise.... But the day of the Lord will\n come as a thief ... what manner of persons ought ye to be in all\n holy living and godliness, looking for and earnestly desiring_\n [marg.: \u2018_hastening_\u2019] _the coming of the day of God_\u201d\u2014awaiting\n it, and hastening its coming by your prayer and labor.\n\n _Rev. 1:3_\u2014\u201c_Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the\n words of the prophecy, and keep the things that are written\n therein: for the time is at hand_\u201d: _22:12, 20_\u2014\u201c_Behold, I come\n quickly; and my reward is with me, to render to each man according\n as his work is.... He who testifieth these things saith, Yea: I\n come quickly. Amen: come, Lord Jesus._\u201d From these passages it is\n evident that the apostles did not know the time of the end, and\n that it was hidden from Christ himself while here in the flesh.\n He, therefore, who assumes to know, assumes to know more than\n Christ or his apostles\u2014assumes to know the very thing which Christ\n declared it was not for us to know!\n\n Gould, Bib. Theol. N.T., 152\u2014\u201cThe expectation of our Lord\u2019s coming\n was one of the elements and _motifs_ of that generation, and the\n delay of the event caused some questioning. But there is never any\n indication that it may be indefinitely postponed. The early church\n never had to face the difficulty forced upon the church to\u2010day, of\n belief in his second coming, founded upon a prophecy of his coming\n during the lifetime of a generation long since dead. And until\n this Epistle [_2 Peter_], we do not find any traces of this\n exegetical legerdemain as such a situation would require. But here\n we have it full\u2010grown; just such a specimen of harmonistic device\n as orthodox interpretation familiarizes us with. The definite\n statement that the advent is to be within that generation is met\n with the general principle that \u2018_one day is with the Lord as a\n thousand years, and a thousand years as one day_\u2019 (_2 Pet. 3:8_).\u201d\n We must regard this comment of Dr. Gould as an unconscious\n fulfilment of the prediction that \u201c_in the last days mockers shall\n come with mockery_\u201d (_2 Pet. 3:3_). A better understanding of\n prophecy, as divinely pregnant utterance, would have enabled the\n critic to believe that the words of Christ might be partially\n fulfilled in the days of the apostles, but fully accomplished only\n at the end of the world.\n\n\n(_c_) In this we discern a striking parallel between the predictions of\nChrist\u2019s first, and the predictions of his second, advent. In both cases\nthe event was more distant and more grand than those imagined to whom the\nprophecies first came. Under both dispensations, patient waiting for\nChrist was intended to discipline the faith, and to enlarge the\nconceptions, of God\u2019s true servants. The fact that every age since Christ\nascended has had its Chiliasts and Second Adventists should turn our\nthoughts away from curious and fruitless prying into the time of Christ\u2019s\ncoming, and set us at immediate and constant endeavor to be ready, at\nwhatsoever hour he may appear.\n\n\n _Gen. 4:1_\u2014\u201c_And the man knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and\n bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man with the help of Jehovah_\n [lit.: \u2018_I have gotten a man, even Jehovah_\u2019]\u201d\u2014an intimation that\n Eve fancied her first\u2010born to be already the promised seed, the\n coming deliverer; see MacWhorter, Jahveh Christ. _Deut.\n 18:15_\u2014\u201c_Jehovah thy God will raise up unto thee a prophet from\n the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye\n shall hearken_\u201d\u2014here is a prophecy which Moses may have expected\n to be fulfilled in Joshua, but which God designed to be fulfilled\n only in Christ. _Is. 7:14, 16_\u2014\u201c_Therefore the Lord himself will\n give you a sign: behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son,\n and shall call his name Immanuel.... For before the child shall\n know to refuse the evil, and choose the good, the land whose two\n kings thou abhorrest shall be forsaken_\u201d\u2014a prophecy which the\n prophet may have expected to be fulfilled in his own time, and\n which was partly so fulfilled, but which God intended to be\n fulfilled ages thereafter.\n\n _Luke 2:25_\u2014\u201c_Simeon; and this man was righteous and devout,\n looking for the consolation of Israel_\u201d\u2014Simeon was the type of\n holy men, in every age of Jewish history, who were waiting for the\n fulfilment of God\u2019s promise, and for the coming of the deliverer.\n So under the Christian dispensation. Augustine held that Christ\u2019s\n reign of a thousand years, which occupies the last epoch of the\n world\u2019s history, did not still lie in the future, but began with\n the founding of the church (Ritschl, Just. and Reconc., 286).\n Luther, near the time of his death, said: \u201cGod forbid that the\n world should last fifty years longer! Let him cut matters short\n with his last judgment!\u201d Melanchthon put the end less than two\n hundred years from his time. Calvin\u2019s motto was: \u201c_Domine,\n quousque?_\u201d\u2014\u201cO Lord, how long?\u201d Jonathan Edwards, before and\n during the great Awakening, indulged high expectations as to the\n probable extension of the movement until it should bring the\n world, even in his own lifetime, into the love and obedience of\n Christ (Life, by Allen, 234). Better than any one of these is the\n utterance of Dr. Broadus: \u201cIf I am always ready, I shall be ready\n when Jesus comes.\u201d On the whole subject, see Hovey, in Baptist\n Quarterly, Oct. 1877:416\u2010432; Shedd, Dogm. Theol., 2:641\u2010646;\n Stevens, in Am. Com. on Thessalonians, Excursus on The Parousia,\n and notes on _1 Thess. 4:13, 16; 5:11; 2 Thess. 2:3, 12_;\n Goodspeed, Messiah\u2019s Second Advent; Heagle, That Blessed Hope.\n\n\n\n3. The precursors of Christ\u2019s coming.\n\n\n(_a_) Through the preaching of the gospel in all the world, the kingdom of\nChrist is steadily to enlarge its boundaries, until Jews and Gentiles\nalike become possessed of its blessings, and a millennial period is\nintroduced in which Christianity generally prevails throughout the earth.\n\n\n _Dan. 2:44, 45_\u2014\u201c_And in the days of those kings shall the God of\n heaven set up a kingdom which shall never be destroyed, nor shall\n the sovereignty thereof be left to another people; but it shall\n break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand\n forever. Forasmuch as thou sawest that a stone was cut out of the\n mountain without hands, and that it brake in pieces the iron, the\n brass, the clay, the silver, and the gold; the great God hath made\n known to the king what shall come to pass hereafter: and the dream\n is certain, and the interpretation thereof sure._\u201d\n\n _Mat. 13:31, 32_\u2014\u201c_The kingdom of heaven is like unto a grain of\n mustard seed ... which indeed is less than all seeds; but when it\n is grown, it is greater than the herbs, and becometh a tree, so\n that the birds of heaven come and lodge in the branches\n thereof_\u201d\u2014the parable of the leaven, which follows, apparently\n illustrates the intensive, as that of the mustard seed illustrates\n the extensive, development of the kingdom of God; and it is as\n impossible to confine the reference of the leaven to the spread of\n evil as it is impossible to confine the reference of the mustard\n seed to the spread of good.\n\n _Mat. 24:14_\u2014\u201c_And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in\n the whole world for a testimony unto all the nations; and then\n shall the end come_\u201d; _Rom. 11:25, 26_\u2014\u201c_a hardening in part hath\n befallen Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in; and\n so all Israel shall be saved_\u201d; _Rev. 20:4\u20106_\u2014\u201c_And I saw thrones,\n and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I\n saw the souls of them that had been beheaded for the testimony of\n Jesus, and for the word of God, and such as worshipped not the\n beast, neither his image, and received not the mark upon their\n forehead and upon their hand; and they lived, and reigned with\n Christ a thousand years._\u201d\n\n _Col. 1:23_\u2014\u201c_the gospel which ye heard, which was preached in all\n creation under heaven_\u201d\u2014Paul\u2019s phrase here and the apparent\n reference in _Mat. 24:14_ to A. D. 70 as the time of the end,\n should restrain theorizers from insisting that the second coming\n of Christ cannot occur until this text has been fulfilled with\n literal completeness (Broadus).\n\n\n(_b_) There will be a corresponding development of evil, either extensive\nor intensive, whose true character shall be manifest not only in deceiving\nmany professed followers of Christ and in persecuting true believers, but\nin constituting a personal Antichrist as its representative and object of\nworship. This rapid growth shall continue until the millennium, during\nwhich evil, in the person of its chief, shall be temporarily restrained.\n\n\n _Mat. 13:30, 38_\u2014\u201c_Let both grow together until the harvest: and\n in the time of the harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather up\n first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather\n the wheat into my barn ... the field is the world; and the good\n seed, these are the sons of the kingdom; and the tares are the\n sons of the evil one_\u201d; _24:5, 11, 12, 24_\u2014\u201c_For many shall come\n in my name, saying, I am the Christ; and shall lead many\n astray.... And many false prophets shall arise, and shall lead\n many astray. And because iniquity shall be multiplied, the love of\n the many shall wax cold.... For there shall arise false Christs,\n and false prophets, and shall show great signs and wonders; so as\n to lead astray, if possible, even the elect._\u201d\n\n _Luke 21:12_\u2014\u201c_But before all these things, they shall lay their\n hands on you, and shall persecute you, delivering you up to the\n synagogues and prisons, bringing you before kings and governors\n for my name\u2019s sake_\u201d; _2 Thess. 2:3, 4, 7, 8,_\u2014\u201c_it will not be,\n except the falling away come first, and the man of sin be\n revealed, the son of perdition, he that opposeth and exalteth\n himself against all that is called God or that is worshipped; so\n that he sitteth in the temple of God, setting himself forth as\n God.... For the mystery of lawlessness doth already work: only\n there is one that restraineth __ now, until he be taken out of the\n way. And then shall be revealed the lawless one, whom the Lord\n Jesus shall slay with the breath of his mouth, and bring to nought\n by the manifestation of his coming._\u201d\n\n Elliott, Hor\u00e6 Apocalyptic\u00e6, 1:65, holds that \u201cAntichrist means\n another Christ, a pro\u2010Christ, a vice\u2010Christ, a pretender to the\n name of Christ, and in that character, an usurper and adversary.\n The principle of Antichrist was already sown in the time of Paul.\n But a certain hindrance, _i. e._, the Roman Empire as then\n constituted, needed first to be removed out of the way, before\n room could be made for Antichrist\u2019s development.\u201d Antichrist,\n according to this view, is the hierarchical spirit, which found\n its final and most complete expression in the Papacy. Dante, Hell,\n 19:106\u2010117, speaks of the Papacy, or rather the temporal power of\n the Popes, as Antichrist: \u201cTo you St. John referred, O shepherds\n vile, When she who sits on many waters, had Been seen with kings\n her person to defile\u201d; see A. H. Strong, Philosophy and Religion,\n 507.\n\n It has been objected that a simultaneous growth both of evil and\n of good is inconceivable, and that the progress of the divine\n kingdom implies a diminution in the power of the adversary. Only a\n slight reflection however convinces us that, as the population of\n the world is always increasing, evil men may increase in numbers,\n even though there is increase in the numbers of the good. But we\n must also consider that evil grows in intensity just in proportion\n to the light which good throws upon it. \u201cWherever God erects a\n house of prayer, The devil always builds a chapel there.\u201d Every\n revival of religion stirs up the forces of wickedness to\n opposition. As Christ\u2019s first advent occasioned an unusual\n outburst of demoniac malignity, so Christ\u2019s second advent will be\n resisted by a final desperate effort of the evil one to overcome\n the forces of good. The great awakening in New England under\n Jonathan Edwards caused on the one hand a most remarkable increase\n in the number of Baptist believers, but also on the other hand the\n rise of modern Unitarianism. The optimistic Presbyterian pastor at\n Auburn argued with the pessimistic chaplain of the State\u2019s Prison\n that the world was certainly growing better, because his\n congregation was increasing; whereupon the chaplain replied that\n his own congregation was increasing also.\n\n\n(_c_) At the close of this millennial period, evil will again be permitted\nto exert its utmost power in a final conflict with righteousness. This\nspiritual struggle, moreover, will be accompanied and symbolized by\npolitical convulsions, and by fearful indications of desolation in the\nnatural world.\n\n\n _Mat. 24:29, 30_\u2014\u201c_But immediately after the tribulation of those\n days the sun shall be darkened, and the moon shall not give her\n light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the\n heavens shall be shaken: and then shall appear the sign of the Son\n of man in heaven_\u201d; _Luke 21:8\u201028_\u2014false prophets; wars and\n tumults; earthquakes; pestilences; persecutions; signs in the sun,\n moon, and stars; \u201c_And then shall they see the Son of man coming\n in a cloud with power and great glory. But when these things begin\n to come to pass, look up, and lift up your heads; because your\n redemption draweth nigh._\u201d\n\n Interpretations of the book of Revelation are divided into three\n classes: (1) the _Pr\u00e6terist_ (held by Grotius, Moses Stuart, and\n Warren), which regards the prophecy as mainly fulfilled in the age\n immediately succeeding the time of the apostles (666 = Neron\n Kaisar); (2) the _Continuous_ (held by Isaac Newton, Vitringa,\n Bengel, Elliott, Kelly, and Cumming), which regards the whole as a\n continuous prophetical history, extending from the first age until\n the end of all things (666 = Lateinos); Hengstenberg and Alford\n hold substantially this view, though they regard the seven seals,\n trumpets, and vials as synchronological, each succeeding set going\n over the same ground and exhibiting it in some special aspect; (3)\n the _Futurist_ (held by Maitland and Todd), which considers the\n book as describing events yet to occur, during the times\n immediately preceding and following the coming of the Lord.\n\n Of all these interpretations, the most learned and exhaustive is\n that of Elliott, in his four volumes entitled Hor\u00e6 Apocalyptic\u00e6.\n The basis of his interpretation is the \u201c_time and times and half a\n time_\u201d of _Dan. 7:25_, which according to the year\u2010day theory\n means 1260 years\u2014the year, according to ancient reckoning,\n containing 360 days, and the \u201c_time_\u201d being therefore 360 years\n [360 + (2 X 360) + 180 = 1260]. This phrase we find recurring with\n regard to the woman nourished in the wilderness (_Rev. 12:14_).\n The blasphemy of the beast for forty and two months (_Rev. 13:5_)\n seems to refer to the same period [42 X 30 = 1260, as before]. The\n two witnesses prophecy 1260 days (_Rev. 11:3_); and the woman\u2019s\n time in the wilderness is stated (_Rev. 12:6_) as 1260 days. This\n period of 1260 years is regarded by Elliott as the time of the\n temporal power of the Papacy.\n\n There is a twofold _terminus a quo_, and correspondingly a twofold\n _terminus ad quem_. The first commencement is A. D. 531, when in\n the edict of Justinian the dragon of the Roman Empire gives its\n power to the beast of the Papacy, and resigns its throne to the\n rising Antichrist, giving opportunity for the rise of the ten\n horns as European kings (_Rev. 13:1\u20103_). The second commencement,\n adding the seventy\u2010five supplementary years of _Daniel 12:12_\n [1335 \u2010 1260 = 75], is A. D. 606, when the Emperor Phocas\n acknowledges the primacy of Rome, and the ten horns, or kings, now\n diademed, submit to the Papacy (_Rev. 17:12, 13_). The first\n ending\u2010point is A. D. 1791, when the French Revolution struck the\n first blow at the independence of the Pope [531 + 1260 = 1791].\n The second ending\u2010point is A. D. 1866, when the temporal power of\n the Pope was abolished at the unification of the kingdom of Italy\n [606 + 1260 = 1866]. Elliott regards the two\u2010horned beast (_Rev.\n 13:11_) as representing the Papal Clergy, and the image of the\n beast (_Rev. 13:14, 15_) as representing the Papal Councils.\n\n Unlike Hengstenberg and Alford, who consider the seals, trumpets,\n and vials as synchronological, Elliott makes the seven trumpets to\n be an unfolding of the seventh seal, and the seven vials to be an\n unfolding of the seventh trumpet. Like other advocates of the\n premillennial advent of Christ, Elliott regards the four chief\n signs of Christ\u2019s near approach as being: (1) the decay of the\n Turkish Empire (the drying up of the river Euphrates\u2014_Rev.\n 16:12_); (2) the Pope\u2019s loss of temporal power (the destruction of\n Babylon\u2014_Rev. 17:19_); (3) the conversion of the Jews and their\n return to their own land (_Ez. 37; Rom. 11:12\u201015, 25\u201027_\u2014but on\n this last, see Meyer); (4) the pouring out of the Holy Spirit and\n the conversion of the Gentiles (the way of the kings of the\n East\u2014_Rev. 16:12_; the fulness of the Gentiles\u2014_Rom. 11:25_).\n\n Elliott\u2019s whole scheme, however, is vitiated by the fact that he\n wrongly assumes the book of Revelation to have been written under\n Domitian (94 or 96), instead of under Nero (67 or 68). His\n _terminus a quo_ is therefore incorrect, and his interpretation of\n chapters 5\u20109 is rendered very precarious. The year 1866, moreover,\n should have been the time of the end, and so the _terminus ad\n quem_ seems to be clearly misunderstood\u2014unless indeed the seventy\u2010\n five supplementary years of Daniel are to be added to 1866. We\n regard the failure of this most ingenious scheme of Apocalyptic\n interpretation as a practical demonstration that a clear\n understanding of the meaning of prophecy is, before the event,\n impossible, and we are confirmed in this view by the utterly\n untenable nature of the theory of the millennium which is commonly\n held by so\u2010called Second Adventists, a theory which we now proceed\n to examine.\n\n A long preparation may be followed by a sudden consummation.\n Drilling the rock for the blast is a slow process; firing the\n charge takes but a moment. The woodwork of the Windsor Hotel in\n New York was in a charred and superheated state before the\n electric wires that threaded it wore out their insulation,\u2014then a\n slight increase of voltage turned heat into flame. The Outlook,\n March 30, 1895\u2014\u201cAn evolutionary conception of the Second Coming,\n as a progressive manifestation of the spiritual power and glory of\n Christ, may issue in a _d\u00e9nouement_ as unique as the first advent\n was which closed the preparatory ages.\u201d\n\n Joseph Cook, on A. J. Gordon: \u201cThere is a wide distinction between\n the flash\u2010light theory and the burning\u2010glass theory of missions.\n The latter was Dr. Gordon\u2019s view. When a burning\u2010glass is held\n over inflammable material, the concentrated rays of the sun\n rapidly produce in it discoloration, smoke, and sparks. At a\n certain instant, after the sparks have been sufficiently diffused,\n the whole material suddenly bursts into flame. There is then no\n longer any need of the burning\u2010glass, for fire has itself fallen\n from on high and is able to do its own work. So the world is to be\n regarded as inflammable material to be set on fire from on high.\n Our Lord\u2019s life on earth is a burning\u2010glass, concentrating rays of\n light and heat upon the souls of men. When the heating has gone on\n far enough, and the sparks of incipient conflagration have been\n sufficiently diffused, suddenly spiritual flame will burst up\n everywhere and will fill the earth. This is the second advent of\n him who kindled humanity to new life by his first advent. As I\n understand the premillenarian view of history, the date when the\n sparks shall kindle into flame is not known, but it is known that\n the duty of the church is to spread the sparks and to expect at\n any instant, after their wide diffusion, the victorious descent of\n millennial flame, that is, the beginning of our Lord\u2019s personal\n and visible reign over the whole earth.\u201d See article on\n Millenarianism, by G. P. Fisher, in McClintock and Strong\u2019s\n Cyclop\u00e6dia; also by Semisch, in Schaff\u2010Herzog, Cyclop\u00e6dia; cf.\n Schaff, History of the Christian Church, 1:840.\n\n\n\n4. Relation of Christ\u2019s second coming to the millennium.\n\n\nThe Scripture foretells a period, called in the language of prophecy \u201ca\nthousand years,\u201d when Satan shall be restrained and the saints shall reign\nwith Christ on the earth. A comparison of the passages bearing on this\nsubject leads us to the conclusion that this millennial blessedness and\ndominion is prior to the second advent. One passage only seems at first\nsight to teach the contrary, _viz._: Rev. 20:4\u201010. But this supports the\ntheory of a premillennial advent only when the passage is interpreted with\nthe barest literalness. A better view of its meaning will be gained by\nconsidering:\n\n(_a_) That it constitutes a part, and confessedly an obscure part, of one\nof the most figurative books of Scripture, and therefore ought to be\ninterpreted by the plainer statements of the other Scriptures.\n\n\n We quote here the passage alluded to: _Rev. 20:4\u201010_\u2014\u201c_And I saw\n thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them:\n and I saw the souls of them that had been beheaded for the\n testimony of Jesus, and for the word of God, and such as\n worshipped not the beast, neither his image, and received not the\n mark upon their forehead and upon their hand; and they lived, and\n reigned with Christ a thousand years. The rest of the dead lived\n not until the thousand years should be finished. This is the first\n resurrection. Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first\n resurrection: over these the second death hath no power; but they\n shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a\n thousand years._\u201d\n\n Emerson and Parker met a Second Adventist who warned them that the\n end of the world was near. Parker replied: \u201cMy friend, that does\n not concern me; I live in Boston.\u201d Emerson said: \u201cWell, I think I\n can get along without it.\u201d A similarly cheerful view is taken by\n Denney, Studies in Theology, 232\u2014\u201cChrist certainly comes,\n according to the picture in Revelation, before the millennium; but\n the question of importance is, whether the conception of the\n millennium itself, related as it is to Ezekiel, is essential to\n faith. I cannot think that it is. The religious content of the\n passages\u2014what they offer for faith to grasp\u2014is, I should say,\n simply this: that _until_ the end the conflict between the kingdom\n of God and the kingdom of the world must go on; that as the end\n approaches it becomes ever more intense, progress in humanity not\n being a progress in goodness merely or in badness only, but in the\n antagonism between the two; and that the necessity for conflict is\n sure to emerge even after the kingdom of God has won its greatest\n triumphs. I frankly confess that to seek more than this in such\n Scriptural indications seems to me trifling.\u201d\n\n\n(_b_) That the other Scriptures contain nothing with regard to a\nresurrection of the righteous which is widely separated in time from that\nof the wicked, but rather declare distinctly that the second coming of\nChrist is immediately connected both with the resurrection of the just and\nthe unjust and with the general judgment.\n\n\n _Mat. 16:27_\u2014\u201c_For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his\n Father with his angels; and then shall he render unto every man\n according to his deeds_\u201d; _25:31\u201033_\u2014\u201c_But when the Son of man\n shall come in his glory, and all the angels with him, then shall\n he sit on the throne of his glory: and before him shall be\n gathered all the nations: and he shall separate them one from\n another, as the shepherd separateth the sheep from the goats_\u201d;\n _John 5:28, 29_\u2014\u201c_Marvel not at this: for the hour cometh, in\n which all that are in the tombs shall hear his voice, and shall\n some forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of\n life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of\n judgment_\u201d; _2 Cor. 5:10_\u2014\u201c_For we must all be made manifest\n before the judgment seat of Christ; that each one may receive the\n things done in the body, according to what he hath done, whether\n it be good or bad_\u201d; _2 Thess. 1:6\u201010_\u2014\u201c_if so be that it is a\n righteous thing with God to recompense affliction to them that\n afflict you, and to you that are afflicted rest with us, at the\n revelation of the Lord Jesus from heaven with the angels of his\n power in flaming fire, rendering vengeance to them that know not\n God, and to them that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus: who\n shall suffer punishment, even eternal destruction from the face of\n the Lord and from the glory of his might, when he shall come to be\n glorified in his saints, and to be marvelled at in all them that\n believed._\u201d\n\n _2 Pet. 3:7, 10_\u2014\u201c_the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly\n men.... But the day of the Lord will come as a thief; in the which\n the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements\n shall be dissolved with fervent heat, and the earth and the works\n that are therein shall be burned up_\u201d; _Rev. 20:11\u201015_\u2014\u201c_And I saw\n a great white throne, and him that sat upon it, from whose face\n the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place\n for them. And I saw the dead, the great and the small, standing\n before the throne; and books were opened: and another book was\n opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of\n the things that were written in the books, according to their\n works. And the sea gave up the dead that were in it; and death and\n Hades gave up the dead that __ were in them: and they were judged\n every man according to their works. And death and Hades were cast\n into the lake of fire. This is the second death, even the lake of\n fire. And if any was not found written in the book of life, he was\n cast into the lake of fire._\u201d\n\n Here is abundant evidence that there is no interval of a thousand\n years between the second coming of Christ and the resurrection,\n general judgment, and end of all things. All these events come\n together. The only answer of the premillennialists to this\n objection to their theory is, that the day of judgment and the\n millennium may be contemporaneous,\u2014in other words, the day of\n judgment may be a thousand years long. Elliott holds to a\n conflagration, partial at the beginning of this period, complete\n at its close,\u2014Peter\u2019s prophecy treating the two conflagrations as\n one, while the book of Revelation separates them; so a nearer view\n resolves binary stars into two. But we reply that, if the judgment\n occupies the whole period of a thousand years, then the coming of\n Christ, the resurrection, and the final conflagration should all\n be a thousand years also. It is indeed possible that, in this\n case, as Peter says in connection with his prophecy of judgment,\n \u201c_one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand\n years as one day_\u201d (_2 Pet. 3:8_). But if we make the word \u201c_day_\u201d\n so indefinite in connection with the judgment, why should we\n regard it as so definite, when we come to interpret the 1260 days?\n\n\n(_c_) That the literal interpretation of the passage\u2014holding, as it does,\nto a resurrection of bodies of flesh and blood, and to a reign of the\nrisen saints in the flesh, and in the world as at present constituted\u2014is\ninconsistent with other Scriptural declarations with regard to the\nspiritual nature of the resurrection\u2010body and of the coming reign of\nChrist.\n\n\n _1 Cor. 15:44, 50_\u2014\u201c_it is sown a natural body; it is raised a\n spiritual body.... Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood\n cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit\n incorruption._\u201d These passages are inconsistent with the view that\n the resurrection is a physical resurrection at the beginning of\n the thousand years\u2014a resurrection to be followed by a second life\n of the saints in bodies of flesh and blood. They are not, however,\n inconsistent with the true view, soon to be mentioned, that \u201c_the\n first resurrection_\u201d is simply the raising of the church to a new\n life and zeal. Westcott, Bib. Com. on _John 14:18, 19_\u2014\u201c_I will\n not leave you desolate_ [marg.: \u2018_orphans_\u2019]: _I come unto you.\n Yet a little while, and the world beholdeth me no more; but ye\n behold me_\u201d:\u2014\u201cThe words exclude the error of those who suppose\n that Christ will \u2018come\u2019 under the same conditions of earthly\n existence as those to which he submitted at his first coming.\u201d See\n Hovey, Bib. Eschatology, 66\u201078.\n\n\n(_d_) That the literal interpretation is generally and naturally connected\nwith the expectation of a gradual and necessary decline of Christ\u2019s\nkingdom upon earth, until Christ comes to bind Satan and to introduce the\nmillennium. This view not only contradicts such passages as Dan. 2:34, 35,\nand Mat. 13:31, 32, but it begets a passive and hopeless endurance of\nevil, whereas the Scriptures enjoin a constant and aggressive warfare\nagainst it, upon the very ground that God\u2019s power shall assure to the\nchurch a gradual but constant progress in the face of it, even to the time\nof the end.\n\n\n _Dan. 2:34, 35_\u2014\u201c_Thou sawest till that a stone was cut out\n without hands, which smote the image upon its feet that were of\n iron and clay, and brake them in pieces. Then was the iron, the\n clay, the brass, the silver, and the gold, broken in pieces\n together, and became like the chaff of the summer threshing\u2010\n floors; and the wind carried them away, so that no place was found\n for them: and the stone that smote the image became a great\n mountain, and filled the whole earth_\u201d; _Mat. 13:31, 32_\u2014\u201c_The\n kingdom of heaven is like unto a grain of mustard seed, which a\n man took, and sowed in his field: which indeed is less than all\n seeds; but when it is grown, it is greater than the herbs, and\n becometh a tree, so that the birds of the heaven come and lodge in\n the branches thereof._\u201d In both these figures there is no sign of\n cessation or of backward movement, but rather every indication of\n continuous advance to complete victory and dominion. The\n premillennial theory supposes that for the principle of\n development under the dispensation of the Holy Spirit, God will\n substitute a reign of mere power and violence. J. B. Thomas: \u201cThe\n kingdom of heaven is like a grain of mustard seed, not like a can\n of nitro\u2010glycerine.\u201d Leighton Williams: \u201cThe kingdom of God is to\n be realized on earth, not by a cataclysm, apart from effort and\n will, but through the universal dissemination of the gospel all\n but lost to the world.\u201d E. G. Robinson: \u201cSecond Adventism\n stultifies the system and scheme of Christianity.\u201d Dr. A. J.\n Gordon could not deny that the early disciples were mistaken in\n expecting the end of the world in their day. So we may be.\n Scripture does not declare that the end should come in the\n lifetime of the apostles, and no definite date is set. \u201c_After a\n long time_\u201d (_Mat. 25:19_) and \u201c_the falling away come first_\u201d (_2\n Thess. 2:3_) are expressions which postpone indefinitely. Yet a\n just view of Christ\u2019s coming as ever possible in the immediate\n future may make us as faithful as were the original disciples.\n\n The theory also divests Christ of all kingly power until the\n millennium, or, rather, maintains that the kingdom has not yet\n been given to him; see Elliott, Hor\u00e6 Apocalyptic\u00e6, 1:94\u2014where\n _Luke 19:12_\u2014\u201c_A certain nobleman went into a far country, to\n receive for himself a kingdom, and to return_\u201d\u2014is interpreted as\n follows: \u201cSubordinate kings went to Rome to receive the\n investiture to their kingdoms from the Roman Emperor, and then\n returned to occupy them and reign. So Christ received from his\n Father, after his ascension, the investiture to his kingdom; but\n with the intention not to occupy it, till his return at his second\n coming. In token of this investiture he takes his seat as the Lamb\n on the divine throne\u201d (_Rev. 5:6\u20108_). But this interpretation\n contradicts _Mat. 28:18, 20_\u2014\u201c_All authority hath been given unto\n me in heaven and on earth ... lo, I am with you always, even unto\n the end of the world._\u201d See Presb. Rev., 1882:228. On the effects\n of the premillennial view in weakening Christian endeavor, see J.\n H. Seelye, Christian Missions, 94\u2010127; _per contra_, see A. J.\n Gordon, in Independent, Feb. 1886.\n\n\n(_e_) We may therefore best interpret Rev. 20:4\u201010 as teaching in highly\nfigurative language, not a preliminary resurrection of the body, in the\ncase of departed saints, but a period in the later days of the church\nmilitant when, under special influence of the Holy Ghost, the spirit of\nthe martyrs shall appear again, true religion be greatly quickened and\nrevived, and the members of Christ\u2019s churches become so conscious of their\nstrength in Christ that they shall, to an extent unknown before, triumph\nover the powers of evil both within and without. So the spirit of Elijah\nappeared again in John the Baptist (Mal. 4:5; _cf._ Mat. 11:13, 14). The\nfact that only the spirit of sacrifice and faith is to be revived is\nfiguratively indicated in the phrase: \u201cThe rest of the dead lived not\nagain until the thousand years should be finished\u201d = the spirit of\npersecution and unbelief shall be, as it were, laid to sleep. Since\nresurrection, like the coming of Christ and the judgment, is twofold,\nfirst, spiritual (the raising of the soul to spiritual life), and\nsecondly, physical (the raising of the body from the grave), the words in\nRev. 20:5\u2014\u201cthis is the first resurrection\u201d\u2014seem intended distinctly to\npreclude the literal interpretation we are combating. In short, we hold\nthat Rev. 20:4\u201010 does not describe the events commonly called the second\nadvent and resurrection, but rather describes great spiritual changes in\nthe later history of the church, which are typical of, and preliminary to,\nthe second advent and resurrection, and therefore, after the prophetic\nmethod, are foretold in language literally applicable only to those final\nevents themselves (_cf._ Ez. 37:1\u201014; Luke 15:32).\n\n\n _Mal. 4:5_\u2014\u201c_Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the\n great and terrible day of Jehovah come_\u201d; _cf._ _Mat. 11:13,\n 14_\u2014\u201c_For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John. And\n if ye are willing to receive it, this is Elijah, that is to\n come_\u201d; _Ez. 37:1\u201014_\u2014the vision of the valley of dry bones =\n either the political or the religious resuscitation of the Jews;\n _Luke 15:32_\u2014\u201c_this thy brother was dead, and is alive again_\u201d\u2014of\n the prodigal son. It will help us in our interpretation of _Rev.\n 20:4\u201010_ to notice that death, judgment, the coming of Christ, and\n the resurrection, are all of two kinds, the first spiritual, and\n the second literal:\n\n (1) First, a spiritual death (_Eph. 2:1_\u2014\u201c_dead through your\n trespasses and sins_\u201d); and secondly, a physical and literal\n death, whose culmination is found in the second death (_Rev.\n 20:14_\u2014\u201c_And death and Hades were cast into the lake of fire. This\n is the second death, even the lake of fire_\u201d).\n\n (2) First, a spiritual judgment (_Is. 26:9_\u2014\u201c_when thy judgments\n are in the earth_\u201d; _John 12:31_\u2014\u201c_Now is the judgment of this\n world: now shall the prince of this world be cast out_\u201d;\n _3:18_\u2014\u201c_he that believeth not hath been judged already_\u201d); and\n secondly, an outward and literal judgment (_Acts 17:31_\u2014\u201c_hath\n appointed a day in which he will judge the world in righteousness\n by the man whom he hath ordained_\u201d).\n\n (3) First, the spiritual and invisible coming of Christ (_Mat.\n 16:28_\u2014\u201c_shall in no wise taste of death, till they see the Son of\n man coming in his kingdom_\u201d\u2014at the destruction of Jerusalem; _John\n 14:16, 18_\u2014\u201c_another Comforter ... I come unto you_\u201d\u2014at Pentecost;\n _14:3_\u2014\u201c_And if I go and prepare a place for you, I come again,\n and will receive you unto myself_\u201d\u2014at death); and secondly, a\n visible literal coming (_Mat. 25:31_\u2014\u201c_the Son of man shall come\n in his glory, and all the angels with him_\u201d).\n\n (4) First, a spiritual resurrection (_John 5:25_\u2014\u201c_The hour\n cometh, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son\n of God; and they that hear shall live_\u201d); and secondly, a physical\n and literal resurrection (_John 5:28, 29_\u2014\u201c_the hour cometh, in\n which all that are in the tombs shall hear his voice, and shall\n come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of\n life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of\n judgment_\u201d). The spiritual resurrection foreshadows the bodily\n resurrection.\n\n This twofoldness of each of the four terms, death, judgment,\n coming of Christ, resurrection, is so obvious a teaching of\n Scripture, that the apostle\u2019s remark in _Rev. 20:5_\u2014\u201c_This is the\n first resurrection_\u201d\u2014seems distinctly intended to warn the reader\n against drawing the premillenarian inference, and to make clear\n the fact that the resurrection spoken of is the first or spiritual\n resurrection,\u2014an interpretation which is made indubitable by his\n proceeding, further on, to describe the outward and literal\n resurrection in _verse 13_\u2014\u201c_And the sea gave up the dead that\n were in it: and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in\n them._\u201d This physical resurrection takes place when \u201c_the thousand\n years_\u201d are \u201c_finished_\u201d (_verse 5_).\n\n This interpretation suggests a possible way of reconciling the\n premillenarian and postmillenarian theories, without sacrificing\n any of the truth in either of them. Christ may come again, at the\n beginning of the millennium, in a spiritual way, and his saints\n may reign with him spiritually, in the wonderful advances of his\n kingdom; while the visible, literal coming may take place at the\n end of the thousand years. Dorner\u2019s view is postmillennial, in\n this sense, that the visible coming of Christ will be after the\n thousand years. Hengstenberg curiously regards the millennium as\n having begun in the Middle Ages (800\u20101800 A. D.). This strange\n view of an able interpreter, as well as the extraordinary\n diversity of explanations given by others, convinces us that no\n exegete has yet found the key to the mysteries of the Apocalypse.\n Until we know whether the preaching of the gospel in the whole\n world (_Mat. 24:14_) is to be a preaching to nations as a whole,\n or to each individual in each nation, we cannot determine whether\n the millennium has already begun, or whether it is yet far in the\n future.\n\n The millennium then is to be the culmination of the work of the\n Holy Spirit, a universal revival of religion, a nation born in a\n day, the kings of the earth bringing their glory and honor into\n the city of God. A. J. Gordon, Ministry of the Spirit, 211\u2014\u201cAfter\n the present elective work of the Spirit has been completed, there\n will come a time of universal blessing, when the Spirit shall\n literally be poured out upon all flesh, when that which is perfect\n shall come and that which is in part shall be done away.... The\n early rain of the Spirit was at Pentecost; the latter rain will be\n at the Parousia.\u201d\n\n A. H. Strong, Sermon before the Baptist World Congress, London,\n July 12, 1905\u2014\u201cLet us expect the speedy spiritual coming of the\n Lord. I believe in an ultimate literal and visible coming of\n Christ in the clouds of heaven to raise the dead, to summon all\n men to the judgment, and to wind up the present dispensation. But\n I believe that this visible and literal coming of Christ must be\n preceded, and prepared for, by his invisible and spiritual coming\n and by a resurrection of faith and love in the hearts of his\n people. \u2018_This is the first resurrection_\u2019 (_Rev. 20:5_). I read\n in Scripture of a spiritual second coming that precedes the\n literal, an inward revelation of Christ to his people, a\n restraining of the powers of darkness, a mighty augmentation of\n the forces of righteousness, a turning to the Lord of men and\n nations, such as the world has not yet seen. I believe in a long\n reign of Christ on earth, in which his saints shall in spirit be\n caught up with him, and shall sit with him upon his throne, even\n though this muddy vesture of decay compasses them about, and the\n time of their complete glorification has not yet come. Let us\n hasten the coming of the day of God by our faith and prayer.\n \u2018_When the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth?_\u2019\n (_Luke 18:8_). Let him find faith, at least in us. Our faith can\n certainly secure the coming of the Lord into our hearts. Let us\n expect that Christ will be revealed in us, as of old he was\n revealed in the Apostle Paul.\u201d\n\n Our own interpretation of _Rev. 20:1\u201010_, was first given, for\n substance, by Whitby. He was followed by Vitringa and Faber. For a\n fuller elaboration of it, see Brown, Second Advent, 206\u2010259;\n Hodge, Outlines of Theology, 447\u2010453. For the postmillennial view\n generally, see Kendrick, in Bap. Quar., Jan. 1870; New Englander,\n 1874:356; 1879:47\u201049, 114\u2010147; Pepper, in Bap. Rev., 1880:15;\n Princeton Review, March, 1879:415\u2010434; Presb. Rev., 1883:221\u2010252;\n Bib. Sac., 15:381, 625; 17:111; Harris, Kingdom of Christ,\n 220\u2010237; Waldegrave, Bampton Lectures for 1854, on the Millennium;\n Neander, Planting and Training, 526, 527; Cowles, Dissertation on\n Premillennial Advent, in Com. on Jeremiah and Ezekiel; Weiss,\n Premillennial Advent; Crosby, Second Advent; Fairbairn on\n Prophecy, 432\u2010480; Woods, Works, 3:267; Abp. Whately, Essays on\n Future State. For the premillennial view, see Elliott, Hor\u00e6\n Apocalyptic\u00e6, 4:140\u2010196; William Kelly, Advent of Christ\n Premillennial; Taylor, Voice of the Church on the Coming and\n Kingdom of the Redeemer; Litch, Christ Yet to Come.\n\n\n\n\nIV. The Resurrection.\n\n\nWhile the Scriptures describe the impartation of new life to the soul in\nregeneration as a spiritual resurrection, they also declare that, at the\nsecond coming of Christ, there shall be a resurrection of the body, and a\nreunion of the body to the soul from which, during the intermediate state,\nit has been separated. Both the just and the unjust shall have part in the\nresurrection. To the just, it shall be a resurrection unto life; and the\nbody shall be a body like Christ\u2019s\u2014a body fitted for the uses of the\nsanctified spirit. To the unjust, it shall be a resurrection unto\ncondemnation; and analogy would seem to indicate that, here also, the\noutward form will fitly represent the inward state of the soul\u2014being\ncorrupt and deformed as is the soul which inhabits it. Those who are\nliving at Christ\u2019s coming shall receive spiritual bodies without passing\nthrough death. As the body after corruption and dissolution, so the\noutward world after destruction by fire, shall be rehabilitated and fitted\nfor the abode of the saints.\n\n\n Passages describing a spiritual resurrection are: _John 5:24\u201027_,\n especially _25_\u2014\u201c_The hour cometh, and now is, when the dead shall\n hear the voice of the Son of God; and they that hear shall live_\u201d;\n _Rom. 6:4, 5_\u2014\u201c_as Christ was raised from the dead through the\n glory of the Father, so we also might walk in newness of life. For\n if we have become united with him by the likeness of his death, we\n shall be also by the likeness of his resurrection_\u201d; _Eph. 2:1, 5,\n 6_\u2014\u201c_And you did he make alive, when ye were dead through your\n trespasses and sins ... even when we were dead through our\n trespasses, made us alive together with Christ ... and raised us\n up with him, and made us to sit with him in the heavenly places,\n in Christ Jesus_\u201d; _5:14_\u2014\u201c_Awake, thou that sleepest, and arise\n from the dead, and Christ shall shine upon thee._\u201d _Phil.\n 3:10_\u2014\u201c_that I may know him, and the power of his resurrection_\u201d;\n _Col. 2:12, 13_\u2014\u201c_having been buried with him in baptism, wherein\n ye were also raised with him through faith in the working of God,\n who raised him from the dead. And you, being dead through your\n trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, you, I say, did\n he make alive together with him_\u201d; _cf._ _Is. 26:19_\u2014\u201c_Thy dead\n shall live; my dead bodies shall arise. Awake and sing, ye that\n dwell in the dust; for thy dew is as the dew of herbs, and the\n earth shall cast forth the dead_\u201d; _Ez. 37:1\u201014_\u2014the valley of dry\n bones: \u201c_I will open your graves, and cause you to come up out of\n your graves, O my people; and I will bring you into the land of\n Israel._\u201d\n\n Passages describing a literal and physical resurrection are: _Job\n 14:12\u201015_\u2014\u201c_So man lieth down and riseth not: Till the heavens be\n no more, they shall not awake, Nor be raised out of their sleep.\n Oh that thou wouldest hide me in Sheol, That thou wouldest keep me\n secret, until thy wrath be past, That thou wouldest appoint me a\n set time, and remember me! If a man die, shall he live again? All\n the days of my warfare would I wait, Till my release should come.\n Thou wouldest call, and I would answer thee: Thou wouldest have a\n desire to the work of thy hands_\u201d; _John 5:28, 29_\u2014\u201c_the hour\n cometh, in which all that are in the tombs shall hear his voice,\n and shalt come forth: they that have done good, unto the\n resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the\n resurrection of judgment._\u201d\n\n _Acts 24:15_\u2014\u201c_having hope toward God ... that there shall be a\n resurrection both of the just and unjust_\u201d; _1 Cor. 15:13, 17, 22,\n 42, 51, 52_\u2014\u201c_if there is no resurrection of the dead, neither\n hath Christ been raised ... and if Christ hath not been raised,\n your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins ... as in Adam all\n die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive ... it is sown in\n corruption: it is raised in incorruption.... We shall not all\n sleep, but we shall all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling\n of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the\n dead shall be raised incorruptible_\u201d; _Phil. 3:21_\u2014\u201c_who shall\n fashion anew the body of our humiliation, that it may be conformed\n to the body of his glory, according to the working whereby he is\n able even to subject all things unto himself_\u201d; _1 Thess.\n 4:14\u201016_\u2014\u201c_For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even\n so them also that are fallen asleep in Jesus will God bring with\n him. For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we\n that are alive, that are left unto the coming of the Lord, shall\n in no wise precede them that are fallen asleep. For the Lord\n himself shall descend from heaven, with a shout, with the voice of\n the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ\n shall rise first._\u201d\n\n _2 Pet. 3:7, 10, 13_\u2014\u201c_the heavens that now are, and the earth, by\n the same word have been stored up for fire, being reserved against\n the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly men.... But the day\n of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, which the heavens\n shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall be\n dissolved with fervent heat, and the earth and the works that are\n therein shall be burned up.... But, according to his promise, we\n look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth\n righteousness_\u201d; _Rev. 20:13_\u2014\u201c_And the sea gave up the dead that\n were __ in it; and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in\n them_\u201d; _21:1, 5_\u2014\u201c_And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for\n the first heaven and the first earth are passed away; and the sea\n is no more.... And he that sitteth on the throne said, Behold, I\n make all things new._\u201d\n\n The smooth face of death with the lost youth restored, and the\n pure white glow of the marble statue with all passion gone and the\n lofty and heroic only visible, are indications of what is to be.\n Art, in its representations alike of the human form, and of an\n ideal earth and society in landscape and poem, is prophetic of the\n future,\u2014it suggests the glorious possibilities of the\n resurrection\u2010morning. Nicoll, Life of Christ: \u201cThe river runs\n through the lake and pursues its way beyond. So the life of faith\n passes through death and is only purified thereby. As to the body,\n all that is worth saving will be saved. Other resurrections [such\n as that of Lazarus] were resurrections to the old conditions of\n earthly life; the resurrection of Christ was the revelation of new\n life.\u201d\n\n Stevens, Pauline Theology, 357 note\u2014\u201cIf we could assume with\n confidence that the report of Paul\u2019s speech before Felix\n accurately reproduced his language in detail, the apostle\u2019s belief\n in a \u2018_resurrection both of the just and of the unjust_\u2019 (_Acts\n 24:15_) would be securely established: but, in view of the silence\n of his epistles, this assumption becomes a precarious one. Paul\n speaks afterwards of \u2018_attaining to the resurrection from the\n dead_\u2019 (_Phil. 3:11_), as if this did not belong to all.\u201d The\n scepticism of Prof. Stevens seems to us entirely needless and\n unjustified. It is the blessed resurrection to which Paul would\n \u201cattain,\u201d and which he has in mind in Philippians, as in _1 Cor.\n 15_\u2014a fact perfectly consistent with a resurrection of the wicked\n to \u201c_shame and everlasting contempt_\u201d (_Daniel 12:2; John 5:29_).\n\n A. J. Gordon, Ministry of the Spirit, 205, 206\u2014\u201cThe rapture of the\n saints (_1 Thess. 4:17_) is the earthly Christ rising to meet the\n heavenly Christ; the elect church, gathered in the Spirit and\n named \u1f41 \u03a7\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03cc\u03c2 (_1 Cor. 12:12_), taken up to be united in glory\n with Christ the head of the church, \u2018_himself the Savior of the\n body_\u2019 (_Eph. 5:23_). It is not by acting upon the body of Christ\n from without, but by energizing it from within, that the Holy\n Ghost will effect its glorification. In a word, the Comforter, who\n on the day of Pentecost came down to form a body out of flesh,\n will at the Parousia return to heaven in that body, having\n fashioned it like unto the body of Christ (_Phil. 3:31_).... Here\n then is where the lines of Christ\u2019s ministry terminate,\u2014in\n sanctification, the perfection of the spirit\u2019s holiness; and in\n resurrection, the perfection of the body\u2019s health.\u201d\n\n E. G. Robinson: \u201cPersonality is the indestructible principle\u2014not\n intelligence, else deny that infants have souls. Personality takes\n to itself a material organization. It is a divinely empowered\n second cause. This refutes materialism and annihilationism. No one\n pretends that the individual elements of the body will be raised.\n The individuality only, the personal identity, will be preserved.\n The soul is the organific power. Medical practice teaches that\n merely animal life is a mechanical process, but this is used by a\n personal power. Materialism, on the contrary, would make the soul\n the product of the body. Every man, in becoming a Christian,\n begins the process of resurrection. We do not know _but_\n resurrection begins at the moment of dissolution, yet we do not\n know _that_ it does. But if Christ arose with identically the same\n body unchanged, how can his resurrection be a type of ours?\n Answer: The nature of Christ\u2019s resurrection body is an open\n question.\u201d\n\n\nUpon the subject of the resurrection, our positive information is derived\nwholly from the word of God. Further discussion of it may be most\nnaturally arranged in a series of answers to objections. The objections\ncommonly urged against the doctrine, as above propounded, may be reduced\nto two:\n\n\n\n1. The exegetical objection.\n\n\n_The exegetical objection_,\u2014that it rests upon a literalizing of\nmetaphorical language, and has no sufficient support in Scripture. To this\nwe answer:\n\n(_a_) That, though the phrase \u201cresurrection of the body\u201d does not occur in\nthe New Testament, the passages which describe the event indicate a\nphysical, as distinguished from a spiritual, change (John 5:28, 29; Phil.\n3:21; 1 Thess. 4:13\u201017). The phrase \u201cspiritual body\u201d (1 Cor. 15:44) is a\ncontradiction in terms, if it be understood as signifying \u201ca body which is\nsimple spirit.\u201d It can only be interpreted as meaning a material organism,\nperfectly adapted to be the outward expression and vehicle of the purified\nsoul. The purely spiritual interpretation is, moreover, expressly excluded\nby the apostolic denial that \u201cthe resurrection is past already\u201d (2 Tim.\n2:18), and by the fact that there is a resurrection of the unjust, as well\nas of the just (Acts 24:15).\n\n\n _John 5:28, 29_\u2014\u201c_all that are in the tombs shall hear his voice,\n and shall come forth_\u201d; _Phil. 3:21_\u2014\u201c_who shall fashion anew the\n body of our humiliation_\u201d; _1 Thess. 4:16, 17_\u2014\u201c_For the Lord\n himself shall descend from heaven, with a shout, with the voice of\n the archangel, and with the trump of God; and the dead in Christ\n shall rise first_\u201d; _1 Cor. 15:44_\u2014\u201c_it is sown a natural_ [marg.:\n \u2018_psychical_\u2019] _body; it is raised a spiritual body_\u201d; _2 Tim.\n 2:17, 18_\u2014\u201c_Hymen\u00e6us and Philetus; men who concerning the truth\n have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already, and\n overthrow the faith of some_\u201d; _Acts 24:15_\u2014\u201c_Having hope toward\n God ... that there shall be a resurrection both of the just and\n the unjust._\u201d\n\n In _1 Cor. 15:44_, the word \u03c8\u03c5\u03c7\u03b9\u03ba\u03cc\u03bd, translated \u201c_natural_\u201d or\n \u201c_psychical_,\u201d is derived from the Greek word \u03c8\u03c5\u03c7\u03ae, soul, just as\n the word \u03c0\u03bd\u03b5\u03c5\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03cc\u03bd, translated \u201c_spiritual_,\u201d is derived from\n the Greek word \u03c0\u03bd\u03b5\u1fe6\u03bc\u03b1, spirit. And as Paul could not mean to say\n that this earthly body is composed of soul, neither does he say\n that the resurrection body is composed of _spirit_. In other\n words, these adjectives \u201c_psychical_\u201d and \u201c_spiritual_\u201d do not\n define the _material_ of the respective bodies, but describe those\n bodies in their relations and adaptations, in their powers and\n uses. The present body is adapted and designed for the use of the\n soul; the resurrection body will be adapted and designed for the\n use of the spirit.\n\n _2 Tim. 2:18_\u2014\u201c_saying that the resurrection is past already_\u201d =\n undue contempt for the body came to regard the resurrection as a\n purely spiritual thing (Ellicott). Dr. A. J. Gordon said that the\n \u201c_spiritual body_\u201d means \u201cthe body spiritualized.\u201d E. H. Johnson:\n \u201cThe phrase \u2018_spiritual body_\u2019 describes not so much the nature of\n the body itself, as its relations to the spirit.\u201d Savage, Life\n after Death, 80\u2014\u201cResurrection does not mean the raising up of the\n body, and it does not mean the mere rising of the soul in the\n moment of death, but a rising again from the prison house of the\n dead, after going down at the moment of death.\u201d D. R. Goodwin,\n Journ. Soc. Bib. Exegesis, 1881:84\u2014\u201cThe spiritual body is _body_,\n and not _spirit_, and therefore must come under the definition of\n _body_. If it were to be mere spirit, then every man in the future\n state would have two spirits\u2014the spirit that he has here and\n another spirit received at the resurrection.\u201d\n\n\n(_b_) That the redemption of Christ is declared to include the body as\nwell as the soul (Rom. 8:23; 1 Cor. 6:13\u201020). The indwelling of the Holy\nSpirit has put such honor upon the frail mortal tenement which he has made\nhis temple, that God would not permit even this wholly to perish (Rom.\n8:11\u2014\u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f78 \u1f10\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c0\u03bd\u03b5\u1fe6\u03bc\u03b1 \u1f10\u03bd \u1f51\u03bc\u1fd6\u03bd, _i. e._, because of his\nindwelling Spirit, God will raise up the mortal body). It is this belief\nwhich forms the basis of Christian care for the dead (Phil. 3:21; _cf._\nMat. 22:32).\n\n\n _Rom. 8:23_\u2014\u201c_waiting for our adoption, to wit, the redemption of\n our body_\u201d; _1 Cor. 6:13\u201020_\u2014\u201c_Meats for the belly and the belly\n for meats: but God shall bring to nought both it and them. But the\n body is not for fornication, but for the Lord; and the Lord for\n the body: and God both raised the Lord, and will raise up us\n through his power.... But he that is joined unto the Lord is one\n spirit.... Or know ye not that your body is a temple of the Holy\n Spirit which is in you, which ye have from God?... glorify God\n therefore in your body_\u201d; _Rom. 8:11_\u2014\u201c_But if the Spirit of him\n that raised up Jesus from the dead dwelleth in you, he that raised\n up Christ Jesus from the dead shall give life also to your mortal\n bodies through his Spirit that dwelleth in you_\u201d\u2014here the Revised\n Version follows Tisch., 8th ed., and Westcott and Hort\u2019s reading\n of \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f10\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c0\u03bd\u03b5\u03cd\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2. Tregelles, Tisch., 7th\n ed., and Meyer, have \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f78 \u1f10\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c0\u03bd\u03b5\u1fe6\u03bc\u03b1, and this\n reading we regard as, on the whole, the best supported. _Phil.\n 3:21_\u2014\u201c_shall fashion anew the body of our humiliation._\u201d\n\n Dr. R. D. Hitchcock, in South Church Lectures, 338, says that\n \u201cthere is no Scripture declaration of the resurrection of the\n flesh, nor even of the resurrection of the body.\u201d While this is\n literally true, it conveys a false idea. The passages just cited\n foretell a quickening of our mortal bodies, a raising of them up,\n a changing of them into the likeness of Christ\u2019s body. Dorner,\n Eschatology: \u201cThe New Testament is not contented with a bodiless\n immortality. It is opposed to a naked spiritualism, and accords\n completely with a deeper philosophy which discerns in the body,\n not merely the sheath or garment of the soul, but a side of the\n person belonging to his full idea, his mirror and organ, of the\n greatest importance for his activity and history.\u201d\n\n Christ\u2019s proof of the resurrection in _Mat. 22:32_\u2014\u201c_God is not\n the God of the dead, but of the living_\u201d\u2014has for its basis this\n very assumption that soul and body belong normally together, and\n that, since they are temporally separated in the case of the\n saints who live with God, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob shall rise\n again. The idealistic philosophy of thirty years ago led to a\n contempt of the body; the recent materialism has done at least\n this service, that it has reasserted the claims of the body to be\n a proper part of man.\n\n\n(_c_) That the nature of Christ\u2019s resurrection, as literal and physical,\ndetermines the nature of the resurrection in the case of believers (Luke\n24:36; John 20:27). As, in the case of Christ, the same body that was laid\nin the tomb was raised again, although possessed of new and surprising\npowers, so the Scriptures intimate, not simply that the saints shall have\nbodies, but that these bodies shall be in some proper sense an outgrowth\nor transformation of the very bodies that slept in the dust (Dan. 12:2; 1\nCor. 15:53, 54). The denial of the resurrection of the body, in the case\nof believers, leads naturally to a denial of the reality of Christ\u2019s\nresurrection (1 Cor. 15:13).\n\n\n _Luke 24:39_\u2014\u201c_See my hands and my feet, that it is I myself:\n handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye\n behold me having_\u201d; _John 20:27_\u2014\u201c_Then saith he to Thomas, Reach\n hither thy finger, and see my hands; and reach hither thy hand,\n and put it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing_\u201d;\n _Dan. 12:2_\u2014\u201c_And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth\n shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and\n everlasting contempt_\u201d; _1 Cor. 15:53, 54_\u2014\u201c_For this corruptible\n must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.\n But when this corruption shall have put on incorruption, and this\n mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall come to pass the\n saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory_\u201d;\n _13_\u2014\u201c_But if there is no resurrection of the dead, neither hath\n Christ been raised._\u201d\n\n Sadducean materialism and Gnostic dualism, which last held matter\n to be evil, both denied the resurrection. Paul shows that to deny\n it is to deny that Christ rose; since, if it were impossible in\n the case of his followers, it must have been impossible in his own\n case. As believers, we are vitally connected with him; and his\n resurrection could not have taken place without drawing in its\n train the resurrection of all of us. Having denied that Christ\n rose, where is the proof that he is not still under the bond and\n curse of death? Surely then our preaching is vain. Paul\u2019s epistle\n to the Corinthians was written before the Gospels; and is\n therefore, as Hanna says, the earliest written account of the\n resurrection. Christ\u2019s transfiguration was a prophecy of his\n resurrection.\n\n S. S. Times, March 22, 1902:161\u2014\u201cThe resurrection of Jesus was not\n a mere rising again, like that of Lazarus and the son of the widow\n of Nain. He came forth from the tomb so changed that he was not at\n once or easily recognized, and was possessed of such new and\n surprising powers that he seemed to be pure spirit, no longer\n subject to the conditions of his natural body. So he was the\n \u2018_first\u2010fruits_\u2019 of the resurrection\u2010harvest (_1 Cor. 15:20_). Our\n resurrection, in like manner, is to involve a change from a\n corruptible body to an incorruptible, from a psychical to a\n spiritual.\u201d\n\n\n(_d_) That the accompanying events, as the second coming and the judgment,\nsince they are themselves literal, imply that the resurrection is also\nliteral.\n\n\n _Rom. 8:19\u201023_\u2014\u201c_For the earnest expectation of the creation\n waiteth for the revealing of the sons of God ... the whole\n creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now ...\n even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for our\n adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body_\u201d\u2014here man\u2019s body is\n regarded as a part of nature, or the \u201c_creation_,\u201d and as\n partaking in Christ of its deliverance from the curse; _Rev. 21:4,\n 5_\u2014\u201c_he shall wipe away every tear from their eyes; and death\n shall be no more.... And he that sitteth on the throne said,\n Behold, I make all things new_\u201d\u2014a declaration applicable to the\n body, the seat of pain and the avenue of temptation, as well as to\n outward nature. See Hanna, The Resurrection, 28; Fuller, Works,\n 3:291; Boston, Fourfold State, in Works, 8:271\u2010289. On Olshausen\u2019s\n view of immortality as inseparable from body, see Aids to the\n Study of German Theology, 63. On resurrection of the flesh, see\n Jahrbuch f. d. Theol., 1:289\u2010317.\n\n\n\n2. The scientific object.\n\n\nThis is threefold:\n\n(_a_) That a resurrection of the particles which compose the body at death\nis impossible, since they enter into new combinations, and not\nunfrequently become parts of other bodies which the doctrine holds to be\nraised at the same time.\n\nWe reply that the Scripture not only does not compel us to hold, but it\ndistinctly denies, that all the particles which exist in the body at death\nare present in the resurrection\u2010body (1 Cor. 15:37\u2014\u03bf\u1f50 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c3\u1ff6\u03bc\u03b1 \u03c4\u1f78\n\u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03b7\u03c3\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd; 50). The Scripture seems only to indicate a certain physical\nconnection between the new and the old, although the nature of this\nconnection is not revealed. So long as the physical connection is\nmaintained, it is not necessary to suppose that even a germ or particle\nthat belonged to the old body exists in the new.\n\n\n _1 Cor. 15:37, 38_\u2014\u201c_that which thou sowest, thou sowest not the\n body that shall be, but a bare grain, it may chance of wheat, or\n of some other kind; but God giveth it a body even as it pleased\n him, and to each seed a body of its own._\u201d Jerome tells us that\n the risen saints \u201chabent dentes, ventrem, genitalia, et tamen nec\n cibis nec uxoribus indigent.\u201d This view of the resurrection is\n exposed to the objection mentioned above. Pollok\u2019s Course of Time\n represented the day of resurrection as a day on which the limbs\n that had been torn asunder on earth hurtled through the air to\n join one another once more. The amputated arm that has been buried\n in China must traverse thousands of miles to meet the body of its\n former owner, as it rose from the place of its burial in England.\n\n There are serious difficulties attending this view. The bodies of\n the dead fertilized the field of Waterloo. The wheat grown there\n has been ground and made into bread, and eaten by thousands of\n living men. Particles of one human body have become incorporated\n with the bodies of many others. \u201cThe Avon to the Severn runs, The\n Severn to the sea, And Wycliffe\u2019s dust shall spread abroad, Wide\n as the waters be.\u201d Through the clouds and the rain, particles of\n Wycliffe\u2019s body may have entered into the water which other men\n have drunk from their wells and fountains. There is a propagation\n of disease by contagion, or the transmission of infinitesimal\n germs from one body to another, sometimes by infection of the\n living from contact with the body of a friend just dead. In these\n various ways, the same particle might, in the course of history,\n enter into the constitution of a hundred living men. How can this\n one particle, at the resurrection, be in a hundred places at the\n same time? \u201cLike the woman who had seven husbands, the same matter\n may belong in succession to many bodies, for \u2018they all had it\u2019 \u201d\n (Smyth). The cannibal and his victim cannot both possess the same\n body at the resurrection. The Providence Journal had an article\n entitled: \u201cWho ate Roger Williams?\u201d When his remains were exhumed,\n it was found that one large root of an apple tree followed the\n spine, divided at the thighs, and turned up at the toes of Roger\n Williams. More than one person had eaten its apples. This root may\n be seen to\u2010day in the cabinet of Brown University.\n\n These considerations have led some, like Origen, to call the\n doctrine of a literal resurrection of the flesh \u201cthe foolishness\n of beggarly minds,\u201d and to say that resurrection may be only \u201cthe\n gathering round the spirit of new materials, and the vitalizing\n them into a new body by the spirit\u2019s God\u2010given power\u201d; see Newman\n Smyth, Old Faiths in a New Light, 349\u2010391; Porter, Human\n Intellect, 39. But this view seems as great an extreme as that\n from which it was a reaction. It gives up all idea of unity\n between the new and the old. If my body were this instant\n annihilated, and if then, an hour hence, God should create a\n second body, precisely like the present, I could not call it the\n same with the present body, even though it were animated by the\n same informing soul, and that soul had maintained an uninterrupted\n existence between the time of the annihilation of the first body\n and the creation of the second. So, if the body laid in the tomb\n were wholly dissipated among the elements, and God created at the\n end of the world a wholly new body, it would be impossible for\n Paul to say: \u201c_this corruptible must put on incorruption_\u201d (_1\n Cor. 15:53_), or: \u201c_it is sown in dishonor; it it raised in\n glory_\u201d (_verse 43_). In short, there is a physical connection\n between the old and the new, which is intimated by Scripture, but\n which this theory denies.\n\n Paul himself gives us an illustration which shows that his view\n was midway between the two extremes: \u201c_that which thou sowest,\n thou sowest not the body that shall be_\u201d (_1 Cor. 15:37_). On the\n one hand, the wheat that springs up does not contain the precise\n particles, perhaps does not contain any particles, that were in\n the seed. On the other hand, there has been a continuous physical\n connection between the seed sown and the ripened grain at the\n harvest. If the seed had been annihilated, and then ripe grain\n created, we could not speak of identity between the one and the\n other. But, because there has been a constant flux, the old\n particles pressed out by new, and these new in their turn\n succeeded by others that take their places, we can say: \u201cthe wheat\n has come up.\u201d We bury grain in order to increase it. The\n resurrection\u2010body will be the same with the body laid away in the\n earth, in the same sense as the living stalk of grain is identical\n with the seed from which it germinated. \u201c_This mortal must put on\n immortality_\u201d\u2014not the immortal spirit put on an immortal body, but\n the mortal body put on immortality, the corruptible body put on\n incorruption (_1 Cor. 15:53_). \u201c_Ye know not the Scriptures, nor\n the power of God_\u201d (_Mark 12:24_), says our Lord; and Paul asks:\n \u201c_Why is it judged incredible with you, if God doth raise the\n dead?_\u201d (_Acts 26:8_).\n\n Or, to use another illustration nearer to the thing we desire to\n illustrate: My body is the same that it was ten years ago,\n although physiologists declare that every particle of the body is\n changed, not simply once in seven years, but once in a single\n year. Life is preserved only by the constant throwing off of dead\n matter and the introduction of new. There is indeed a unity of\n consciousness and personality, without which I should not be able\n to say at intervals of years: \u201cthis body is the same; this body is\n mine.\u201d But a physical connection between the old and the new is\n necessary in addition.\n\n The nails of the hands are renewed in less than four months, or\n about twenty\u2010one times in seven years. They grow to full length,\n an average of seven twelfths of an inch, in from 121 to 138 days.\n Young people grow them more rapidly, old people more slowly. In a\n man of 21, it took 126 days; in a man of 67, it took 244; but the\n average was a third of a year. A Baptist pastor attempted to prove\n that he was a native of South Carolina though born in another\n state, upon the ground that the body he brought with him from\n Tennessee had exchanged its physical particles for matter taken\n from South Carolina. Two dentists, however, maintained that he\n still had the same teeth which he owned in Tennessee seven years\n before, there being no circulation in the enamel. Should we then\n say: Every particle of the body has changed, except the enamel of\n the teeth?\n\n Pope\u2019s Martinus Scriblerus: \u201cSir John Cutler had a pair of black\n worsted stockings which his maid darned so often with silk that\n they became at last a pair of silk stockings.\u201d Adeney, in\n Christianity and Evolution, 122, 123\u2014\u201cHerod\u2019s temple was treated\n as identical with the temple that Haggai knew, because the\n rebuilding was gradual, and was carried on side by side with the\n demolition of the several parts of the old structure.\u201d The ocean\n wave travels around the world and is the same wave; but it is\n never in two consecutive seconds composed of the same particles of\n water.\n\n The North River is the same to\u2010day that it was when Hendrick\n Hudson first discovered it; yet not a particle of its current, nor\n the surface of the banks which that current touches now, is the\n same that it was then. Two things make the present river identical\n with the river of the past. The first is, that the same formative\n principle is at work,\u2014the trend of the banks is the same, and\n there is the same general effect in the flow and direction of the\n waters drained from a large area of country. The second is, the\n fact that, ever since Hendrick Hudson\u2019s time, there has been a\n physical connection, old particles in continuous succession having\n been replaced by new.\n\n So there are two things requisite to make our future bodies one\n with the bodies we now inhabit: first, that the same formative\n principle be at work in them; and secondly, that there be some\n sort of physical connection between the body that now is and the\n body that shall be. What that physical connection is, it is vain\n to speculate. We only teach that, though there may not be a single\n material particle in the new that was present in the old, there\n yet will be such a physical connection that it can be said: \u201cthe\n new has grown out of the old\u201d; \u201cthat which was in the grave has\n come forth\u201d; \u201cthis mortal has put on immortality.\u201d\n\n\n(_b_) That a resurrection\u2010body, having such a remote physical connection\nwith the present body, cannot be recognized by the inhabiting soul or by\nother witnessing spirits as the same with that which was laid in the\ngrave.\n\nTo this we reply that bodily identity does not consist in absolute\nsameness of particles during the whole history of the body, but in the\norganizing force, which, even in the flux and displacement of physical\nparticles, makes the old the basis of the new, and binds both together in\nthe unity of a single consciousness. In our recognition of friends,\nmoreover, we are not wholly dependent, even in this world, upon our\nperception of bodily form; and we have reason to believe that in the\nfuture state there may be methods of communication far more direct and\nintuitive than those with which we are familiar here.\n\n\n _Cf._ _Mat. 17:3, 4_\u2014\u201c_And behold, there appeared unto them Moses\n and Elijah talking with him. And Peter answered, and said unto\n Jesus, Lord, it is good for us to be here: if thou wilt, I will\n make here three tabernacles; one for thee, and one for Moses, and\n one for Elijah_\u201d\u2014here there is no mention of information given to\n Peter as to the names of the celestial visitants; it would seem\n that, in his state of exalted sensibility, he at once knew them.\n The recent proceedings of the English Society for Psychical\n Research seem to indicate the possibility of communication between\n two minds without physical intermediaries. Hudson, Scientific\n Demonstration of a Future Life, 294, 295, holds that telepathy is\n the means of communication in the future state.\n\n G. S. Fullerton, Sameness and Identity, 6, 32, 67\u2014\u201cHeracleitus of\n Ephesus declared it impossible to enter the same river twice.\n Cratylus replied that the same river could not be entered once....\n The kinds of sameness are: 1. Thing same _with itself_ at any one\n instant; 2. Same pain to\u2010day I felt yesterday = a _like_ pain; 3.\n I See the same tree at different times = two or more percepts\n represent the same object; 4. Two plants belonging to the same\n _class_ are called the same; 5. Memory gives us the same object\n that we formerly perceived; but the object is not the past, it is\n the _memory\u2010image_ which represents it; 6. Two men perceive the\n same object = they have like percepts, while both percepts are\n only representative of the same object; 7. External thing same\n with its representative in consciousness, or with the substance or\n noumenon supposed to underlie it.\u201d\n\n Ladd, Philosophy of Mind, 153, 255\u2014\u201cWhat is called \u2018remaining the\n same,\u2019 in the case of all organic beings is just this,\u2014remaining\n faithful to some immanent idea, while undergoing a great variety\n of changes in the pursuit, as it were, of the idea.... Self\u2010\n consciousness and memory are themselves processes of becoming. The\n mind that does not change, in the way of growth, has no claim to\n be called mind. One cannot be conscious of changes without also\n being conscious of being the very being that is changed. When he\n loses this consciousness, we say that \u2018he has lost his mind.\u2019 Amid\n changes of its ideas the ego remains permanent because it is held\n within limits by the power of some immanent idea.... Our bodies as\n such have only a formal existence. They are a stream in constant\n flow and are ever changing. My body is only a temporary loan from\n Nature, to be repaid at death.\u201d\n\n With regard to the meaning of the term \u201cidentity,\u201d as applied to\n material things, see Porter, Human Intellect, 631\u2014\u201cHere the\n substance is called the same, by a loose analogy taken from living\n agents and their gradual accretion and growth.\u201d The Euphrates is\n the same stream that flowed, \u201cWhen high in Paradise By the four\n rivers the first roses blew,\u201d even though after that time the\n flood, or deluge, stopped its flow and obliterated all the natural\n features of the landscape. So this flowing organism which we call\n the body may be the same, after the deluge of death has passed\n away.\n\n A different and less satisfactory view is presented in Dorner\u2019s\n Eschatology: \u201cIdentity involves: 1. Plastic form, which for the\n earthly body had its moulding principle in the soul. That\n principle could effect nothing permanent in the intermediate\n state; but with the spiritual consummation of the soul, it attains\n the full power which can appropriate to itself the heavenly body,\n accompanied by a cosmical process, made like Christ. 2.\n Appropriation, from the world of elements, of what it needs. The\n elements into which everything bodily of earth is dissolved, are\n an essentially uniform mass, like an ocean; and it is indifferent\n what parts of this are assigned to each individual man. The whole\n world of substance, which makes the constant change of substance\n possible, is made over to humanity as a common possession (_Acts\n 4:32_\u2014\u2018_not one of them said that aught of the things which he\n possessed was his own; but they had all things common_\u2019).\u201d\n\n\n(_c_) That a material organism can only be regarded as a hindrance to the\nfree activity of the spirit, and that the assumption of such an organism\nby the soul, which, during the intermediate state, had been separated from\nthe body, would indicate a decline in dignity and power rather than a\nprogress.\n\nWe reply that we cannot estimate the powers and capacities of matter, when\nbrought by God into complete subjection to the spirit. The bodies of the\nsaints may be more ethereal than the air, and capable of swifter motion\nthan the light, and yet be material in their substance. That the soul,\nclothed with its spiritual body, will have more exalted powers and enjoy a\nmore complete felicity than would be possible while it maintained a purely\nspiritual existence, is evident from the fact that Paul represents the\nculmination of the soul\u2019s blessedness as occurring, not at death, but at\nthe resurrection of the body.\n\n\n _Rom. 8:23_\u2014\u201c_waiting for our adoption, to wit, the redemption of\n our body_\u201d; _2 Cor. 5:4_\u2014\u201c_not for that we would be unclothed; but\n that we would be clothed upon, that what is mortal may be\n swallowed up of life_\u201d; _Phil. 3:11_\u2014\u201c_if by any means I may\n attain unto the resurrection from the dead._\u201d Even _Ps.\n 86:11_\u2014\u201c_Unite my heart to fear thy name_\u201d\u2014may mean the collecting\n of all the powers of the body as well as soul. In this respect for\n the body, as a normal part of man\u2019s being, Scripture is based upon\n the truest philosophy. Plotinus gave thanks that he was not tied\n to an immortal body, and refused to have his portrait taken,\n because the body was too contemptible a thing to have its image\n perpetuated. But this is not natural, nor is it probably anything\n more than a whim or affectation. _Eph. 5:29_\u2014\u201c_no man ever hated\n his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it._\u201d What we desire\n is not the annihilation of the body, but its perfection.\n\n Renouf, Hibbert Lectures, 188\u2014\u201cIn the Egyptian Book of the Dead,\n the soul reunites itself to the body, with the assurance that they\n shall never again be separated.\u201d McCosh, Intuitions, 213\u2014\u201cThe\n essential thing about the resurrection is the development, out of\n the dead body, of an organ for the communion and activity of the\n spiritual life.\u201d Ebrard, Dogmatik, 2:226\u2010234, has interesting\n remarks upon the relation of the resurrection\u2010body to the present\n body. The essential difference he considers to be this, that\n whereas, in the present body, matter is master of the spirit, in\n the resurrection\u2010body spirit will be the master of matter, needing\n no reparation by food, and having control of material laws. Ebrard\n adds striking speculations with regard to the glorified body of\n Christ.\n\n A. J. Gordon, Ministry of the Spirit, 126\u2014\u201c_Now_ the body bears\n the spirit, a slow chariot whose wheels are often disabled, and\n whose swiftest motion is but labored and tardy. _Then_ the spirit\n will bear the body, carrying it as on wings of thought\n whithersoever it will. The Holy Ghost, by his divine inworking\n will, has completed in us the divine likeness, and perfected over\n us the divine dominion. The human body will now be in sovereign\n subjection to the human spirit, and the human spirit to the divine\n Spirit, and God will be all in all.\u201d Newman Smyth, Place of Death\n in Evolution, 112\u2014\u201cWeismann maintains that the living germ not\n only persists and is potentially immortal, but also that under\n favorable conditions it seems capable of surrounding itself with a\n new body. If a vital germ can do this, why not a spiritual germ?\u201d\n Two martyrs were led to the stake. One was blind, the other lame.\n As the fires kindled, the latter exclaimed: \u201cCourage, brother!\n this fire will cure us both!\u201d\n\n\nWe may sum up our answers to objections, and may at the same time throw\nlight upon the doctrine of the resurrection, by suggesting four principles\nwhich should govern our thinking with regard to the subject,\u2014these namely:\n1. Body is in continual flux; 2. Since matter is but the manifestation of\nGod\u2019s mind and will, body is plastic in God\u2019s hands; 3. The soul in\ncomplete union with God may be endowed with the power of God; 4. Soul\ndetermines body, and not body soul, as the materialist imagines.\n\n\n Ice, the flowing stream, the waterfall with the rainbow upon it,\n steam with its power to draw the railway train or to burst the\n boiler of the locomotive, are all the same element in varied\n forms, and they are all _material_. Wundt regards physical\n development, not as the cause, but as the effect, of psychical\n development. Aristotle defines the soul as \u201cthe prime entelechy of\n the living body.\u201d Swedenborg regarded each soul here as fashioning\n its own spiritual body, either hideous or lovely. Spenser, A Hymne\n to Beautie: \u201cFor of the soul the body form doth take, For soul is\n form, and doth the body make.\u201d Wordsworth, Sonnet 36,\n Afterthought: \u201cFar backward, Duddon, as I cast my eyes, I see what\n was, and is, and will abide; Still glides the stream, and shall\n not cease to glide; The Form remains, the Function never dies\u201d;\n The Primrose of the Rock: \u201cSin\u2010blighted as we are, we too, The\n reasoning sons of men, From one oblivious winter called, Shall\n rise and breathe again, And in eternal summer lose Our three\u2010score\n years and ten. To humbleness of heart descends This prescience\n from on high. The faith that elevates the just Before and when\n they die, And makes each soul a separate heaven, A court for\n Deity.\u201d Robert Browning, Asolando: \u201cOne who never turned his back,\n but marched breastforward; Never doubted clouds would break; Never\n dreamed, though right were worsted, Wrong would triumph; Held we\n fall to rise, are baffled to fight better, Sleep to wake.\u201d Mrs.\n Browning: \u201cGod keeps a niche In heaven to hold our idols, and\n albeit He broke them to our faces and denied That our close kisses\n should impair their white, I know we shall behold them raised,\n complete, The dust shook off, their beauty glorified.\u201d\n\n On the spiritual body as possibly evolved by will, see Harris,\n Philos. Basis of Theism, 386. On the nature of the resurrection\u2010\n body, see Burnet, State of the Departed, chaps. 3 and 8; Cudworth,\n Intell. System, 3:310 _sq._; Splittgerber, Tod, Fortleben and\n Auferstehung. On the doctrine of the Resurrection among the\n Egyptians, see Dr. Howard Osgood, in Hebrew Student, Feb. 1885;\n among the Jews, see Gr\u00f6bler, in Studien und Kritiken, 1879: Heft\n 4; DeW\u00fcnsche, in Jahrbuch f. prot. Theol., 1880: Heft 2 and 4;\n Revue Th\u00e9ologique, 1881:1\u201017. For the view that the resurrection\n is wholly spiritual and takes place at death, see Willmarth, in\n Bap. Quar., October, 1868, and April, 1870; Ladd, in New\n Englander, April, 1874; Crosby, Second Advent.\n\n On the whole subject, see Hase, Hutterus Redivivus, 280; Herzog,\n Encyclop., art.; Auferstehung; Goulburn, Bampton Lectures for\n 1850, on the Resurrection; Cox, The Resurrection; Neander,\n Planting and Training, 479\u2010487, 524\u2010526; Naville, La Vie\n \u00c9ternelle, 253, 254; Delitzsch, Bib. Psychologie, 453\u2010463;\n Moorhouse, Nature and Revelation, 87\u2010112; Unseen Universe, 33;\n Hovey, in Baptist Quarterly, Oct. 1867; Westcott, Revelation of\n the Risen Lord, and in Contemporary Review, vol. 30; R. W. Macan,\n Resurrection of Christ; Cremer, Beyond the Grave.\n\n\n\n\nV. The Last Judgment.\n\n\nWhile the Scriptures represent all punishment of individual transgressors\nand all manifestations of God\u2019s vindicatory justice in the history of\nnations as acts or processes of judgment, they also intimate that these\ntemporal judgments are only partial and imperfect, and that they are\ntherefore to be concluded with a final and complete vindication of God\u2019s\nrighteousness. This will be accomplished by making known to the universe\nthe characters of all men, and by awarding to them corresponding\ndestinies.\n\n\n Passages describing temporal or spiritual judgment are: _Ps.\n 9:7_\u2014\u201c_He hath prepared his throne for judgment_\u201d; _Is.\n 26:9_\u2014\u201c_when thy judgments are in the earth, the inhabitants of\n the world learn righteousness_\u201d; _Mat. 16:27, 28_\u2014\u201c_For the Son of\n man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and\n then shall he render unto every man according to his deeds. Verily\n I say unto you, There be some of them that stand here, who shall\n in no wise taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in\n his kingdom_\u201d; _John 3:18, 19_\u2014\u201c_he that believeth not hath been\n judged already, because he hath not believed on the name of the\n only begotten Son of God. And this is the judgment, that the light\n is come into the world, and men loved the darkness rather than the\n light; for their works were evil_\u201d; _9:39_\u2014\u201c_For judgment came I\n into this world, that they that see not may see; and that they\n that see may become blind_\u201d; _12:31_\u2014\u201c_Now is the judgment of this\n world: now shall the prince of this world be cast out._\u201d\n\n Passages describing the final judgment are: _Mat. 25:31\u201046_\u2014\u201c_But\n when the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the angels\n with him, then shall he sit on the throne of his glory: and before\n him shall be gathered all the nations: and he shall separate them\n one from another, as the shepherd separateth the sheep from the\n goats...._\u201d _Acts 17:31_\u2014\u201c_he hath appointed a day, in which he\n will judge the world in righteousness by the man whom he hath\n ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he\n hath raised him from the dead_\u201d; _Rom. 2:16_\u2014\u201c_in the day when God\n shall judge the secrets of men, according to my gospel, by Jesus\n Christ_\u201d; _2 Cor. 5:10_\u2014\u201c_For we must all be made manifest before\n the judgment\u2010seat of Christ; that each one may receive the things\n done in the body, according to what he hath done, whether it be\n good or bad_\u201d; _Heb. 9:27, 28_\u2014\u201c_And inasmuch as it is appointed\n unto men once to die, and after this cometh judgment; so Christ\n also, having been once offered to bear the sins of many, shall\n appear a second time, apart from sin, to them that wait for him,\n unto salvation_\u201d; _Rev. 20:12_\u2014\u201c_And I saw the dead, the great and\n the small, standing before the throne; and books were opened: and\n another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead\n were judged out of the things which were written in the books,\n according to their works._\u201d\n\n Delitzsch: \u201cThe fall of Jerusalem was the day of the Lord, the\n bloody and fiery dawn of the last great day\u2014the day of days, the\n ending\u2010day of all days, the settling day of all days, the day of\n the promotion of time into eternity, the day which for the church\n breaks through and breaks off the night of this present world.\u201d E.\n G. Robinson: \u201cJudgment begins here. The callousing of conscience\n in this life is a penal infliction. Punishment begins in this life\n and is carried on in the next. We have no right to assert that\n there are no positive inflictions, but, if there are none, still\n every word of Scripture threatening would stand. There is no _day_\n of judgment or of resurrection all at one time. Judgment is an\n eternal process. The angels in _2 Pet. 2:4_\u2014\u2018_cast ... down to\n hell_\u2019\u2014suffer the self\u2010perpetuating consequences of\n transgression..... Man is being judged every day. Every man honest\n with himself knows where he is going to. Those who are not honest\n with themselves are playing a trick, and, if they are not careful,\n they will get a trick played on them.\u201d\n\n\n\n1. The nature of the final judgment.\n\n\nThe final judgment is not a spiritual, invisible, endless process,\nidentical with God\u2019s providence in history, but is an outward and visible\nevent, occurring at a definite period in the future. This we argue from\nthe following considerations:\n\n(_a_) The judgment is something for which the evil are \u201creserved \u201d (2\nPeter 2:4, 9); something to be expected in the future (Acts 24:25; Heb.\n10:27); something after death (Heb. 9:27); something for which the\nresurrection is a preparation (John 5:29).\n\n\n _2 Pet. 2:4, 9_\u2014\u201c_God spared not angels when they sinned, but cast\n them down to hell ... reserved unto judgment ... the lord knoweth\n how ... to keep the unrighteous unto punishment unto the day of\n judgment_\u201d; _Acts 24:25_\u2014\u201c_as he reasoned of righteousness, and\n self\u2010control, and the judgment to come, Felix was terrified_\u201d;\n _Heb. 10:27_\u2014\u201c_a certain fearful expectation of judgment_\u201d;\n _9:27_\u2014\u201c_it is appointed unto men once to die, and after this\n cometh judgment_\u201d; _John 5:29_\u2014\u201c_the resurrection of judgment._\u201d\n\n\n(_b_) The accompaniments of the judgment, such as the second coming of\nChrist, the resurrection, and the outward changes of the earth, are events\nwhich have an outward and visible, as well as an inward and spiritual,\naspect. We are compelled to interpret the predictions of the last judgment\nupon the same principle.\n\n\n _John 5:28, 29_\u2014\u201c_Marvel not at this: for the hour cometh, in\n which all that are in the tombs shall hear his voice, and shall\n come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of\n life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of\n judgment_\u201d; _2 Pet. 3:7, 10_\u2014\u201c_the day of judgment ... the day of\n the Lord ... in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great\n noise, and the elements shall be dissolved with fervent heat_\u201d; _2\n Thess. 1:7, 8, 2:10_\u2014\u201c_the revelation of the Lord Jesus from\n heaven with the angels of his power in flaming fire, rendering\n vengeance to them that know not God ... when he shall come ... in\n that day._\u201d\n\n\n(_c_) God\u2019s justice, in the historical and imperfect work of judgment,\nneeds a final outward judgment as its vindication. \u201cA perfect justice must\njudge, not only moral units, but moral aggregates; not only the\nparticulars of life, but the life as a whole.\u201d The crime that is hidden\nand triumphant here, and the goodness that is here maligned and oppressed,\nmust be brought to light and fitly recompensed. \u201cOtherwise man is a\nTantalus\u2014longing but never satisfied\u201d; and God\u2019s justice, of which his\noutward administration is the expression, can only be regarded as\napproximate.\n\n\n Renouf, Hibbert Lectures, 194\u2014\u201cThe Egyptian Book of the Dead\n represents the deceased person as standing in the presence of the\n goddess Ma\u0101t , who is distinguished by the ostrich\u2010feather on her\n head; she holds the sceptre in one hand and the symbol of life in\n the other. The man\u2019s heart, which represents his entire moral\n nature, is being weighed in the balance in the presence of Osiris,\n seated upon his throne as judge of the dead.\u201d Rationalism believes\n in only present and temporal judgment; and this it regards as but\n the reaction of natural law: \u201cDie Weltgeschichte ist das\n Weltgericht,\u2014the world\u2019s history is the world\u2019s judgment\u201d\n (Schiller, Resignation). But there is an inner connection between\n present, temporal, spiritual judgments, and the final, outward,\n complete judgment of God. Nero\u2019s murder of his mother was not the\n only penalty of his murder of Germanicus.\n\n Dorner: \u201cWith Christ\u2019s appearance, faith sees that the beginning\n of the judgment and of the end has come. Christians are a\n prophetic race. Without judgment, Christianity would involve a\n sort of dualism: evil and good would be of equal might and worth.\n Christianity cannot always remain a historic principle _alongside_\n of the contrary principle of evil. It is the only reality.\u201d God\n will show or make known his righteousness with regard to: (1) the\n disparity of lots among men; (2) the prosperity of the wicked; (3)\n the permission of moral evil in general; (4) the consistency of\n atonement with justice. \u201cThe \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03c4\u03ad\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03b1\u1f30\u1ff6\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 (\u2018_end of the\n world_,\u2019 _Mat. 13:39_) = stripping hostile powers of their usurped\n might, revelation of their falsity and impotence, consigning them\n to the past. Evil shall be utterly cut off, given over to its own\n nothingness, or made a subordinate element.\u201d\n\n A great statesman said that what he dreaded for his country was\n not the day of judgment, but the day of no judgment. \u201cJove strikes\n the Titans down, Not when they first begin their mountain\u2010piling,\n But when another rock would crown their work.\u201d R. W. Emerson: \u201cGod\n said: I am tired of kings, I suffer them no more; Up to my ears\n the morning brings The outrage of the poor.\u201d Royce, The World and\n the Individual, 2:384 _sq._\u2014\u201cIf God\u2019s life is given to free\n individual souls, then God\u2019s life can be given also to free\n nations and to a free race of men. There may be an apostasy of a\n family, nation, race, and a judgment of each according to their\n deeds.\u201d\n\n The Expositor, March, 1898\u2014\u201cIt is claimed that we are being judged\n now, that laws execute themselves, that the system of the universe\n is automatic, that there is no need for future retribution. But\n all ages have agreed that there is not here and now any sufficient\n vindication of the principle of eternal justice. The mills of the\n gods grind slowly. Physical immorality is not proportionately\n punished. Deterioration is not an adequate penalty. Telling a\n second lie does not recompense the first. Punishment includes\n pain, and here is no pain. That there is not punishment here is\n due, not to law, but to grace.\u201d\n\n Denney, Studies in Theology, 240, 241\u2014\u201cThe dualistic conception of\n an endless suspense, in which good and evil permanently balance\n each other and contest with each other the right to inherit the\n earth, is virtually atheistic, and the whole Bible is a protest\n against it.... It is impossible to overestimate the power of the\n final judgment, as a motive, in the primitive church. On almost\n every page of St. Paul, for instance, we see that he lives in the\n presence of it; he lets the awe of it descend into his heart to\n keep his conscience quick.\u201d\n\n\n\n2. The object of the final judgment.\n\n\nThe object of the final judgment is not the ascertainment, but the\nmanifestation, of character, and the assignment of outward condition\ncorresponding to it.\n\n(_a_) To the omniscient Judge, the condition of all moral creatures is\nalready and fully known. The last day will be only \u201cthe _revelation_ of\nthe righteous judgment of God.\u201d\n\n\n They are inwardly judged when they die, and before they die; they\n are outwardly judged at the last day: _Rom. 2:5, 6_\u2014\u201c_treasurest\n up for thyself wrath in the day of wrath and revelation of the\n righteous judgment of God; who will render to every man according\n to his works_\u201d\u2014see Meyer on this passage; not \u201cagainst the day of\n wrath,\u201d but \u201c_in the day of wrath_\u201d\u2014wrath existing beforehand, but\n breaking out on that day. _1 Tim. 5:24, 25_\u2014\u201c_Some men\u2019s sins are\n evident, going before unto judgment; and some men also they follow\n after. In like manner also there are good works that are evident;\n and such as are otherwise cannot be hid_\u201d; _Rev. 14:13_\u2014\u201c_for\n their works follow with them_\u201d\u2014as close companions, into God\u2019s\n presence and judgment (Ann. Par. Bible).\n\n Epitaph: \u201cHic jacet in expectatione diei supremi.... Qualis erat,\n dies iste indicabit\u201d\u2014\u201cHere lies, in expectation of the last\n day.... Of what sort he was, that day will show.\u201d Shakespeare,\n Hamlet, 3:3\u2014\u201cIn the corrupted currents of this world Offence\u2019s\n glided hand may shove by justice. But \u2019tis not so above. There is\n no shuffling, there the action lies In his true nature; and we\n ourselves compelled, Even to the teeth and forehead of our faults.\n To give in evidence\u201d; King John, 4:2\u2014\u201cOh, when the last account\n \u2019twixt heaven and earth Is to be made, then shall this hand and\n seal [the warrant for the murder of Prince Arthur] Witness against\n us to damnation.\u201d \u201cNot all your piety nor wit Can lure it\n [justice] back to cancel half a line, Nor all your tears wash out\n one word of it.\u201d\n\n\n(_b_) In the nature of man, there are evidences and preparations for this\nfinal disclosure. Among these may be mentioned the law of memory, by which\nthe soul preserves the records of its acts, both good and evil (Luke\n16:25); the law of conscience, by which men involuntarily anticipate\npunishment for their own sins (Rom. 2:15, 16; Heb. 10:27); the law of\ncharacter, by which every thought and deed makes indelible impress upon\nthe moral nature (Heb. 3:8, 15).\n\n\n The law of memory.\u2014_Luke 16:25_\u2014\u201c_Son, remember!_\u201d See Maclaren,\n Sermons, 1:109\u2010122\u2014Memory (1) will embrace all the events of the\n past life; (2) will embrace them all at the same moment; (3) will\n embrace them continuously and continually. Memory is a process of\n self\u2010registry. As every business house keeps a copy of all letters\n sent or orders issued, so every man retains in memory the record\n of his sins. The mind is a palimpsest; though the original writing\n has been erased, the ink has penetrated the whole thickness of the\n parchment, and God\u2019s chemistry is able to revive it. Hudson, Dem.\n of Future Life, 212, 213\u2014\u201cSubjective memory is the retention of\n all ideas, however superficially they may have been impressed upon\n the objective mind, and it admits of no variation in different\n individuals. Recollection is the power of recalling ideas to the\n mind. This varies greatly. Sir William Hamilton calls the former\n \u2018mental latency.\u2019 \u201d\n\n The law of conscience.\u2014_Rom. 2:15, 16_\u2014\u201c_they show the work of the\n law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness\n therewith, and their thoughts one with another accusing or else\n excusing them; in the day when God shall judge the secrets of men,\n according to my gospel, by Jesus Christ_\u201d; _Heb. 10:27_\u2014\u201c_a\n certain fearful expectation of judgment, and a fierceness of fire\n which shall devour the adversaries._\u201d Goethe said that his\n writings, taken together, constituted a great confession.\n Wordsworth, Excursion, III:579\u2014\u201cFor, like a plague will memory\n break out. And, in the blank and solitude of things, Upon his\n spirit, with a fever\u2019s strength, Will conscience prey.\u201d A man who\n afterwards became a Methodist preacher was converted in\n Whitefield\u2019s time by a vision of the judgment, in which he saw all\n men gathered before the throne, and each one coming up to the book\n of God\u2019s law, tearing open his heart before it \u201cas one would tear\n open the bosom of his shirt,\u201d comparing his heart with the things\n written in the book, and, according as they agreed or disagreed\n with that standard, either passing triumphant to the company of\n the blest, or going with howling to the company of the damned. No\n word was spoken; the Judge sat silent; the judgment was one of\n self\u2010revelation and self\u2010condemnation. See Autobiography of John\n Nelson (quoted in the Diary of Mrs. Kitty Trevylyan, 207, by Mrs.\n E. Charles, the author of The Sch\u00f6nberg\u2010Cotta Family).\n\n The law of character.\u2014_Heb. 3:8, 15_\u2014\u201c_Harden not your hearts, as\n in the provocation, Like as in the day of the trial in the\n wilderness.... Today, if ye shall hear his voice, Harden not your\n hearts, as in the provocation._\u201d Sin leaves its marks upon the\n soul; men become \u201c_past feeling_\u201d (_Eph. 4:19_). In England,\n churchmen claim to tell a dissenter by his walk\u2014not a bad sign by\n which to know a man. God needs only to hold up our characters to\n show what have been our lives. Sin leaves its scars upon the soul,\n as truly as lust and hatred leave their marks upon the body. So\n with the manifestation of the good\u2014\u201cthe chivalry that does the\n right, and disregards The yea and nay of the world.... Expect nor\n question nor reply At what we figure as God\u2019s judgment\u2010bar\u201d\n (Robert Browning, Ring and Book, 178, 202). Mr. Edison says: \u201cIn a\n few years the world will be just like one big ear; it will be\n unsafe to speak in a house till one has examined the walls and the\n furniture for concealed phonographs.\u201d But the world even now is\n \u201cone big ear\u201d, and we ourselves in our characters are writing the\n books of the judgment. Brooks, Foundations of Zo\u00f6logy, 134,\n 135\u2014\u201cEvery part of the material universe contains a permanent\n record of every change that has taken place therein, and there is\n also no limit to the power of minds like ours to read and\n interpret the record.\u201d\n\n Draper, Conflict of Science and Religion: \u201cIf on a cold polished\n metal, as a new razor, any object, such as a wafer, be laid, and\n the metal breathed upon, and when the moisture has had time to\n disappear, the wafer be thrown off, though now the most critical\n inspection of the polished surface can discern no trace of any\n form, if we breathe once more upon it, a spectral image of the\n wafer comes plainly into view; and this may be done again and\n again. Nay, more; if the polished metal be carefully put aside\n where nothing can injure its surface, and be kept so for many\n months, on breathing upon it again, the shadowy form emerges. A\n shadow never falls upon a wall without leaving thereon a permanent\n trace, a trace which might be made visible by resorting to proper\n processes. Upon the walls of our most private apartments, where we\n think the eye of intrusion is altogether shut out, and our\n retirement can never be profaned, there exist the vestiges of all\n our acts.\u201d\n\n Babbage, Ninth Bridgewater Treatise, 113\u2010115\u2014\u201cIf we had power to\n follow and detect the minutest effects of any disturbance, each\n particle of existing matter would furnish a register of all that\n has happened. The track of every canoe, of every vessel that has\n yet disturbed the surface of the ocean, whether impelled by manual\n force or elemental power, remains forever registered in the future\n movement of all succeeding particles which may occupy its place.\n The furrow which it left is indeed filled up by the closing\n waters, but they draw after them other and larger portions of the\n surrounding element, and these again, once moved, communicate\n motion to others in endless succession. The air itself is one vast\n library, in whose pages are forever written all that man has said\n or even whispered. There, in their mutable but unerring\n characters, mixed with the earliest as well as the latest sighs of\n mortality, stand forever recorded vows unredeemed, promises\n unfulfilled, perpetuating in the united movements of each particle\n the testimony of man\u2019s changeful will.\u201d\n\n\n(_c_) Single acts and words, therefore, are to be brought into the\njudgment only as indications of the moral condition of the soul. This\nmanifestation of all hearts will vindicate not only God\u2019s past dealings,\nbut his determination of future destinies.\n\n\n _Mat. 12:36_\u2014\u201c_And I say unto you, that every idle word that man\n shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of\n judgment_\u201d; _Luke 12:2, 8, 9_\u2014\u201c_there is nothing covered up, that\n shall not be revealed; and hid, that shall not be known.... Every\n one who shall confess me before men, him shall the Son of man also\n confess before the angels of God: but he that denieth me in the\n presence of men shall be denied in the presence of the angels of\n God_\u201d; _John 3:18_\u2014\u201c_He that believeth on him is not judged: he\n that believeth not hath been judged already, because he hath not\n believed on the name of the only begotten Son of God_\u201d; _2 Cor.\n 5:10_\u2014\u201c_For we must all be made manifest_ [not: \u2018must all appear,\u2019\n as in A. Vers.] _before the judgment\u2010seat of Christ_.\u201d\n\n Even the human judge, in passing sentence, commonly endeavors so\n to set forth the guilt of the criminal that he shall see his doom\n to be just. So God will awaken the consciences of the lost, and\n lead them to pass judgment on themselves. Each lost soul can say\n as Byron\u2019s Manfred said to the fiend that tortured his closing\n hour: \u201cI have not been thy dupe, nor am thy prey, But was my own\n destroyer.\u201d Thus God\u2019s final judgment will be only the culmination\n of a process of natural selection, by which the unfit are\n eliminated, and the fit are caused to survive.\n\n O. J. Smith, The Essential Verity of Religion: \u201cBelief in the\n immortality of the soul and belief in the accountability of the\n soul are fundamental beliefs in all religion. The origin of the\n belief in immortality is found in the fact that justice can be\n established in human affairs only upon the theory that the soul of\n man is immortal, and the belief that man is accountable for his\n actions eternally is based upon the conviction that justice should\n and will be enforced. The central verity in religion therefore is\n eternal justice. The sense of justice makes us men. Religion has\n no miraculous origin,\u2014it is born with the awakening of man\u2019s moral\n sense. Friendship and love are based on reciprocity, which is\n justice. \u2018Universal justice,\u2019 says Aristotle, \u2018includes all\n virtues.\u2019 \u201d If by justice here is meant the divine justice,\n implied in the awakening of man\u2019s moral sense, we can agree with\n the above. As we have previously intimated, we regard the belief\n in immortality as an inference from the intuition of God\u2019s\n existence, and every new proof that God is just strengthens our\n conviction of immortality.\n\n\n\n3. The Judge in the final judgment.\n\n\nGod, in the person of Jesus Christ, is to be the judge. Though God is the\njudge of all (Heb. 12:23), yet this judicial activity is exercised through\nChrist, at the last day, as well as in the present state (John 5:22, 27).\n\n\n _Heb. 12:23_\u2014\u201c_to God the judge of all_\u201d; _John 5:22, 27_\u2014\u201c_For\n neither doth the Father judge any man, but he hath given all\n judgment unto the Son ... and he gave him authority to execute\n judgment, because he is a son of man._\u201d Stevens, Johannine\n Theology, 349\u2014\u201cJesus says that he judges no man (_John 8:15_). He\n does not personally judge men. His attitude toward men is solely\n that of Savior. It is rather his work, his word, his truth, which\n pronounces condemnation against them both here and hereafter. The\n judgment is that light is come; men\u2019s attitude toward the light\n involves their judgment; the light judges them, or, they judge\n themselves.... The Savior does not come to judge but to save them;\n but, by their rejection of salvation, they turn the saving message\n itself into a judgment.\u201d\n\n\nThis, for three reasons:\n\n(_a_) Christ\u2019s human nature enables men to understand both the law and the\nlove of God, and so makes intelligible the grounds on which judgment is\npassed.\n\n\n Whoever says that God is too distant and great to be understood\n may be pointed to Christ, in whose human life the divine \u201claw\n appears, drawn out in living characters,\u201d and the divine love is\n manifest, as suffering upon the cross to save men from their sins.\n\n\n(_b_) The perfect human nature of Christ, united as it is to the divine,\nensures all that is needful in true judgment, _viz._: that it be both\nmerciful and just.\n\n\n _Acts 17:31_\u2014\u201c_he will judge the world in righteousness by the man\n whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all\n men, in that he hath raised him from the dead._\u201d\n\n As F. W. Robertson has shown in his sermon on \u201cThe Sympathy of\n Christ\u201d (vol. 1: sermon vii), it is not sin that most sympathizes\n with sin. Sin blinds and hardens. Only the pure can appreciate the\n needs of the impure, and feel for them.\n\n\n(_c_) Human nature, sitting upon the throne of judgment, will afford\nconvincing proof that Christ has received the reward of his sufferings,\nand that humanity has been perfectly redeemed. The saints shall \u201cjudge the\nworld\u201d only as they are one with Christ.\n\n\n The lowly Son of man shall sit upon the throne of judgment. And\n with himself he will join all believers. _Mat. 19:28_\u2014\u201c_ye who\n have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall\n sit on the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve\n thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel_\u201d; _Luke\n 22:28\u201030_\u2014\u201c_But ye are they that have continued with me in my\n temptations; and I appoint unto you a kingdom, even as my Father\n appointed unto me, that ye may eat and drink at my table in my\n kingdom; and ye shall sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of\n Israel_\u201d; _1 Cor. 6:2, 3_\u2014\u201c_know ye not that the saints shall\n judge the world?... Know ye not that we shall judge angels?_\u201d\n _Rev. 3:21_\u2014\u201c_He that overcometh, I will give to him to sit down\n with me in my throne, as I also overcame, and sat down with my\n Father in his throne._\u201d\n\n\n\n4. The subjects of the final judgment.\n\n\nThe persons upon whose characters and conduct this judgment shall be\npassed are of two great classes:\n\n(_a_) All men\u2014each possessed of body as well as soul,\u2014the dead having been\nraised, and the living having been changed.\n\n\n _1 Cor. 15:51, 52_\u2014\u201c_We all shall not sleep, but we shall all be\n changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last\n trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised\n incorruptible, and we shall be changed_\u201d; _1 Thess. 4:16,\n 17_\u2014\u201c_For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven, with a\n shout, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trump of God:\n and the dead in Christ shall rise first; then we that are alive,\n that are left, shall together with them be caught up in the\n clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with\n the Lord._\u201d\n\n\n(_b_) All evil angels,\u2014good angels appearing only as attendants and\nministers of the Judge.\n\n\n Evil angels: _2 Pet. 2:4_\u2014\u201c_For if God spared not angels when they\n sinned, but cast them down to hell, and committed them to pits of\n darkness, to be reserved unto judgment_\u201d; _Jude 6_\u2014\u201c_And angels\n that kept not their own principality, but left their proper\n habitation, he hath kept in everlasting bonds under darkness unto\n the judgment of the great day_\u201d; Good angels: _Mat. 13:41,\n 42_\u2014\u201c_The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall\n gather out of his kingdom all things that cause stumbling, and\n them that do iniquity, and shall cast them into the furnace of\n fire: there shall be the weeping and the gnashing of teeth_\u201d;\n _25:31_\u2014\u201c_But when the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all\n the angels with him, then shall he sit on the throne of his glory:\n and before him shall be gathered all the nations._\u201d\n\n\n\n5. The grounds of the final judgment.\n\n\nThese will be two in number:\n\n(_a_) The law of God,\u2014as made known in conscience and in Scripture.\n\n\n _John 12:48_\u2014\u201c_He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my sayings,\n hath one that judgeth him: the word that I spake, the same shall\n judge him in the last day_\u201d; _Rom. 2:12_\u2014\u201c_For as many as have\n sinned without the law shall also perish without the law: and as\n many as have sinned under the law shall be judged by the law._\u201d On\n the self\u2010registry and disclosure of sin, see F. A. Noble, Our\n Redemption, 59\u201076. Dr. Noble quotes Daniel Webster in the Knapp\n case at Salem: \u201cThere is no refuge from confession but suicide,\n and suicide is confession.\u201d Thomas Carlyle said to Lord Houghton:\n \u201cRichard Milnes! in the day of judgment, when the Lord asks you\n why you did not get that pension for Alfred Tennyson, it will not\n do to lay the blame on your constituents,\u2014it is you that will be\n damned.\u201d\n\n\n(_b_) The grace of Christ (Rev. 20:12),\u2014those whose names are found\n\u201cwritten in the book of life\u201d being approved, simply because of their\nunion with Christ and participation in his righteousness. Their good works\nshall be brought into judgment only as proofs of this relation to the\nRedeemer. Those not found \u201cwritten in the book of life\u201d will be judged by\nthe law of God, as God has made it known to each individual.\n\n\n _Rev. 20:12_\u2014\u201c_And I saw the dead, the great and the small,\n standing before the throne; and books were opened: and another\n book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were\n judged out of the things which were written in the books,\n according to their works._\u201d The \u201c_book of life_\u201d = the book of\n justification, in which are written the names of those who are\n united to Christ by faith; as the \u201cbook of death\u201d would = the book\n of condemnation, in which are written the names of those who stand\n in their sins, as unrepentant and unforgiven transgressors of\n God\u2019s law.\n\n Ferries, in Hastings\u2019 Bible Dictionary, 2:821\u2014\u201cThe judgment, in\n one aspect or stage of it, is a present act. For judgment Christ\n is come into this world (_John 9:39_). There is an actual\n separation of men in progress here and now.... This judgment which\n is in progress now, is destined to be perfected.... In the last\n assize, Christ will be the Judge as before.... It may be said that\n men will hereafter judge themselves. Those who are unlike Christ\n will find themselves as such to be separate from him. The two\n classes of people are parted because they have acquired distinct\n natures like the sheep and the goat.... The character of each\n person is a \u2018_book_\u2019 or record, preserving, in moral and spiritual\n effects, all that he has been and done and loved, and in the\n judgment these books will be \u2018_opened_,\u2019 or each man\u2019s character\n will be manifested as the light of Christ\u2019s character falls upon\n it.... The people of Christ themselves receive different rewards,\n according as their life has been.\u201d\n\n Dr. H. E. Robins, in his Restatement, holds that only under the\n grace\u2010system can the deeds done in the body be the ground of\n judgment. These deeds will be repentance and faith, not words of\n external morality. They will be fruits of the Spirit, such as\n spring from the broken and contrite heart. Christ, as head of the\n mediatorial kingdom, will fitly be the Judge. So Judgment will be\n an unmixed blessing to the righteous. To them the words \u201c_prepare\n to meet thy God_\u201d (_Amos 4:12_) should have no terror; for to meet\n God is to meet their deliverance and their reward. \u201cTeach me to\n live that I may dread The grave as little as my bed: Teach me to\n die, that so I may Rise glorious at the judgment day.\u201d On the\n whole subject, see Hodge, Outlines of Theology, 456, 457;\n Martensen, Christian Dogmatics, 465, 466; Neander, Planting and\n Training, 524\u2010526; Jonathan Edwards, Works, 2:499, 500; 4:202\u2010225;\n Fox, in Lutheran Rev., 1887:206\u2010226.\n\n\n\n\nVI. The Final States of the Righteous and of the Wicked.\n\n\n\n1. Of the righteous.\n\n\nThe final state of the righteous is described as eternal life (Mat.\n25:46), glory (2 Cor. 4:17), rest (Heb. 4:9), knowledge (1 Cor. 13:8\u201010),\nholiness (Rev. 21:27), service (Rev. 22:3), worship (Rev. 19:1), society\n(Heb. 12:23), communion with God (Rev. 21:3).\n\n\n _Mat. 25:46_\u2014\u201c_And these shall go away into eternal punishment:\n but the righteous into eternal life_\u201d; _2 Cor. 4:17_\u2014\u201c_For our\n light affliction, which is for the moment, worketh for us more and\n more exceedingly an eternal weight of glory_\u201d; _Heb. 4:9_\u2014\u201c_There\n remaineth therefore a sabbath rest for the people of God_\u201d; _1\n Cor. 13:8\u201010_\u2014\u201c_Love never faileth: but whether there be\n prophecies, they shall be done away; whether there be tongues,\n they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall be done\n away. For we know in part, and we prophesy in part: but when that\n which is perfect is come, that which is in part shall be done\n away_\u201d; _Rev. 21:27_\u2014\u201c_and there shall in no wise enter into it\n anything unclean, or he that maketh an abomination and a lie: but\n only they that are written in the Lamb\u2019s book of life_\u201d;\n _22:3_\u2014\u201c_and his servants shall serve him_\u201d; _19:1, 2_\u2014\u201c_After\n these things I heard as it were a great voice of a great multitude\n in heaven, saying, Hallelujah; Salvation, and glory, and power,\n belong to our God; for true and righteous are his judgments_\u201d;\n _Heb. 12:23_\u2014\u201c_to the general assembly and church of the firstborn\n who are enrolled in heaven_\u201d; _Rev. 21:3_\u2014\u201c_And I heard a great\n voice out of the throne saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is\n with men, and he shall dwell with them, and they shall be his\n peoples, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God._\u201d\n\n _Is. 35:7_\u2014\u201c_The mirage shall become a pool_\u201d = aspiration shall\n become reality; _Hos. 2:15_\u2014\u201c_I will give her ... the valley of\n Achor_ [that is, _Troubling_] _for a door of hope._\u201d Victor Hugo:\n \u201cIf you persuade Lazarus that there is no Abraham\u2019s bosom awaiting\n him, he will not lie at Dives\u2019 door, to be fed with his crumbs,\u2014he\n will make his way into the house and fling Dives out of the\n window.\u201d It was the preaching of the Methodists that saved England\n from the general crash of the French Revolution. It brought the\n common people to look for the redress of the inequalities and\n injustices of this life in a future life\u2014a world of less friction\n than this (S. S. Times). In the Alps one has no idea of the upper\n valleys until he enters them. He may long to ascend, but only\n actual ascending can show him their beauty. And then, \u201cbeyond the\n Alps lies Italy,\u201d and the revelation of heaven will be like the\n outburst of the sunny landscape after going through the darkness\n of the St. Gothard tunnel.\n\n Robert Hall, who for years had suffered acute bodily pain, said to\n Wilberforce: \u201cMy chief conception of heaven is _rest_.\u201d \u201cMine,\u201d\n replied Wilberforce, \u201cis _love_\u2014love to God and to every bright\n inhabitant of that glorious place.\u201d Wilberforce enjoyed society.\n Heaven is not all rest. On the door is inscribed: \u201cNo admission\n except on business.\u201d \u201c_His servants shall serve him_\u201d (_Rev.\n 21:3_). Butler, Things Old and New, 143\u2014\u201cWe know not; but if life\n be there The outcome and the crown of this: What else can make\n their perfect bliss Than in their Master\u2019s work to share? Resting,\n but not in slumberous ease, Working, but not in wild unrest, Still\n ever blessing, ever blest, They see us as the Father sees.\u201d\n Tennyson, Crossing the Bar: \u201cSunset and evening star, And one\n clear call for me; And may there be no moaning of the bar When I\n put out to sea! But such a tide as moving seems asleep, Too full\n for sound and foam, When that which drew from out the boundless\n deep Turns again home. Twilight and evening bell, And after that\n the dark; And may there be no sadness of farewell, When I embark.\n For though from out our bourne of time and place The flood may\n bear me far, I hope to see my Pilot face to face, When I have\n crossed the bar.\u201d\n\n _Mat. 6:20_\u2014\u201c_lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven_\u201d = there\n are no permanent investments except in heaven. A man at death is\n worth only what he has sent on before him. Christ prepares a place\n for us (_John 14:3_) by gathering our friends to himself. Louise\n Chandler Moulton: \u201cSome day or other I shall surely come Where\n true hearts wait for me; Then let me learn the language of that\n home, While here on earth I be; Lest my poor lips for want of\n words be dumb In that high company.\u201d Bronson Alcott: \u201cHeaven will\n be to me a place where I can get a little conversation.\u201d Some of\n his friends thought it would be a place where he could hear\n himself talk. A pious Scotchman, when asked whether he ever\n expected to reach heaven, replied: \u201cWhy, mon, I live there noo!\u201d\n\n\nSumming up all these, we may say that it is the fulness and perfection of\nholy life, in communion with God and with sanctified spirits. Although\nthere will be degrees of blessedness and honor, proportioned to the\ncapacity and fidelity of each soul (Luke 19:17, 19; 1 Cor. 3:14, 15), each\nwill receive as great a measure of reward as it can contain (1 Cor. 2:9),\nand this final state, once entered upon, will be unchanging in kind and\nendless in duration (Rev. 3:12; 22:15).\n\n\n _Luke 19:17, 19_\u2014\u201c_Well done, thou good servant: because thou wast\n found faithful in a very little, have thou authority over ten\n cities.... Be thou also over five cities_\u201d; _1 Cor. 3:14, 15_\u2014\u201c_If\n any man\u2019s work shall abide which he built thereon, he shall\n receive a reward. If any man\u2019s work shall be burned, he shall\n suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as through\n fire_\u201d; _2:9_\u2014\u201c_Things which eye saw not, and ear heard not, And\n which entered not into the heart of man, Whatsoever things God\n prepared for them that love him_\u201d; _Rev. 3:12_\u2014\u201c_He that\n overcometh, I will make __ him a pillar in the temple of my God,\n and he shall go out thence no more_\u201d; _22:15_\u2014\u201c_Without are the\n dogs, and the sorcerers, and the fornicators, and the murderers,\n and the idolaters, and every one that loveth and maketh a lie._\u201d\n\n In the parable of the laborers (_Mat. 20:1\u201016_), each receives a\n penny. Rewards in heaven will be equal, in the sense that each\n saved soul will be filled with good. But rewards will vary, in the\n sense that the capacity of one will be greater than that of\n another; and this capacity will be in part the result of our\n improvement of God\u2019s gifts in the present life. The relative value\n of the penny may in this way vary from a single unit to a number\n indefinitely great, according to the work and spirit of the\n recipient. The penny is good only for what it will buy. For the\n eleventh hour man, who has done but little work, it will not buy\n so sweet rest as it buys for him who has \u201c_borne the burden of the\n day and the scorching heat_.\u201d It will not buy appetite, nor will\n it buy joy of conscience.\n\n E. G. Robinson: \u201cHeaven is not to be compared to a grasshopper on\n a shingle floating down stream. Heaven is a place where men are\n taken up, as they leave this world, and are carried forward. No\n sinners will be there, though there may be incompleteness of\n character. There is no intimation in Scripture of that sudden\n transformation in the hour of dissolution which is often\n supposed.\u201d _Ps. 84:7_\u2014\u201c_They go from strength to strength; Every\n one of them appeareth before God in Zion_\u201d\u2014it is not possible that\n progress should cease with our entrance into heaven; rather is it\n true that uninterrupted progress will then begin. _1 Cor.\n 13:12_\u2014\u201c_now we see in a mirror, darkly; but then face to face._\u201d\n There, progress is not _towards_, but _within_, the sphere of the\n infinite. In this world we are like men living in a cave, and\n priding themselves on the rushlights with which they explore it,\n unwilling to believe that there is a region of sunlight where\n rushlights are needless.\n\n Heaven will involve deliverance from defective physical\n organization and surroundings, as well as from the remains of evil\n in our hearts. Rest, in heaven, will be consistent with service,\n an activity without weariness, a service which is perfect freedom.\n We shall be perfect when we enter heaven, in the sense of being\n free from sin; but we shall grow to greater perfection thereafter,\n in the sense of a larger and completer being. The fruit tree shows\n perfection at each stage of its growth\u2014the perfect bud, the\n perfect blossom, and finally the perfect fruit; yet the bud and\n the blossom are preparatory and prophetic; neither one is a\n finality. So \u201c_when that which is perfect is come, that which is\n in part shall be done away_\u201d (_1 Cor. 13:10_). A broadshouldered\n convert at the Rescue Mission said: \u201cI\u2019m the happiest man in the\n room to\u2010night. I couldn\u2019t be any happier unless I were larger.\u201d A\n little pail can be as full of water as is a big tub, but the tub\n will hold much more than the pail. To be \u201c_filled unto all the\n fulness of God_\u201d (_Eph. 3:19_) will mean much more in heaven than\n it means here, because we shall then \u201c_be strong to apprehend with\n all the saints what is the breadth and length and height and\n depth, and to know the love of Christ which passeth knowledge_.\u201d\n In the book of Revelation, John seems to have mistaken an angel\n for the Lord himself, and to have fallen down to worship (_Rev.\n 22:8_). The time may come in eternity when we shall be equal to\n what we now conceive God to be (_1 Cor. 2:9_).\n\n Plato\u2019s Republic and More\u2019s Utopia are only earthly adumbrations\n of St. John\u2019s City of God. The representation of heaven as a city\n seems intended to suggest security from every foe, provision for\n every want, intensity of life, variety of occupation, and\n closeness of relation to others; or, as Hastings\u2019 Bible\n Dictionary, 1:446, puts it: \u201cSafety, Security, Service.\u201d Here, the\n greatest degradation and sin are found in the great cities. There,\n the life of the city will help holiness, as the life of the city\n here helps wickedness. Brotherly love in the next world implies\n knowing those we love, and loving those we know. We certainly\n shall not know less there than here. If we know our friends here,\n we shall know them there. And, as love to Christ here draws us\n nearer to each other, so there we shall love friends, not less but\n more, because of our greater nearness to Christ.\n\n _Zech. 8:5_\u2014\u201c_And the streets of the city shall be full of boys\n and girls playing in the streets thereof._\u201d Newman Smyth, Through\n Science to Faith, 125\u2014\u201cAs of the higher animals, so even more of\n men and women it may be true, that those who play best may succeed\n best and thrive best.\u201d Horace Bushnell, in his essay, Work and\n Play, holds that ideal work is work performed so heartily and\n joyfully, and with such a surplus of energy, that it becomes play.\n This is the activity of heaven: _John 10:10_\u2014\u201c_I came that they\n may have life, and may have it abundantly._\u201d We enter into the\n life of God: _John 5:17_\u2014\u201c_My Father worketh even until now, and I\n work._\u201d A nurse who had been ill for sixteen years, said: \u201cIf I\n were well, I would be at the small\u2010pox hospital. I\u2019m not going to\n heaven to do nothing.\u201d Savage, Life after Death, 129, 292\u2014\u201cIn\n Dante\u2019s universe, the only reason for any one\u2019s wanting to get to\n heaven is for the sake of getting out of the other place. There is\n nothing in heaven for him to do, nothing human for him to engage\n in.... A good deacon in his depression thought he was going to\n hell; but when asked what he would do there, he replied that he\n would try to start a prayer meeting.\u201d\n\n\nWith regard to heaven, two questions present themselves, namely:\n\n\n(a) Is heaven a place, as well as a state?\n\n\nWe answer that this is probable, for the reason that the presence of\nChrist\u2019s human body is essential to heaven, and that this body must be\nconfined to place. Since deity and humanity are indissolubly united in\nChrist\u2019s single person, we cannot regard Christ\u2019s human soul as limited to\nplace without vacating his person of its divinity. But we cannot conceive\nof his human body as thus omnipresent. As the new bodies of the saints are\nconfined to place, so, it would seem, must be the body of their Lord. But,\nthough heaven be the place where Christ manifests his glory through the\nhuman body which he assumed in the incarnation, our ruling conception of\nheaven must be something higher even than this, namely, that of a state of\nholy communion with God.\n\n\n _John 14:2, 3_\u2014\u201c_In my Father\u2019s house are many mansions; if it\n were not so, I would have told you; for I go to prepare a place\n for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I come again,\n and will receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be\n also_\u201d; _Heb. 12:14_\u2014\u201c_follow after peace with all men, and the\n sanctification without which no man shall see the Lord._\u201d\n\n Although heaven is probably a place, we are by no means to allow\n this conception to become the preponderant one in our minds.\n Milton: \u201cThe mind is its own place, and in itself Can make a\n heaven of hell, a hell of heaven.\u201d As he goes through the gates of\n death, every Christian can say, as C\u00e6sar said when he crossed the\n Rubicon: \u201cOmnia mea mecum porto.\u201d The hymn \u201cO sing to me of\n heaven, when I am called to die\u201d is not true to Christian\n experience. In that hour the soul sings, not of heaven, but of\n Jesus and his cross. As houses on river\u2010flats, accessible in time\n of flood by boats, keep safe only goods in the upper story, so\n only the treasure laid up above escapes the destroying floods of\n the last day. Dorner: \u201cThe soul will possess true freedom, in that\n it can no more become unfree; and that through the indestructible\n love\u2010energy springing from union with God.\u201d\n\n Milton: \u201cWhat if earth be But the shadow of heaven, and things\n therein Each to the other like, more than on earth is thought?\u201d\n Omar Khayy\u00e1m, Rub\u00e1iy\u00e1t, stanzas 66, 67\u2014\u201cI sent my soul through the\n Invisible, Some letter of that After\u2010life to spell: And by and by\n my soul returned to me, And answered \u2018I myself am Heaven and Hell\u2019\n ... Heaven but the vision of fulfilled desire, And Hell the shadow\n of a soul on fire.\u201d In other words, not the kind of place, but the\n kind of people in it, makes Heaven or Hell. Crane, Religion of To\u2010\n morrow, 341\u2014\u201cThe earth is but a breeding\u2010ground from which God\n intends to populate the whole universe. After death, the soul goes\n to that place which God has prepared as its home. In the\n resurrection they \u2018_neither marry nor are given in marriage_\u2019\n (_Mat. 22:30_) = ours is the only generative planet. There is no\n reproduction hereafter. To incorporate himself into the race, the\n Father must come to the reproductive planet.\u201d\n\n Dean Stanley: \u201c_Till death us part!_ So speaks the heart When each\n repeats to each the words of doom; Through blessing and through\n curse, For better and for worse, We will be one till that dread\n hour shall come. Life, with its myriad grasp, Our yearning souls\n shall clasp, By ceaseless love and still expectant wonder, In\n bonds that shall endure, Indissolubly sure, Till God in death\n shall part our paths asunder. _Till death us join!_ O voice yet\n more divine, That to the broken heart breathes hope sublime;\n Through lonely hours and shattered powers, We still are one\n despite of change or time. Death, with his healing hand, Shall\n once more knit the band, Which needs but that one link which none\n may sever; Till through the only Good, Heard, felt and understood,\n Our life in God shall make us one forever.\u201d\n\n\n(b) Is this earth to be the heaven of the saints?\n\n\nWe answer:\n\nFirst,\u2014that the earth is to be purified by fire, and perhaps prepared to\nbe the abode of the saints,\u2014although this last is not rendered certain by\nthe Scriptures.\n\n\n _Rom. 8:19\u201023_\u2014\u201c_For the earnest expectation of the creation\n waiteth for the revealing of the sons of God. For the creation was\n subjected to vanity, not of its own will, but by reason of him who\n subjected it, in hope that the creation itself also shall be\n delivered from the bondage of corruption into the liberty of the\n glory of the children of God. For we know that the whole creation\n groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now. And not only\n so, but ourselves also, who have the first\u2010fruits of the Spirit,\n even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for our\n adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body_\u201d; _2 Pet. 3:12,\n 13_\u2014\u201c_looking for and earnestly desiring the coming of the day of\n God, by reason of which the heavens being on fire shall be\n dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat. But,\n according to his promise, we look for new heavens and a new earth,\n wherein dwelleth righteousness_\u201d; _Rev. 21:1_\u2014\u201c_And I saw a new\n heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth\n are passed away; and the sea is no more._\u201d Dorner: \u201cWithout loss\n of substantiality, matter will have exchanged its darkness,\n hardness, heaviness, inertia, and impenetrableness, for clearness,\n radiance, elasticity, and transparency. A new stadium will\n begin\u2014God\u2019s advance to new creations, with the co\u00f6peration of\n perfected mankind.\u201d\n\n Is the earth a molten mass, with a thin solid crust? Lord Kelvin\n says no,\u2014it is more rigid and solid than steel. The interior may\n be intensely hot, yet pressure may render it solid to the very\n centre. The wrinkling of the surface may be due to contraction, or\n \u201csolid flow,\u201d like the wrinkling in the skin of a baked apple that\n has cooled. See article on The Interior of the Earth, by G. F.\n Becker, in N. American Rev., April, 1893. Edward S. Holden,\n Director of the Lick Observatory, in The Forum, Oct. 1893:211\u2010220,\n tells us that \u201cthe star Nova Aurig\u00e6, which doubtless resembled our\n sun, within two days increased in brilliancy sixteen fold. Three\n months after its discovery it had become invisible. After four\n months again it reappeared and was comparatively bright. But it\n was no longer a star but a nebula. In other words it had developed\n changes of light and heat which, if repeated in the case of our\n own sun, would mean a quick end of the human race, and the utter\n annihilation of every vestige of animal and other life upon this\n earth.... This catastrophe occured in December, 1891, or was\n announced to us by light which reached us then. But this light\n must have left the star twenty, perhaps fifty, years earlier.\u201d\n\n\nSecondly,\u2014that this fitting\u2010up of the earth for man\u2019s abode, even if it\nwere declared in Scripture, would not render it certain that the saints\nare to be confined to these narrow limits (John 14:2). It seems rather to\nbe intimated that the effect of Christ\u2019s work will be to bring the\nredeemed into union and intercourse with other orders of intelligence,\nfrom communion with whom they are now shut out by sin (Eph. 1:20; Col.\n1:20).\n\n\n _John 14:2_\u2014\u201c_In my Father\u2019s house are many mansions_\u201d; _Eph.\n 1:10_\u2014\u201c_unto a dispensation of the fulness of the times, to sum up\n all things in Christ, the things in the heavens, and the things\n upon the earth_\u201d; _Col. 1:20_\u2014\u201c_through him to reconcile all\n things unto himself, having made peace through the blood of his\n cross; through him, I say, whether things upon the earth, or\n things in the heavens._\u201d\n\n See Dr. A. C. Kendrick, in Bap. Quarterly, Jan. 1870. Dr. Kendrick\n thinks we need local associations. Earth may be our home, yet from\n this home we may set out on excursions through the universe, after\n a time returning again to our earthly abodes. So Chalmers,\n interpreting literally _2 Pet. 3_. We certainly are in a prison\n here, and look out through the bars, as the Prisoner of Chillon\n looked over the lake to the green isle and the singing birds. Why\n are we shut out from intercourse with other worlds and other\n orders of intelligence? Apparently it is the effect of sin. We are\n in an abnormal state of durance and probation. Earth is out of\n harmony with God. The great harp of the universe has one of its\n strings out of tune, and that one discordant string makes a jar\n through the whole. All things in heaven and earth shall be\n reconciled when this one jarring string is keyed right and set in\n tune by the hand of love and mercy. See Leitch, God\u2019s Glory in the\n Heavens, 327\u2010330.\n\n\n\n2. Of the wicked.\n\n\nThe final state of the wicked is described under the figures of eternal\nfire (Mat. 25:41); the pit of the abyss (Rev. 9:2, 11); outer darkness\n(Mat. 8:12); torment (Rev. 14:10, 11); eternal punishment (Mat. 25:46);\nwrath of God (Rom. 2:5); second death (Rev. 21:8); eternal destruction\nfrom the face of the Lord (2 Thess. 1:9); eternal sin (Mark 3:29).\n\n\n _Mat. 25:41_\u2014\u201c_Depart from me, ye cursed, into the eternal fire\n which is prepared for the devil and his angels_\u201d; _Rev. 9:2,\n 11_\u2014\u201c_And he opened the pit of the abyss; and there went up a\n smoke out of the pit, as the smoke of a great furnace.... They\n have over them as king the angel of the abyss: his name in Hebrew\n is Abaddon, and in the Greek tongue he hath the name Apollyon_\u201d;\n _Mat. 8:12_\u2014\u201c_but the sons of the kingdom shall be cast forth into\n the outer darkness: there shall be the weeping and the gnashing of\n teeth_\u201d; _Rev. 14:10, 11_\u2014\u201c_he also shall drink of the wine of the\n wrath of God, which is prepared unmixed in the cup of his anger;\n and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence\n of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb: and the smoke\n of their torment goeth up for ever and ever_\u201d; _Mat. 25:46_\u2014\u201c_And\n these shall go away into eternal punishment._\u201d\n\n _Rom. 2:5_\u2014\u201c_after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up\n for thyself wrath in the day of wrath and revelation of the\n righteous judgment of God_\u201d; _Rev. 21:8_\u2014\u201c_But for the fearful,\n and unbelieving, and abominable, and murderers, and fornicators,\n and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, their part shall be\n in the lake that burneth with fire and brimstone; which is the\n second death_\u201d: _2 Thess. 1:9_\u2014\u201c_who shall suffer punishment, even\n eternal destruction from the face of the Lord and from the glory\n of his might_\u201d\u2014here \u1f00\u03c0\u03cc, from, = not separation, but \u201cproceeding\n from,\u201d and indicates that the everlasting presence of Christ, once\n realized, ensures everlasting destruction; _Mark 3:29_\u2014\u201c_whosoever\n shall blaspheme against the Holy Spirit hath never forgiveness,\n but is guilty of an eternal sin_\u201d\u2014a text which implies that (1)\n some will never cease to sin; (2) this eternal sinning will\n involve eternal misery; (3) this eternal misery, as the appointed\n vindication of the law, will be eternal punishment. As Uzziah,\n when smitten with leprosy, did not need to be thrust out of the\n temple, but \u201c_himself hasted also to go out_\u201d (_2 Chron. 26:20_),\n so Judas is said to go \u201c_to his own place_\u201d (_Acts 1:25_; _cf._\n _4:23_\u2014where Peter and John, \u201c_being let go, they came to their\n own company_\u201d). _Cf._ _John 8:35_\u2014\u201c_the bondservant abideth not in\n the house forever_\u201d = whatever be his outward connection with God,\n it can be only for a time; _15:2_\u2014\u201c_Every branch in me that\n beareth not fruit, he taketh it away_\u201d\u2014at death; the history of\n Abraham showed that one might have outward connection with God\n that was only temporary: Ishmael was cast out; the promise\n belonged only to Isaac.\n\n Wrightnour: \u201cGehenna was the place into which all the offal of the\n city of Jerusalem was swept. So hell is the penitentiary of the\n moral universe. The profligate is not happy in the prayer meeting,\n but in the saloon; the swine is not at home in the parlor, but in\n the sty. Hell is the sinner\u2019s own place; he had rather be there\n than in heaven; he will not come to the house of God, the nearest\n thing to heaven; why should we expect him to enter heaven itself?\u201d\n\n\nSumming up all, we may say that it is the loss of all good, whether\nphysical or spiritual, and the misery of an evil conscience banished from\nGod and from the society of the holy, and dwelling under God\u2019s positive\ncurse forever. Here we are to remember, as in the case of the final state\nof the righteous, that the decisive and controlling element is not the\noutward, but the inward. If hell be a place, it is only that the outward\nmay correspond to the inward. If there be outward torments, it is only\nbecause these will be fit, though subordinate, accompaniments of the\ninward state of the soul.\n\n\n Every living creature will have an environment suited to its\n character\u2014\u201cits own place.\u201d \u201cI know of the future judgment, How\n dreadful so e\u2019er it be, That to sit alone with my conscience Will\n be judgment enough for me.\u201d Calvin: \u201cThe wicked have the seeds of\n hell in their own hearts.\u201d Chrysostom, commenting on the words\n \u201cDepart, ye cursed,\u201d says: \u201cTheir own works brought the punishment\n on them; the fire was not prepared for them, but for Satan; yet,\n since they cast themselves into it, \u2018Impute it to yourselves,\u2019 he\n says, \u2018that you are there.\u2019 \u201d Milton, Par. Lost, 4:75\u2014Satan:\n \u201cWhich way I fly is hell; myself am hell.\u201d Byron: \u201cThere is no\n power in holy men, Nor charm in prayer, nor purifying form Of\n penitence, nor outward look, nor fast, Nor agony, nor, greater\n than all these, The innate torture of that deep despair Would make\n a hell of heaven, can exorcise From out the unbounded spirit the\n quick sense Of its own sins.\u201d\n\n Phelps, English Style, 228, speaks of \u201ca law of the divine\n government, by which the body symbolizes, in its experience, the\n moral condition of its spiritual inhabitant. The drift of sin is\n to physical suffering. Moral depravity tends always to a corrupt\n and tortured body. Certain diseases are the product of certain\n crimes. The whole catalogue of human pains, from a toothache to\n the _angina pectoris_, is but a witness to a state of sin\n expressed by an experience of suffering. Carry this law into the\n experience of eternal sin. The bodies of the wicked live again as\n well as those of the righteous. You have therefore a spiritual\n body, inhabited and used, and therefore tortured, by a guilty\n soul,\u2014a body, perfected in its sensibilities, inclosing and\n expressing a soul matured in its depravity.\u201d Augustine,\n Confessions, 25\u2014\u201cEach man\u2019s sin is the instrument of his\n punishment, and his iniquity is turned into his torment.\u201d Lord\n Bacon: \u201cBeing, without well\u2010being, is a curse, and the greater the\n being, the greater the curse.\u201d\n\n\nIn our treatment of the subject of eternal punishment we must remember\nthat false doctrine is often a reaction from the unscriptural and\nrepulsive over\u2010statements of Christian apologists. We freely concede: 1.\nthat future punishment does not necessarily consist of physical\ntorments,\u2014it may be wholly internal and spiritual; 2. that the pain and\nsuffering of the future are not necessarily due to positive inflictions of\nGod,\u2014they may result entirely from the soul\u2019s sense of loss, and from the\naccusations of conscience; and 3. that eternal punishment does not\nnecessarily involve endless successions of suffering,\u2014as God\u2019s eternity is\nnot mere endlessness, so we may not be forever subject to the law of time.\n\n\n An over\u2010literal interpretation of the Scripture symbols has had\n much to do with such utterances as that of Savage, Life after\n Death, 101\u2014\u201cIf the doctrine of eternal punishment was clearly and\n unmistakably taught in every leaf of the Bible, and on every leaf\n of all the Bibles of all the world, I could not believe a word of\n it. I should appeal from these misconceptions of even the seers\n and the great men to the infinite and eternal Good, who only is\n God, and who only on such terms could be worshiped.\u201d\n\n The figurative language of Scripture is a miniature representation\n of what cannot be fully described in words. The symbol is a\n symbol; yet it is less, not greater, than the thing symbolized. It\n is sometimes fancied that Jonathan Edwards, when, in his sermon on\n \u201cSinners in the Hands of an Angry God,\u201d he represented the sinner\n as a worm shriveling in the eternal fire, supposed that hell\n consists mainly of such physical torments. But this is a\n misinterpretation of Edwards. As he did not fancy heaven\n essentially to consist in streets of gold or pearly gates, but\n rather in holiness and communion with Christ, of which these are\n the symbols, so he did not regard hell as consisting in fire and\n brimstone, but rather in the unholiness and separation from God of\n a guilty and accusing conscience, of which the fire and brimstone\n are symbols. He used the material imagery, because he thought that\n this best answered to the methods of Scripture. He probably went\n beyond the simplicity of the Scripture statements, and did not\n sufficiently explain the spiritual meaning of the symbols he used;\n but we are persuaded that he neither understood them literally\n himself, nor meant them to be so understood by others.\n\n Sin is self\u2010isolating, unsocial, selfish. By virtue of natural\n laws the sinner reaps as he has sown, and sooner or later is\n repaid by desertion or contempt. Then the selfishness of one\n sinner is punished by the selfishness of another, the ambition of\n one by the ambition of another, the cruelty of one by the cruelty\n of another. The misery of the wicked hereafter will doubtless be\n due in part to the spirit of their companions. They dislike the\n good, whose presence and example is a continual reproof and\n reminder of the height from which they have fallen, and they shut\n themselves out of their company. The judgment will bring about a\n complete cessation of intercourse between the good and the bad.\n Julius M\u00fcller, Doctrine of Sin, 1:239\u2014\u201cBeings whose relations to\n God are diametrically opposite, and persistently so, differ so\n greatly from each other that other ties of relationship became as\n nothing in comparison.\u201d\n\n\nIn order, however, to meet opposing views, and to forestall the common\nobjections, we proceed to state the doctrine of future punishment in\ngreater detail:\n\n\nA. The future punishment of the wicked is not annihilation.\n\n\nIn our discussion of Physical Death, we have shown that, by virtue of its\noriginal creation in the image of God, the human soul is naturally\nimmortal; that neither for the righteous nor the wicked is death a\ncessation of being; that on the contrary, the wicked enter at death upon a\nstate of conscious suffering which the resurrection and the judgment only\naugment and render permanent. It is plain, moreover, that if annihilation\ntook place at death, there could be no degrees in future punishment,\u2014a\nconclusion itself at variance with express statements of Scripture.\n\n\n The old annihilationism is represented by Hudson, Debt and Grace,\n and Christ our Life; also by Dobney, Future Punishment. It\n maintains that \u03ba\u03cc\u03bb\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2, \u201c_punishment_\u201d (in _Mat. 25:46_\u2014\u201c_eternal\n punishment_\u201d), means etymologically an everlasting \u201ccutting\u2010off.\u201d\n But we reply that the word had to a great degree lost its\n etymological significance, as is evident from the only other\n passage where it occurs in the New Testament, namely, _1 John\n 4:18_\u2014\u201c_fear hath punishment_\u201d (A. V.: \u201cfear hath torment\u201d). For\n full answer to the old statements of the annihilation\u2010theory, see\n under Physical Death, pages 991\u2010998.\n\n That there are degrees of punishment in God\u2019s administration is\n evident from _Luke 12:47, 48_\u2014\u201c_And that servant, who knew his\n Lord\u2019s will, and made not ready, nor did according to his will,\n shall be beaten with many stripes; but he that knew not, and did\n things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes_\u201d;\n _Rom. 2:5, 6_\u2014\u201c_after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest\n up for thyself wrath in the day of wrath and revelation of the\n righteous judgment of God; who will render to every man according\n to his works_\u201d; _2 Cor. 5:10_\u2014\u201c_For we must all be made manifest\n before the judgment\u2010seat of Christ; that each one may receive the\n things done in the body, according to what he hath done, whether\n it be good or bad_\u201d; _11:15_\u2014\u201c_whose end shall be according to\n their works_\u201d; _2 Tim. 4:14_\u2014\u201c_Alexander the coppersmith did me\n much evil: the Lord will render to him according to his works_\u201d;\n _Rev. 2:23_\u2014\u201c_I will give unto each one of you according to your\n works_\u201d; _18:5, 6_\u2014\u201c_her sins have reached even unto heaven, and\n God hath remembered her iniquities. Render unto her even as she\n rendered, and double unto her the double according to her works:\n in the cup which she mingled, mingle unto her double._\u201d\n\n A French Christian replied to the argument of his deistical\n friend: \u201cProbably you are right; probably you are not immortal;\n but I am.\u201d This was the doctrine of conditional immortality, the\n doctrine that only the good survive. We grant that the measure of\n our faith in immortality is the measure of our _fitness_ for its\n blessings; but it is not the measure of our _possession_ of\n immortality. We are immortal beings, whether we believe it or not.\n The acorn is potentially an oak, but it may never come to its full\n development. There is a saltless salt, which, though it does not\n cease to exist, is cast out and trodden under foot of men. Denney,\n Studies in Theology, 256\u2014\u201cConditional immortality denies that man\n can exist after death without being united to Christ by faith. But\n the immortality of man cannot be something accidental, something\n appended to his nature, after he believes in Christ. It must be\n something, at the very lowest, for which his nature is\n constituted, even if apart from Christ it can never realize itself\n as it ought.\u201d\n\n Broadus, Com. on _Mat. 25:46_ (page 514)\u2014\u201cHe who caused to exist\n could keep in existence. _Mark 9:49_\u2014\u2018_Every one shall be salted\n with fire_\u2019\u2014has probably this meaning. Fire is usually\n destructive; but this unquenchable fire will act like salt,\n preserving instead of destroying. So Keble, Christian Year, 5th\n Sunday in Lent, says of the Jews in their present condition:\n \u2018Salted with fire, they seem to show How spirits lost in endless\n woe May undecaying live. Oh, sickening thought! Yet hold it fast\n Long as this glittering world shall last, Or sin at heart\n survive.\u2019 \u201d\n\n\nThere are two forms of the annihilation theory which are more plausible,\nand which in recent times find a larger number of advocates, namely:\n\n(_a_) That the powers of the wicked are gradually weakened, as the natural\nresult of sin, so that they finally cease to be.\u2014We reply, first, that\nmoral evil does not, in this present life, seem to be incompatible with a\nconstant growth of the intellectual powers, at least in certain\ndirections, and we have no reason to believe the fact to be different in\nthe world to come; secondly, that if this theory were true, the greater\nthe sin, the speedier would be the relief from punishment.\n\n\n This form of the annihilation theory is suggested by Bushnell, in\n his Forgiveness and Law, 146, 147, and by Martineau, Study,\n 2:107\u20108. Dorner also, in his Eschatology, seems to favor it as one\n of the possible methods of future punishment. He says: \u201cTo the\n ethical also pertains ontological significance. The \u2019second death\u2019\n may be the dissolving of the soul itself into nothing.\n Estrangement from God, the source of life, ends in extinction of\n life. The orthodox talk about demented beings, raging in impotent\n fury, amounts to the same\u2014annihilation of their human character.\n Evil is never the substance of the soul,\u2014this remains\n metaphysically good.\u201d It is argued that even for saved sinners\n there is a loss. The prodigal regained his father\u2019s favor, but he\n could not regain his lost patrimony. We cannot get back the lost\n time, nor the lost growth. Much more, then, in the case of the\n wicked, will there be perpetual loss. Draper: \u201cAt every return to\n the sun, comets lose a portion of their size and brightness,\n stretching out until the nucleus loses control, the mass breaks\n up, and the greater portion navigates the sky, in the shape of\n disconnected meteorites.\u201d\n\n To this argument it is often replied that certain minds grow in\n their powers, at least in certain directions, in spite of their\n sin. Napoleon\u2019s military genius, during all his early years, grew\n with experience. Sloane, in his Life of Napoleon, however, seems\n to show that the Emperor lost his grip as he went on. Success\n unbalanced his judgment; he gave way to physical indulgence; his\n body was not equal to the strain he put upon it; at Waterloo he\n lost precious moments of opportunity by vacillation and inability\n to keep awake. There was physical, mental, and moral\n deterioration. But may this not be the result of the soul\u2019s\n connection with a body? Satan\u2019s cunning and daring seem to be on\n the increase from the first mention of him in Scripture to its\n end. See Princeton Review, 1882:673\u2010694. Will not this very\n cunning and daring, however, work its own ruin, and lead Satan to\n his final and complete destruction? Does not sin blunt the\n intellect, unsettle one\u2019s sober standards of decision, lead one to\n prefer a trifling present triumph or pleasure to a permanent good?\n\n Gladden, What is Left? 104, 105\u2014\u201cEvil is benumbing and deadening.\n Selfishness weakens a man\u2019s mental grasp, and narrows his range of\n vision. The schemer becomes less astute as he grows older; he is\n morally sure, before he dies, to make some stupendous blunder\n which even a tyro would have avoided.... The devil, who has sinned\n longest, must be the greatest fool in the universe, and we need\n not be at all afraid of him.\u201d To the view that this weakening of\n powers leads to absolute extinction of being, we oppose the\n consideration that its award of retribution is glaringly unjust in\n making the greatest sinner the least sufferer; since to him\n relief, in the way of annihilation, comes the soonest.\n\n\n(_b_) That there is for the wicked, certainly after death, and possibly\nbetween death and the judgment, a positive punishment proportioned to\ntheir deeds, but that this punishment issues in, or is followed by,\nannihilation.\u2014We reply first, that upon this view, as upon any theory of\nannihilation, future punishment is a matter of grace as well as of\njustice\u2014a notion for which Scripture affords no warrant; secondly, that\nScripture not only gives no hint of the cessation of this punishment, but\ndeclares in the strongest terms its endlessness.\n\n\n The second form of the annihilation theory seems to have been held\n by Justin Martyr (Trypho, Edinb. transl.)\u2014\u201cSome, who have appeared\n worthy of God, never die; but others are punished so long as God\n wills them to exist and be punished.\u201d The soul exists because God\n wills, and no longer than he wills. \u201cWhenever it is necessary that\n the soul should cease to exist, the spirit of life is removed from\n it, and there is no more soul, but it goes back to the place from\n which it was taken.\u201d\n\n Schaff, Hist. Christ. Church, 2:608, 609\u2014\u201cJustin Martyr teaches\n that the wicked or hopelessly impenitent will be raised at the\n judgment to receive an eternal punishment. He speaks of it in\n twelve passages: \u2018We believe that all who live wickedly and do not\n repent will be punished in eternal fire.\u2019 Such language is\n inconsistent with the annihilation theory for which Justin Martyr\n has been claimed. He does indeed reject the idea of the\n independent immortality of the soul, and hints at the _possible_\n final destruction of the wicked; but he puts that possibility\n countless ages beyond the final judgment, so that it loses all\n practical significance.\u201d\n\n A modern advocate of this view is White, in his Life in Christ. He\n favors a conditional immortality, belonging only to those who are\n joined to Christ by faith; but he makes a retributive punishment\n and pain fall upon the godless, before their annihilation. The\n roots of this view lie in a false conception of holiness as a form\n or manifestation of benevolence, and of punishment as deterrent\n and preventive instead of vindicative of righteousness. To the\n minds of its advocates, extinction of being is a comparative\n blessing; and they, for this reason, prefer it to the common view.\n See Whiton, Is Eternal Punishment Endless?\n\n A view similar to that which we are opposing is found in Henry\n Drummond, Natural Law in the Spiritual World. Evil is punished by\n its own increase. Drummond, however, leaves no room for future\n life or for future judgment in the case of the unregenerate. See\n reviews of Drummond, in Watts, New Apologetic, 332; and in Murphy,\n Nat. Selection and Spir. Freedom, 19\u201021, 77\u2010124. While Drummond is\n an annihilationist, Murphy is a restorationist. More rational and\n Scriptural than either of these is the saying of Tower: \u201cSin is\n God\u2019s foe. He does not annihilate it, but he makes it the means of\n displaying his holiness; as the Romans did not slay their captured\n enemies, but made them their servants.\u201d The terms \u03b1\u1f30\u03ce\u03bd and\n \u03b1\u1f30\u03ce\u03bd\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2, which we have still to consider, afford additional\n Scripture testimony against annihilation. See also the argument\n from the divine justice, pages 1046\u20101051; article on the Doctrine\n of Extinction, in New Englander, March, 1879:201\u2010224; Hovey,\n Manual of Theology and Ethics, 153\u2010168; J. S. Barlow, Endless\n Being; W. H. Robinson, on Conditional Immortality, in Report of\n Baptist Congress for 1886.\n\n\nSince neither one of these two forms of the annihilation theory is\nScriptural or rational, we avail ourselves of the evolutionary hypothesis\nas throwing light upon the problem. Death is not degeneracy ending in\nextinction, nor punishment ending in extinction,\u2014it is atavism that\nreturns, or tends to return, to the animal type. As moral development is\nfrom the brute to man, so abnormal development is from man to the brute.\n\n\n Lord Byron: \u201cAll suffering doth destroy, or is destroyed.\u201d This is\n true, not of man\u2019s being, but of his well being. Ribot, Diseases\n of the Will, 115\u2014\u201cDissolution pursues a regressive course from the\n more voluntary and more complex to the less voluntary and more\n simple, that is to say, toward the automatic. One of the first\n signs of mental impairment is incapacity for sustained attention.\n Unity, stability, power, have ceased, and the end is extinction of\n the will.\u201d We prefer to say, loss of the freedom of the will. On\n the principle of evolution, abuse of freedom may result in\n reversion to the brute, annihilation not of existence but of\n higher manhood, punishment from within rather than from without,\n eternal penalty in the shape of eternal loss. _Mat. 24:13_\u2014\u201c_he\n that endureth to the end, the same shall be saved_\u201d\u2014has for its\n parallel passage _Luke 21:19_\u2014\u201c_In your patience ye shall win your\n souls,_\u201d _i. e._, shall by free will get possession of your own\n being. Losing one\u2019s soul is just the opposite, namely, losing\n one\u2019s free will, by disuse renouncing freedom, becoming a victim\n of habit, nature, circumstance, and this is the cutting off and\n annihilation of true manhood. \u201cTo be in hell is to drift; to be in\n heaven is to steer\u201d (Bernard Shaw).\n\n In _John 15:2_ Christ says of all men\u2014the natural branches of the\n vine\u2014\u201c_Every branch in me that beareth not fruit, he taketh it\n away_\u201d; _Ps. 49:20_\u2014\u201c_Man that is in honor, and understandeth not,\n Is like the beasts that perish_\u201d; _Rev. 22:15_\u2014\u201c_Without are the\n dogs._\u201d In heathen fable men were turned into beasts, and even\n into trees. The story of Circe is a parable of human fate,\u2014men may\n become apes, tigers, or swine. They may lose their higher powers\n of consciousness and will. By perpetual degradation they may\n suffer eternal punishment. All life that is worthy of the name may\n cease, while still existence of a low animal type is prolonged. We\n see precisely these results of sin in this world. We have reason\n to believe that the same laws of development will operate in the\n world to come.\n\n McConnell, Evolution of Immortality, 85\u201095, 99, 124,\n 180\u2014\u201cImmortality, or survival after death, depends upon man\u2019s\n freeing himself from the law which sweeps away the many, and\n becoming an individual (indivisible) that is fit to survive. The\n individual must become stronger than the species. By using will\n aright, he lays hold of the infinite Life, and becomes one who,\n like Christ, has \u2018_life in himself_\u2019 (_John 5:26_). Gravitation\n and chemical affinity had their way in the universe until they\n were arrested and turned about in the interest of life.\n Overproduction, death, and the survival of the fittest, had their\n ruthless sway until they were reversed in the interest of\n affection. The supremacy of the race at the expense of the\n individual we may expect to continue until something in the\n individual comes to be of more importance than that law, and no\n longer.... Goodness can arrest and turn back for nations the\n primal law of growth, vigor, and decline. Is it too much to\n believe that it may do the same for an individual man?... Life is\n a thing to be achieved. At every step there are a thousand\n candidates who fail, for one that attains.... Until moral\n sensibility becomes self\u2010conscious, all question of personal\n immortality becomes irrelevant, because there is, accurately\n speaking, no personality to be immortal. Up to that point the\n individual living creature, whether in human form or not, falls\n short of that essential personality for which eternal life can\n have any meaning.\u201d But how about children who never come to moral\n consciousness? McConnell appeals to heredity. The child of one who\n has himself achieved immortality may also prove to be immortal.\n But is there no chance for the children of sinners? The doctrine\n of McConnell leans toward the true solution, but it is vitiated by\n the belief that individuality is a transient gift which only\n goodness can make permanent. We hold on the other hand that this\n gift of God is \u201c_without repentance_\u201d (_Rom. 11:29_), and that no\n human being can lose life, except in the sense of losing all that\n makes life desirable.\n\n\nB. Punishment after death excludes new probation and ultimate restoration\nof the wicked.\n\n\nSome have maintained the ultimate restoration of all human beings, by\nappeal to such passages as the following: Mat. 19:28; Acts 3:21; Eph. 1:9,\n10.\n\n\n _Mat. 19:28_\u2014\u201c_in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit\n on the throne of his glory_\u201d; _Acts 3:21_\u2014Jesus, \u201c_whom the heaven\n must receive until the times of restoration of all things_\u201d; _1\n Cor. 15:26_\u2014\u201c_The last enemy that shall be abolished is death_\u201d;\n _Eph. 1:9, 10_\u2014\u201c_according to his good pleasure which he purposed\n in him unto a dispensation of the fulness of the times, to sum up\n all things in Christ, the things in the heavens, and the things\n upon the earth_\u201d; _Phil. 2:10, 11_\u2014\u201c_that in the name of Jesus\n every knee should bow, of things in heaven and things on earth and\n things under the earth, and that every tongue should confess that\n Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father_\u201d; _2 Pet.\n 3:9, 13_\u2014\u201c_not wishing that any should perish, but that all should\n come to repentance ... But, according to his promise, we look for\n new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness._\u201d\n\n Robert Browning: \u201cThat God, by God\u2019s own ways occult, May\u2014doth, I\n will believe\u2014bring back All wanderers to a single track.\u201d B. W.\n Lockhart: \u201cI must believe that evil is essentially transient and\n mortal, or alter my predicates of God. And I must believe in the\n ultimate extinction of that personality whom the power of God\n cannot sometime win to goodness. The only alternative is the\n termination of a wicked life either through redemption or through\n extinction.\u201d Mulford, Republic of God, claims that the soul\u2019s\n state cannot be fixed by any event, such as death, outside of\n itself. If it could, the soul would exist, not under a moral\n government, but under fate, and God himself would be only another\n name for fate. The soul carries its fate, under God, in its power\n of choice; and who dares to say that this power to choose the good\n ceases at death?\n\n For advocacy of a second probation for those who have not\n consciously rejected Christ in this life, see Newman Smyth\u2019s\n edition of Dorner\u2019s Eschatology. For the theory of restoration,\n see Farrar, Eternal Hope; Birks, Victory of Divine Goodness;\n Jukes, Restitution of All Things; Delitzsch, Bib. Psychologie,\n 469\u2010476; Robert Browning, Apparent Failure; Tennyson, In Memoriam,\n \u00a7 liv. _Per contra_, see Hovey, Bib. Eschatology, 95\u2010144. See\n also, Griffith\u2010Jones, Ascent through Christ, 406\u2010440.\n\n\n(_a_) These passages, as obscure, are to be interpreted in the light of\nthose plainer ones which we have already cited. Thus interpreted, they\nforetell only the absolute triumph of the divine kingdom, and the\nsubjection of all evil to God.\n\n\n The true interpretation of the passages above mentioned is\n indicated in Meyer\u2019s note on _Eph. 1:9, 10_\u2014this namely, that \u201cthe\n allusion is not to the restoration of _fallen individuals_, but to\n the restoration of _universal harmony_, implying that the wicked\n are to be excluded from the kingdom of God.\u201d That there is no\n allusion to a probation after this life, is clear from _Luke\n 16:19\u201031_\u2014the parable of the rich man and Lazarus. Here penalty is\n inflicted for the sins done \u201c_in thy lifetime_\u201d (_v. 25_); this\n penalty is unchangeable\u2014\u201c_there is a great gulf fixed_\u201d (_v. 26_);\n the rich man asks favors for his brethren who still live on the\n earth, but none for himself (_v. 27, 28_). _John 5:25\u201029_\u2014\u201c_The\n hour cometh, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the\n Son of God; and they that hear shall live. For as the Father hath\n life in himself, even so gave he to the Son also to have life in\n himself: and he gave him authority to execute judgment, because he\n is a son of man. Marvel not at this: for the hour cometh, in which\n all that are in the tombs shall hear his voice, and shall come\n forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life;\n and they that have done evil, until the resurrection of\n judgment_\u201d\u2014here it is declared that, while for those who have done\n good there is a resurrection of life, there is for those who have\n done ill only a resurrection of judgment. _John 8:21, 24_\u2014\u201c_shall\n die in your sin: whither I go, ye cannot come ... except ye\n believe that I am he, ye shall die in your sins_\u201d\u2014sayings which\n indicate finality in the decisions of this life.\n\n Orr, Christian View of God and the World, 243\u2014\u201cScripture\n invariably represents the judgment as proceeding on the data of\n this life, and it concentrates every ray of appeal into the\n present.\u201d _John 9:4_\u2014\u201c_We must work the works of him that sent me,\n while it is day: the night cometh __ when no man can\n work_\u201d\u2014intimates that there is no opportunity to secure salvation\n after death. The Christian hymn writer has caught the meaning of\n Scripture, when he says of those who have passed through the gate\n of death: \u201cFixed in an eternal state, They have done with all\n below; We a little longer wait; But how little, none can know.\u201d\n\n\n(_b_) A second probation is not needed to vindicate the justice or the\nlove of God, since Christ, the immanent God, is already in this world\npresent with every human soul, quickening the conscience, giving to each\nman his opportunity, and making every decision between right and wrong a\ntrue probation. In choosing evil against their better judgment even the\nheathen unconsciously reject Christ. Infants and idiots, as they have not\nconsciously sinned, are, as we may believe, saved at death by having\nChrist revealed to them and by the regenerating influence of his Spirit.\n\n\n _Rom. 1:18\u201028_\u2014there is probation under the light of nature as\n well as under the gospel, and under the law of nature as well as\n under the gospel men may be given up \u201c_unto a reprobate mind_\u201d;\n _2:6\u201016_\u2014Gentiles shall be judged, not by the gospel, but by the\n law of nature, and shall \u201c_perish without the law ... in the day\n when God shall judge the secrets of men._\u201d _2 Cor. 5:10_\u2014\u201c_For we\n must all be made manifest before the judgment\u2010seat of Christ_;\n [not that each may have a new opportunity to secure salvation,\n but] _that each one may receive the things done in the body,\n according to what he hath done, whether it be good or bad_\u201d; _Heb.\n 6:8_\u2014\u201c_whose end is to be burned_\u201d\u2014not to be quickened again;\n _9:27_\u2014\u201c_And inasmuch as it is appointed unto men once to die, and\n after this cometh_ [not a second probation, but] _judgment._\u201d\n Luckock, Intermediate State, 22\u2014\u201cIn _Heb. 9:27_, the word\n \u2018_judgment_\u2019 has no article. The judgment alluded to is not the\n final or general judgment, but only that by which the place of the\n soul is determined in the Intermediate State.\u201d\n\n Denney, Studies in Theology, 243\u2014\u201cIn _Mat. 25_, our Lord gives a\n pictorial representation of the judgment of the heathen. All\n nations\u2014all the Gentiles\u2014are gathered before the King; and their\n destiny is determined, not by their conscious acceptance or\n rejection of the historical Savior, but by their unconscious\n acceptance or rejection of him in the persons of those who needed\n services of love.... This does not square with the idea of a\n future probation. It rather tells us plainly that men may do\n things of final and decisive import in this life, even if Christ\n is unknown to them.... The real argument against future probation\n is that it depreciates the present life, and denies the infinite\n significance that, under all conditions, essentially and\n inevitably belongs to the actions of a self\u2010conscious moral being.\n A type of will may be in process of formation, even in a heathen\n man, on which eternal issues depend.... Second probation lowers\n the moral tone of the spirit. The present life acquires a relative\n unimportance. I dare not say that if I forfeit the opportunity the\n present life gives me I shall ever have another, and therefore I\n dare not say so to another man.\u201d\n\n For an able review of the Scripture testimony against a second\n probation, see G. F. Wright, Relation of Death to Probation, iv.\n Emerson, the most recent advocate of restorationism, in his\n Doctrine of Probation Examined, 42, is able to evade these latter\n passages only by assuming that they are to be spiritually\n interpreted, and that there is to be no literal outward day of\n judgment\u2014an error which we have previously discussed and\n refuted,\u2014see pages 1024, 1025.\n\n\n(_c_) The advocates of universal restoration are commonly the most\nstrenuous defenders of the inalienable freedom of the human will to make\nchoices contrary to its past character and to all the motives which are or\ncan be brought to bear upon it. As a matter of fact, we find in this world\nthat men choose sin in spite of infinite motives to the contrary. Upon the\ntheory of human freedom just mentioned, no motives which God can use will\ncertainly accomplish the salvation of all moral creatures. The soul which\nresists Christ here may resist him forever.\n\n\n Emerson, in the book just referred to, says: \u201cThe truth that sin\n is in its permanent essence a free choice, however for a time it\n may be held in mechanical combination with the notion of moral\n opportunity arbitrarily closed, can never mingle with it, and must\n in the logical outcome permanently cast it off. Scripture presumes\n and teaches the constant capability of souls to obey as well as to\n be disobedient.\u201d Emerson is correct. If the doctrine of the\n unlimited ability of the human will be a true one, then\n restoration in the future world is possible. Clement and Origen\n founded on this theory of will their denial of future punishment.\n If will be essentially the power of contrary choice, and if will\n may act independently of all character and motive, there can be no\n objective certainty that the lost will remain sinful. In short,\n there can be no finality, even to God\u2019s allotments, nor is any\n _last_ judgment possible. Upon this view, regeneration and\n conversion are as possible at any time in the future as they are\n to\u2010day.\n\n But those who hold to this defective philosophy of the will should\n remember that unlimited freedom is unlimited freedom to sin, as\n well as unlimited freedom to turn to God. If restoration is\n possible, endless persistence in evil is possible also; and this\n last the Scripture predicts. Whittier: \u201cWhat if thine eye refuse\n to see, Thine ear of heaven\u2019s free welcome fail, And thou a\n willing captive be, Thyself thine own dark jail?\u201d Swedenborg says\n that the man who obstinately refuses the inheritance of the sons\n of God is allowed the pleasures of the beast, and enjoys in his\n own low way the hell to which he has confined himself. Every\n occupant of hell prefers it to heaven. Dante, Hell, iv\u2014\u201cAll here\n together come from every clime, And to o\u2019erpass the river are not\n loth, For so heaven\u2019s justice goads them on, that fear Is turned\n into desire. Hence never passed good spirit.\u201d The lost are\n _Heautoutimoroumenoi_, or self\u2010tormentors, to adopt the title of\n Terence\u2019s play. See Whedon, in Meth. Quar. Rev., Jan. 1884;\n Robbins, in Bib. Sac., 1881:460\u2010507.\n\n Denney, Studies in Theology, 255\u2014\u201cThe very conception of human\n freedom involves the possibility of its permanent misuse, or of\n what our Lord himself calls \u2018_eternal sin_\u2019 (_Mark 3:29_).\u201d Shedd,\n Dogm. Theology, 2:699\u2014\u201cOrigen\u2019s restorationism grew naturally out\n of his view of human liberty\u201d\u2014the liberty of indifference\u2014\u201cendless\n alternations of falls and recoveries, of hells and heavens; so\n that practically he taught nothing but a hell.\u201d J. C. Adams, The\n Leisure of God: \u201cIt is lame logic to maintain the inviolable\n freedom of the will, and at the same time insist that God can,\n through his ample power, through protracted punishment, bring the\n soul into a disposition which it does not wish to feel. There is\n no compulsory holiness possible. In our Civil War there was some\n talk of \u2018compelling men to volunteer,\u2019 but the idea was soon seen\n to involve a self\u2010contradiction.\u201d\n\n\n(_d_) Upon the more correct view of the will which we have advocated, the\ncase is more hopeless still. Upon this view, the sinful soul, in its very\nsinning, gives to itself a sinful bent of intellect, affection, and will;\nin other words, makes for itself a character, which, though it does not\nrender necessary, yet does render certain, apart from divine grace, the\ncontinuance of sinful action. In itself it finds a self\u2010formed motive to\nevil strong enough to prevail over all inducements to holiness which God\nsees it wise to bring to bear. It is in the next world, indeed, subjected\nto suffering. But suffering has in itself no reforming power. Unless\naccompanied by special renewing influences of the Holy Spirit, it only\nhardens and embitters the soul. We have no Scripture evidence that such\ninfluences of the Spirit are exerted, after death, upon the still\nimpenitent; but abundant evidence, on the contrary, that the moral\ncondition in which death finds men is their condition forever.\n\n\n See Bushnell\u2019s \u201cOne Trial Better than Many,\u201d in Sermons on Living\n Subjects; also see his Forgiveness and Law, 146, 147. Bushnell\n argues that God would give us fifty trials, if that would do us\n good. But there is no possibility of such result. The first\n decision adverse to God renders it more difficult to make a right\n decision upon the next opportunity. Character tends to fixity, and\n each new opportunity may only harden the heart and increase its\n guilt and condemnation. We should have no better chance of\n salvation if our lives were lengthened to the term of the sinners\n before the flood. Mere suffering does not convert the soul; see\n Martineau, Study, 2:100. A life of pain did not make Blanco White\n a believer; see Mozley, Hist. and Theol. Essays, vol. 2, essay 1.\n\n Edward A. Lawrence, Does Everlasting Punishment Last Forever?\u2014\u201cIf\n the deeds of the law do not justify here, how can the penalties of\n the law hereafter? The pain from a broken limb does nothing to\n mend the break, and the suffering from disease does nothing to\n cure it. Penalty pays no debts,\u2014it only shows the outstanding and\n unsettled accounts.\u201d If the will does not act without motive, then\n it is certain that without motives men will never repent. To an\n impenitent and rebellious sinner the motive must come, not from\n within, but from without. Such motives God presents by his Spirit\n in this life; but when this life ends and God\u2019s Spirit is\n withdrawn, no motives to repentance will be presented. The soul\u2019s\n dislike for God will issue only in complaint and resistance.\n Shakespeare, Hamlet, 3:4\u2014\u201cTry what repentance can? what can it\n not? Yet what can it, when one cannot repent?\u201d Marlowe, Faustus:\n \u201cHell hath no limits, nor is circumscribed In one self place; for\n where we are is hell, And where hell is, there we must ever be.\u201d\n\n The pressure of the atmosphere without is counteracted by the\n resistance of the atmosphere within the body. So God\u2019s life within\n is the only thing that can enable us to bear God\u2019s afflictive\n dispensations without. Without God\u2019s Spirit to inspire repentance\n the wicked man in this world never feels sorrow for his deeds,\n except as he realizes their evil consequences. Physical anguish\n and punishment inspire hatred, not of sin, but of the effects of\n sin. The remorse of Judas induced confession, but not true\n repentance. So in the next world punishment will secure\n recognition of God and of his justice, on the part of the\n transgressor, but it will not regenerate or save. The penalties of\n the future life will be no more effectual to reform the sinner\n than were the invitations of Christ and the strivings of the Holy\n Spirit in the present life. The transientness of good resolves\n which are forced out of us by suffering is illustrated by the old\n couplet: \u201cThe devil was sick,\u2014the devil a monk would be; The devil\n got well,\u2014the devil a monk was he.\u201d\n\n Charles G. Sewall: \u201cPaul Lester Ford, the novelist, was murdered\n by his brother Malcolm, because the father of the two brothers had\n disinherited the one who committed the crime. Has God the right to\n disinherit any one of his children? We answer that God disinherits\n no one. Each man decides for himself whether he will accept the\n inheritance. It is a matter of character. A father cannot give his\n son an education. The son may play truant and throw away his\n opportunity. The prodigal son disinherited himself. Heaven is not\n a place,\u2014it is a way of living, a condition of being. If you have\n a musical ear, I will admit you to a lovely concert. If you have\n not a musical ear, I may give you a reserved seat and you will\n hear no melody. Some men fail of salvation because they have no\n taste for it and will not have it.\u201d\n\n The laws of God\u2019s universe are closing in upon the impenitent\n sinner, as the iron walls of the medi\u00e6val prison closed in night\n by night upon the victim,\u2014each morning there was one window less,\n and the dungeon came to be a coffin. In Jean Ingelow\u2019s poem\n \u201cDivided,\u201d two friends, parted by a little rivulet across which\n they could clasp hands, walk on in the direction in which the\n stream is flowing, till the rivulet becomes a brook, and the brook\n a river, and the river an arm of the sea across which no voice can\n be heard and there is no passing. By constant neglect to use our\n opportunity, we lose the power to cross from sin to righteousness,\n until between the soul and God \u201c_there is a great gulf fixed_\u201d\n (_Luke 16:26_).\n\n John G. Whittier wrote within a twelvemonth of his death: \u201cI do\n believe that we take with us into the next world the same freedom\n of will we have here, and that _there_, as _here_, he that turns\n to the Lord will find mercy; that God never ceases to follow his\n creatures with love, and is always ready to hear the prayer of the\n penitent. But I also believe that _now_ is the accepted time, and\n that he who dallies with sin may find the chains of evil habit too\n strong to break in this world or the other.\u201d And the following is\n the Quaker poet\u2019s verse: \u201cThough God be good and free be heaven,\n Not force divine can love compel; And though the song of sins\n forgiven Might sound through lowest hell, The sweet persuasion of\n his voice Respects the sanctity of will. He giveth day; thou hast\n thy choice To walk in darkness still.\u201d\n\n Longfellow, Masque of Pandora: \u201cNever by lapse of time The soul\n defaced by crime Into its former self returns again; For every\n guilty deed Holds in itself the seed Of retribution and undying\n pain. Never shall be the loss Restored, till Helios Hath purified\n them with his heavenly fires; Then what was lost is won, And the\n new life begun, Kindled with nobler passions and desires.\u201d Seth,\n Freedom as Ethical Postulate, 42\u2014\u201cFaust\u2019s selling his soul to\n Mephistopheles, and signing the contract with his life\u2019s blood, is\n no single transaction, done deliberately, on one occasion; rather,\n that is the lurid meaning of a life which consists of innumerable\n individual acts,\u2014the life of evil means that.\u201d See John Caird,\n Fundamental Ideas of Christianity, 2:88; Crane, Religion of To\u2010\n morrow, 315.\n\n\n(_e_) The declaration as to Judas, in Mat. 26:24, could not be true upon\nthe hypothesis of a final restoration. If at any time, even after the\nlapse of ages, Judas be redeemed, his subsequent infinite duration of\nblessedness must outweigh all the finite suffering through which he has\npassed. The Scripture statement that \u201cgood were it for that man if he had\nnot been born\u201d must be regarded as a refutation of the theory of universal\nrestoration.\n\n\n _Mat. 26:24_\u2014\u201c_The Son of man goeth, even as it is written of him:\n but woe unto that man through whom the Son of man is betrayed!\n good were it for that man if he had not been born._\u201d G. F. Wright,\n Relation of Death to Probation: \u201cAs Christ of old healed only\n those who came or were brought to him, so now he waits for the\n co\u00f6peration of human agency. God has limited himself to an orderly\n method in human salvation. The consuming missionary zeal of the\n apostles and the early church shows that they believed the\n decisions of this life to be final decisions. The early church not\n only thought the heathen world would perish without the gospel,\n but they found a conscience in the heathen answering to this\n belief. The solicitude drawn out by this responsibility for our\n fellows may be one means of securing the moral stability of the\n future. What is bound on earth is bound in heaven; else why not\n pray for the wicked dead?\u201d It is certainly a remarkable fact, if\n this theory be true, that we have in Scripture not a single\n instance of prayer for the dead.\n\n The apocryphal 2 Maccabees 12:39 _sq._ gives an instance of Jewish\n prayer for the dead. Certain who were slain had concealed under\n their coats things consecrated to idols. Judas and his host\n therefore prayed that this sin might be forgiven to the slain, and\n they contributed 2,000 drachmas of silver to send a sin offering\n for them to Jerusalem. So modern Jews pray for the dead; see\n Luckock, After Death, 54\u201066\u2014an argument for such prayer. John\n Wesley, Works, 9:55, maintains the legality of prayer for the\n dead. Still it is true that we have no instance of such prayer in\n canonical Scriptures. _Ps. 132:1_\u2014\u201c_Jehovah, remember for David\n All his affliction_\u201d\u2014is not a prayer for the dead, but signifies:\n \u201c_Remember for David_\u201d, so as to fulfil thy promise to him, \u201c_all\n his anxious cares_\u201d\u2014with regard to the building of the temple; the\n psalm having been composed, in all probability, for the temple\n dedication. Paul prays that God will \u201c_grant mercy to the house of\n Onesiphorus_\u201d (_2 Tim. 1:16_), from which it has been\n unwarrantably inferred that Onesiphorus was dead at the time of\n the apostle\u2019s writing; but Paul\u2019s further prayer in _verse\n 18_\u2014\u201c_the Lord grant unto him to find mercy of the Lord in that\n day_\u201d\u2014seems rather to point to the death of Onesiphorus as yet in\n the future.\n\n Shedd, Dogm. Theology, 2:715 note\u2014\u201cMany of the arguments\n constructed against the doctrine of endless punishment proceed\n upon the supposition that original sin, or man\u2019s evil inclination,\n is the work of God: that because man is _born_ in sin (_Ps.\n 51:5_), he was _created_ in sin. All the strength and plausibility\n of John Foster\u2019s celebrated letter lies in the assumption that the\n moral corruption and impotence of the sinner, whereby it is\n impossible to save himself from eternal death, is not self\u2010\n originated and self\u2010determined, but infused by his Maker. \u2018If,\u2019\n says he, \u2018the very nature of man, as _created_ by the Sovereign\n Power, be in such desperate disorder that there is no possibility\n of conversion or salvation except in instances where that Power\n interposes with a special and redeeming efficacy, how can we\n conceive that the main portion of the race, thus morally impotent\n (that is, really and absolutely impotent), will be eternally\n punished for the inevitable result of this moral impotence?\u2019 If\n this assumption of concreated depravity and impotence is correct,\n Foster\u2019s objection to eternal retribution is conclusive and\n fatal.... Endless punishment supposes the freedom of the human\n will, and is impossible without it. Self\u2010determination runs\n parallel with hell.\u201d\n\n The theory of a second probation, as recently advocated, is not\n only a logical result of that defective view of the will already\n mentioned, but it is also in part a consequence of denying the old\n orthodox and Pauline doctrine of the organic unity of the race in\n Adam\u2019s first transgression. New School Theology has been inclined\n to deride the notion of a fair probation of humanity in our first\n father, and of a common sin and guilt of mankind in him. It cannot\n find what it regards as a fair probation for each individual since\n that first sin; and the conclusion is easy that there must be such\n a fair probation for each individual in the world to come. But we\n may advise those who take this view to return to the old theology.\n Grant a fair probation for the whole race already passed, and the\n condition of mankind is no longer that of mere unfortunates\n unjustly circumstanced, but rather that of beings guilty and\n condemned, to whom present opportunity, and even present\n existence, is a matter of pure grace,\u2014much more the general\n provision of a salvation, and the offer of it to any human soul.\n This world is already a place of second probation; and since the\n second probation is due wholly to God\u2019s mercy, no probation after\n death is needed to vindicate either the justice or the goodness of\n God. See Kellogg, in Presb. Rev., April, 1885:226\u2010256; Cremer,\n Beyond the Grave, preface by A. A. Hodge, xxxvi _sq._; E. D.\n Morris, Is There Salvation After Death? A. H. Strong, on The New\n Theology, in Bap. Quar. Rev., Jan. 1888,\u2014reprinted in Philosophy\n and Religion, 164\u2010179.\n\n\nC. Scripture declares this future punishment of the wicked to be eternal.\n\n\nIt does this by its use of the terms \u03b1\u1f30\u03ce\u03bd, \u03b1\u1f30\u03ce\u03bd\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2.\u2014Some, however,\nmaintain that these terms do not necessarily imply eternal duration. We\nreply:\n\n(_a_) It must be conceded that these words do not _etymologically_\nnecessitate the idea of eternity; and that, as expressing the idea of\n\u201cage\u2010long,\u201d they are sometimes used in a limited or rhetorical sense.\n\n\n _2 Tim. 1:9_\u2014\u201c_his own purpose and grace, which was given us in\n Christ Jesus before times eternal_\u201d\u2014but the past duration of the\n world is limited; _Heb. 9:26_\u2014\u201c_now once at the end of the ages\n hath he been manifested_\u201d\u2014here the \u03b1\u1f30\u1ff6\u03bd\u03b5\u03c2 have an end; _Tit.\n 1:2_\u2014\u201c_eternal life ... promised before times eternal_\u201d; but here\n there may be a reference to the eternal covenant of the Father\n with the Son; _Jer. 31:3_\u2014\u201c_I have loved thee with an everlasting\n love_\u201d = a love which antedated time; _Rom. 16:25, 26_\u2014\u201c_the\n mystery which hath been kept in silence through times eternal ...\n according to the commandment of the eternal God_\u201d\u2014here \u201c_eternal_\u201d\n is used in the same verse in two senses. It is argued that in\n _Mat. 25:46_\u2014\u201c_these shall go away into eternal punishment_\u201d\u2014the\n word \u201c_eternal_\u201d may be used in the narrower sense.\n\n Arthur Chambers, Our Life after Death, 222\u2010236\u2014\u201cIn _Mat.\n 13:39_\u2014\u2018_the harvest is the end of the_ \u03b1\u1f30\u03ce\u03bd,\u2019 and in _2 Tim.\n 4:10_\u2014\u2018_Demas forsook me, having loved this present_ \u03b1\u1f30\u03ce\u03bd\u2019\u2014the\n word \u03b1\u1f30\u03ce\u03bd clearly implies limitation of time. Why not take the\n word \u03b1\u1f30\u03ce\u03bd in this sense in _Mark 3:29_\u2014\u2018_hath never forgiveness,\n but is guilty of an eternal sin_\u2019? We must not translate \u03b1\u1f30\u03ce\u03bd by\n \u2018_world_,\u2019 and so express limitation, while we translate \u03b1\u1f30\u03ce\u03bd\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2\n by \u2018_eternal_,\u2019 and so express endlessness which excludes\n limitation; _cf._ _Gen. 13:15_\u2014\u2018_all the land which thou seest, to\n thee will I give it, and to thy seed forever_\u2019; _Num. 25:13_\u2014\u2018_it\n shall be unto him_ [Phinehas], _and to his seed after him, the\n covenant of an everlasting priesthood_\u2019; _Josh. 24:2_\u2014\u2018_your\n fathers dwelt of old time_ [from eternity] _beyond the River_\u2019;\n _Deut. 23:3_\u2014\u2018_An Ammonite or a Moabite shall not enter ... into\n the assembly of Jehovah for ever_\u2019; _Ps. 24:7, 8_\u2014\u2018_be ye lifted\n up, ye everlasting doors._\u2019 \u201d\n\n\n(b) They do, however, express the longest possible duration of which the\nsubject to which they are attributed is capable; so that, if the soul is\nimmortal, its punishment must be without end.\n\n\n _Gen. 49:26_\u2014\u201c_the everlasting hills_\u201d; _17:8, 13_\u2014\u201c_I will give\n unto thee ... all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting\n possession ... my covenant_ [of circumcision] _shall be in your\n flesh for an everlasting covenant_\u201d; _Ex. 21:6_\u2014\u201c_he_ [the slave]\n _shall serve him_ [his master] _for ever_\u201d; _2 Chron. 6:2_\u2014\u201c_But I\n have built thee an house of habitation, and a place for thee to\n dwell in for ever_\u201d\u2014of the temple at Jerusalem; _Jude 6,\n 7_\u2014\u201c_angels ... he hath kept in everlasting bonds under darkness\n unto the judgment of the great day. Even as Sodom and Gomorrah ...\n are set forth as an example, suffering the punishment of eternal\n fire_\u201d\u2014here in _Jude 6_, bonds which endure only to the judgment\n day are called \u1f00\u03ca\u03b4\u03af\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 (the same word which is used in _Rom.\n 1:20_\u2014\u201c_his everlasting power and divinity_\u201d), and fire which\n lasts only till Sodom and Gomorrah are consumed is called \u03b1\u1f30\u03c9\u03bd\u03af\u03bf\u03bd.\n Shedd, Dogm. Theology, 2:687\u2014\u201cTo hold land forever is to hold it\n as long as grass grows and water runs, _i. e._, as long as this\n world or \u00e6on endures.\u201d\n\n In all the passages cited above, the condition denoted by \u03b1\u1f30\u03ce\u03bd\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2\n lasts as long as the object endures of which it is predicated. But\n we have seen (pages 982\u2010998) that physical death is not the end of\n man\u2019s existence, and that the soul, made in the image of God, is\n immortal. A punishment, therefore, that lasts as long as the soul,\n must be an everlasting punishment. Another interpretation of the\n passages in Jude is, however, entirely possible. It is maintained\n by many that the \u201c_everlasting bonds_\u201d of the fallen angels do not\n cease at the judgment, and that Sodom and Gomorrah suffer \u201c_the\n punishment __ of eternal fire_\u201d in the sense that their\n condemnation at the judgment will be a continuation of that begun\n in the time of Lot (see _Mat. 10:15_\u2014\u201c_It shall be more tolerable\n for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah in the day of judgment, than\n for that city_\u201d).\n\n\n(_c_) If, when used to describe the future punishment of the wicked, they\ndo not declare the endlessness of that punishment, there are no words in\nthe Greek language which could express that meaning.\n\n\n C. F. Wright, Relation of Death to Probation: \u201cThe Bible writers\n speak of eternity in terms of time, and make the impression more\n vivid by reduplicating the longest time\u2010words they had [_e. g._,\n \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f30\u1ff6\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b1\u1f30\u03ce\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd = \u2018unto the ages of the ages\u2019]. Plato\n contrasts \u03c7\u03c1\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 and \u03b1\u1f30\u03ce\u03bd, as we do time and eternity, and\n Aristotle says that eternity [\u03b1\u1f30\u03ce\u03bd] belongs to God.... The\n Scriptures have taught the doctrine of eternal punishment as\n clearly as their general style allows.\u201d The destiny of lost men is\n bound up with the destiny of evil angels in _Mat. 25:41_\u2014\u201c_Depart\n from me, ye cursed, into the eternal fire which is prepared for\n the devil and his angels._\u201d If the latter are hopelessly lost,\n then the former are hopelessly lost also.\n\n\n(_d_) In the great majority of Scripture passages where they occur, they\nhave unmistakably the signification \u201ceverlasting.\u201d They are used to\nexpress the eternal duration of God, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit\n(Rom. 16:26; 1 Tim. 1:17; Heb. 9:14; Rev. 1:18); the abiding presence of\nthe Holy Spirit with all true believers (John 14:17); and the endlessness\nof the future happiness of the saints (Mat. 19:29; John 6:54, 58; 2 Cor.\n9:9).\n\n\n _Rom. 16:26_\u2014\u201c_the commandment of the eternal God_\u201d; _1 Tim.\n 1:17_\u2014\u201c_Now unto the King eternal, incorruptible, invisible, the\n only God, be honor and glory for ever and ever_\u201d; _Heb.\n 9:14_\u2014\u201c_the eternal Spirit_\u201d; _Rev. 1:17, 18_\u2014\u201c_I am the first and\n the last, and the Living one; and I was dead, and behold, I am\n alive for evermore_\u201d; _John 14:16, 17_\u2014\u201c_And I will pray the\n Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may be\n with you for ever, even the Spirit of truth_\u201d; _Mat.\n 19:29_\u2014\u201c_every one that hath left houses, or brethren, or sisters\n ... for my name\u2019s sake, shall receive a hundredfold, and shall\n inherit eternal life_\u201d; _John 6:54, 58_\u2014\u201c_He that eateth my flesh\n and drinketh my blood hath eternal life.... he that eateth this\n bread shall live for ever_\u201d; _2 Cor. 9:9_\u2014\u201c_His righteousness\n abideth for ever_\u201d; _cf._ _Dan. 7:18_\u2014\u201c_But the saints of the Most\n High shall receive the kingdom, and possess the kingdom for ever,\n even for ever and ever._\u201d\n\n Everlasting punishment is sometimes said to be the punishment\n which takes place in, and belongs to, an \u03b1\u1f30\u03ce\u03bd, with no reference\n to duration. But President Woolsey declares, on the other hand,\n that \u201c\u03b1\u1f30\u03ce\u03bd\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2 cannot denote \u2018pertaining to an \u03b1\u1f30\u03ce\u03bd, or world\n period.\u2019 \u201d The punishment of the wicked cannot cease, any more\n than Christ can cease to live, or the Holy Spirit to abide with\n believers; for all these are described in the same terms; \u201c\u03b1\u1f30\u03ce\u03bd\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2\n is used in the N. T. 66 times,\u201451 times of the happiness of the\n righteous, 2 times of the duration of God and his glory, 6 times\n where there is no doubt as to its meaning \u2018eternal,\u2019 7 times of\n the punishment of the wicked; \u03b1\u1f30\u03ce\u03bd is used 95 times,\u201455 times of\n unlimited duration, 31 times of duration that has limits, 9 times\n to denote the duration of future punishment.\u201d See Joseph Angus, in\n Expositor, Oct. 1887:274\u2010286.\n\n\n(_e_) The fact that the same word is used in Mat. 25:46 to describe both\nthe sufferings of the wicked and the happiness of the righteous shows that\nthe misery of the lost is eternal, in the same sense as the life of God or\nthe blessedness of the saved.\n\n\n _Mat. 25:46_\u2014\u201c_And these shall go away into eternal punishment:\n but the righteous into eternal life._\u201d On this passage see Meyer:\n \u201cThe absolute idea of eternity, in respect to the punishments of\n hell, is not to be set aside, either by an appeal to the popular\n use of \u03b1\u1f30\u03ce\u03bd\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2, or by an appeal to the figurative term \u2018fire\u2019; to\n the incompatibility of the idea of the eternal with that of moral\n evil and its punishment, or to the warning design of the\n representation; but it stands fast exegetically, by means of the\n contrasted \u03b6\u03c9\u1f74\u03bd \u03b1\u1f30\u03ce\u03bd\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd, which signifies the endless Messianic\n life.\u201d\n\n\n(_f_) Other descriptions of the condemnation and suffering of the lost,\nexcluding, as they do, all hope of repentance or forgiveness, render it\ncertain that \u03b1\u1f30\u03ce\u03bd and \u03b1\u1f30\u03ce\u03bd\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2, in the passages referred to, describe a\npunishment that is without end.\n\n\n _Mat. 12:31, 32_\u2014\u201c_Every sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto\n men; but the blasphemy against the Spirit shall not be\n forgiven.... it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world,\n nor in that which is to come_\u201d; _25:10_\u2014\u201c_and the door was shut_\u201d;\n _Mark 3:29_\u2014\u201c_whosoever shall blaspheme against the Holy Spirit\n hath never forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal sin_\u201d; _9:43,\n 48_\u2014\u201c_to go into hell, into the unquenchable fire ... where their\n worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched_\u201d\u2014not the dying worm\n but the undying worm; not the fire that is quenched, but the fire\n that is unquenchable; _Luke 3:17_\u2014\u201c_the chaff he will burn up with\n unquenchable fire_\u201d; _16:26_\u2014\u201c_between us and you there is a great\n gulf fixed, that they that would pass from hence to you may not be\n able, and that none may cross over from thence to us_\u201d; _John\n 3:36_\u2014\u201c_he that obeyeth not the Son shall not see life, but the\n wrath of God abideth on him._\u201d\n\n Review of Farrar\u2019s Eternal Hope, in Bib. Sac., Oct. 1878:782\u2014\u201cThe\n original meaning of the English word \u2018hell\u2019 and \u2018damn\u2019 was\n precisely that of the Greek words for which they stand. Their\n present meaning is widely different, but from what did it arise?\n It arose from the connotation imposed upon these words by the\n impression the Scriptures made on the popular mind. The present\n meaning of these words is involved in the Scripture, and cannot be\n removed by any mechanical process. Change the words, and in a few\n years \u2018judge\u2019 will have in the Bible the same force that \u2018damn\u2019\n has at present. In fact, the words were not mistranslated, but the\n connotation of which Dr. Farrar complains has come upon them\n since, and that through the Scriptures. This proves what the\n general impression of Scripture upon the mind is, and shows how\n far Dr. Farrar has gone astray.\u201d\n\n\n(_g_) While, therefore, we grant that we do not know the nature of\neternity, or its relation to time, we maintain that the Scripture\nrepresentations of future punishment forbid both the hypothesis of\nannihilation, and the hypothesis that suffering will end in restoration.\nWhatever eternity may be, Scripture renders it certain that after death\nthere is no forgiveness.\n\n\n We regard the argument against endless punishment drawn from \u03b1\u1f30\u03ce\u03bd\n and \u03b1\u1f30\u03ce\u03bd\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2 as a purely verbal one which does not touch the heart\n of the question at issue. We append several utterances of its\n advocates. The Christian Union: \u201cEternal punishment is punishment\n in eternity, not throughout eternity; as temporal punishment is\n punishment in time, not throughout time.\u201d Westcott: \u201cEternal life\n is not an endless duration of being in time, but being of which\n time is not a measure. We have indeed no powers to grasp the idea\n except through forms and images of sense. These must be used, but\n we must not transfer them to realities of another order.\u201d\n\n Farrar holds that \u1f00\u0390\u03b4\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2, \u201c_everlasting_\u201d, which occurs but twice\n in the N. T. (_Rom. 1:20_ and _Jude 6_), is not a synonym of\n \u03b1\u1f30\u03ce\u03bd\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2, \u201c_eternal_\u201d, but the direct antithesis of it; the former\n being the unrealizable conception of endless time, and the latter\n referring to a state from which our imperfect human conception of\n time is absolutely excluded. Whiton, Gloria Patri, 145, claims\n that the perpetual immanence of God in conscience makes recovery\n possible after death; yet he speaks of the possibility that in the\n incorrigible sinner conscience may become extinct. To all these\n views we may reply with Schaff, Ch. History, 2:66\u2014\u201cAfter the\n general judgment we have nothing revealed but the boundless\n prospect of \u00e6onian life and \u00e6onian death.... Everlasting\n punishment of the wicked always was and always will be the\n orthodox theory.\u201d\n\n For the view that \u03b1\u1f30\u03ce\u03bd and \u03b1\u1f30\u03ce\u03bd\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2 are used in a limited sense,\n see De Quincey, Theological Essays, 1:126\u2010146; Maurice, Essays,\n 436; Stanley, Life and Letters, 1:485\u2010488; Farrar, Eternal Hope,\n 200; Smyth, Orthodox Theology of To\u2010day, 118\u2010123; Chambers, Life\n after Death; Whiton, Is Eternal Punishment Endless? For the common\n orthodox view, see Fisher and Tyler, in New Englander, March,\n 1878; Gould, in Bib. Sac., 1880:212\u2010248; Princeton Review,\n 1873:620; Shedd, Doctrine of Endless Punishment, 12\u2010117; Broadus,\n Com. on _Mat. 25:45_.\n\n\nD. This everlasting punishment of the wicked is not inconsistent with\nGod\u2019s justice, but is rather a revelation of that justice.\n\n\n(_a_) We have seen in our discussion of Penalty (pages 652\u2010656) that its\nobject is neither reformatory nor deterrent, but simply vindicatory; in\nother words, that it primarily aims, not at the good of the offender, nor\nat the welfare of society, but at the vindication of law. We have also\nseen (pages 269, 291) that justice is not a form of benevolence, but is\nthe expression and manifestation of God\u2019s holiness. Punishment, therefore,\nas the inevitable and constant reaction of that holiness against its moral\nopposite, cannot come to an end until guilt and sin come to an end.\n\n\n The fundamental error of Universalism is its denial that penalty\n is vindicatory, and that justice is distinct from benevolence. See\n article on Universalism, in Johnson\u2019s Cyclop\u00e6dia: \u201cThe punishment\n of the wicked, however severe or terrible it may be, is but a\n means to a beneficent end; not revengeful, but remedial; not for\n its own sake, but for the good of those who suffer its\n infliction.\u201d With this agrees Rev. H. W. Beecher: \u201cI believe that\n punishment exists, both here and hereafter; but it will not\n continue after it ceases to do good. With a God who could give\n pain for pain\u2019s sake, this world would go out like a candle.\u201d But\n we reply that the doctrine of eternal punishment is not a doctrine\n of \u201cpain for pain\u2019s sake,\u201d but of pain for holiness\u2019 sake.\n Punishment could have no beneficial effect upon the universe, or\n even upon the offender, unless it were just and right in itself.\n And if just and right in itself, then the reason for its\n continuance lies, not in any benefit to the universe, or to the\n sufferer, to accrue therefrom.\n\n F. L. Patton, in Brit. and For. Ev. Rev., Jan. 1878:126\u2010139, on\n the Philosophy of Punishment\u2014\u201cIf the Universalist\u2019s position were\n true, we should expect to find some manifestations of love and\n pity and sympathy in the infliction of the dreadful punishments of\n the future. We look in vain for this, however. We read of God\u2019s\n anger, of his judgments, of his fury, of his taking vengeance; but\n we get no hint, in any passage which describes the sufferings of\n the next world, that they are designed to work the redemption and\n recovery of the soul. If the punishments of the wicked were\n chastisements, we should expect to see some bright outlook in the\n Bible\u2010picture of the place of doom. A gleam of light, one might\n suppose, might make its way from the celestial city to this dark\n abode. The sufferers would catch some sweet refrain of heavenly\n music which would be a promise and prophecy of a far\u2010off but\n coming glory. But there is a finality about the Scripture\n statements as to the condition of the lost, which is simply\n terrible.\u201d\n\n The reason for punishment lies not in the benevolence, but in the\n holiness, of God. That holiness reveals itself in the moral\n constitution of the universe. It makes itself felt in\n conscience\u2014imperfectly here, fully hereafter. The wrong merits\n punishment. The right binds, not because it is the expedient, but\n because it is the very nature of God. \u201cBut the great ethical\n significance of this word _right_ will not be known,\u201d (we quote\n again from Dr. Patton,) \u201cits imperative claims, its sovereign\n behests, its holy and imperious sway over the moral creation will\n not be understood, until we witness, during the lapse of the\n judgment hours, the terrible retribution which measures the ill\u2010\n desert of wrong.\u201d When Dr. Johnson seemed overfearful as to his\n future, Boswell said to him: \u201cThink of the mercy of your Savior.\u201d\n \u201cSir,\u201d replied Johnson, \u201cmy Savior has said that he will place\n some on his right hand, and some on his left.\u201d\n\n A Universalist during our Civil War announced his conversion to\n Calvinism, upon the ground that hell was a military necessity. \u201cIn\n _Rom. 12:19_, \u2018_vengeance_,\u2019 \u1f10\u03ba\u03b4\u03af\u03ba\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2, means primarily\n \u2018_vindication_.\u2019 God will show to the sinner and to the universe\n that the apparent prosperity of evil was a delusion and a snare\u201d\n (Crane, Religion of To\u2010morrow, 319 note). That strange book,\n Letters from Hell, shows how memory may increase our knowledge of\n past evil deeds, but may lose the knowledge of God\u2019s promises.\n Since we retain most perfectly that which has been the subject of\n most constant thought, retribution may come to us through the\n operation of the laws of our own nature.\n\n Jackson, James Martineau, 193\u2010195\u2014\u201cPlato holds that the wise\n transgressor will seek, not shun, his punishment. James Martineau\n painted a fearful picture of the possible lashing of conscience.\n He regarded suffering for sin, though dreadful, yet as altogether\n desirable, not to be asked reprieve from, but to be prayed for:\n \u2018Smite, Lord; for thy mercy\u2019s sake, spare not!\u2019 The soul denied\n such suffering is not favored, but defrauded. It learns the truth\n of its condition, and the truth and the right of the universe are\n vindicated.\u201d The Connecticut preacher said: \u201cMy friends, some\n believe that all will be saved; but we hope for better things.\n Chaff and wheat are not to be together always. One goes to the\n garner, and the other to the furnace.\u201d\n\n Shedd, Dogm. Theology, 2:755\u2014\u201cLuxurious ages and luxurious men\n recalcitrate at hell, and \u2018_kick against the goad_\u2019 (_Acts\n 26:14_). No theological doctrine is more important than eternal\n retribution to those modern nations which, like England, Germany\n and the United States, are growing rapidly in riches, luxury and\n earthly power. Without it, they will infallibly go down in that\n vortex of sensuality and wickedness that swallowed up Babylon and\n Rome. The bestial and shameless vice of the dissolute rich that\n has recently been uncovered in the commercial metropolis of the\n world is a powerful argument for the necessity and reality of\n \u2018_the lake that burneth with fire and brimstone_\u2019 (_Rev. 21:8_).\u201d\n The conviction that after death there must be punishment for sin\n has greatly modified the older Universalism. There is little\n modern talk of all men, righteous and wicked alike, entering\n heaven the moment this life is ended. A purgatorial state must\n intervene. E. G. Robinson: \u201cUniversalism results from an\n exaggerated idea of the atonement. There is no genuine\n Universalism in our day. Restorationism has taken its place.\u201d\n\n\n(_b_) But guilt, or ill\u2010desert, is endless. However long the sinner may be\npunished, he never ceases to be ill\u2010deserving. Justice, therefore, which\ngives to all according to their deserts, cannot cease to punish. Since the\nreason for punishment is endless, the punishment itself must be endless.\nEven past sins involve an endless guilt, to which endless punishment is\nsimply the inevitable correlate.\n\n\n For full statement of this argument that guilt, as never coming to\n an end, demands endless punishment, see Shedd, Doctrine of Endless\n Punishment, 118\u2010163\u2014\u201cSuffering that is penal can never come to an\n end, because guilt is the reason for its infliction, and guilt\n once incurred, never ceases to be.... One sin makes guilt, and\n guilt makes hell.\u201d Man does not punish endlessly, because he does\n not take account of God. \u201cHuman punishment is only approximate and\n imperfect, not absolute and perfect like the divine. It is not\n adjusted exactly and precisely to the whole guilt of the offence,\n but is more or less modified, first, by not considering its\n relation to God\u2019s honor and majesty; secondly, by human ignorance\n of inward motives; and thirdly, by social expediency.\u201d But \u201chell\n is not a penitentiary.... The Lamb of God is also Lion of the\n tribe of Judah.... The human penalty that approaches nearest to\n the divine is capital punishment. This punishment has a kind of\n endlessness. Death is a finality. It forever separates the\n murderer from earthly society, even as future punishment separates\n forever from the society of God and heaven.\u201d See Martineau, Types,\n 2:65\u201069.\n\n The lapse of time does not convert guilt into innocence. The\n verdict \u201cGuilty for ten days\u201d was Hibernian. Guilt is indivisible\n and untransferable. The whole of it rests upon the criminal at\n every moment. Richelieu: \u201cAll places are temples, and all seasons\n summer, for justice.\u201d George Eliot: \u201cConscience is harder than our\n enemies, knows more, accuses with more nicety.\u201d Shedd: \u201cSin is the\n only perpetual motion that has ever been discovered. A slip in\n youth, committed in a moment, entails lifelong suffering. The\n punishment nature inflicts is infinitely longer than the time\n consumed in the violation of law, yet the punishment is the\n legitimate outgrowth of the offence.\u201d\n\n\n(_c_) Not only eternal guilt, but eternal sin, demands eternal punishment.\nSo long as moral creatures are opposed to God, they deserve punishment.\nSince we cannot measure the power of the depraved will to resist God, we\ncannot deny the possibility of endless sinning. Sin tends evermore to\nreproduce itself. The Scriptures speak of an \u201ceternal sin\u201d (Mark 3:29).\nBut it is just in God to visit endless sinning with endless punishment.\nSin, moreover, is not only an act, but also a condition or state, of the\nsoul; this state is impure and abnormal, involves misery; this misery, as\nappointed by God to vindicate law and holiness, is punishment; this\npunishment is the necessary manifestation of God\u2019s justice. Not the\npunishing, but the not\u2010punishing, would impugn his justice; for if it is\njust to punish sin at all, it is just to punish it as long as it exists.\n\n\n _Mark 3:29_\u2014\u201c_whosoever shall blaspheme against the Holy Spirit\n hath never forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal sin_\u201d; _Rev.\n 22:11_\u2014\u201c_He that is unrighteous, let him do unrighteousness still;\n and he that is filthy, let him be made filthy still._\u201d Calvin:\n \u201cGod has the best reason for punishing everlasting sin\n everlastingly.\u201d President Dwight: \u201cEvery sinner is condemned for\n his first sin, and for every sin that follows, though they\n continue forever.\u201d What Martineau (Study, 2:106) says of this\n life, we may apply to the next: \u201cSin being there, it would be\n simply monstrous that there should be no suffering.\u201d\n\n But we must remember that men are finally condemned, not merely\n for _sins_, but for _sin_; they are punished, not simply for\n _acts_ of disobedience, but for evil _character_. The judgment is\n essentially a remanding of men to their \u201c_own place_\u201d (_Acts\n 1:25_). The soul that is permanently unlike God cannot dwell with\n God. The consciences of the wicked will justify their doom, and\n they will themselves prefer hell to heaven. He who does not love\n God is at war with himself, as well as with God, and cannot be at\n peace. Even though there were no positive inflictions from God\u2019s\n hand, the impure soul that has banished itself from the presence\n of God and from the society of the holy has in its own evil\n conscience a source of torment.\n\n And conscience gives us a pledge of the eternity of this\n suffering. Remorse has no tendency to exhaust itself. The memory\n of an evil deed grows not less but more keen with time, and self\u2010\n reproach grows not less but more bitter. Ever renewed affirmation\n of its evil decision presents to the soul forever new occasion for\n conviction and shame. F. W. Robertson speaks of \u201cthe infinite\n maddening of remorse.\u201d And Dr. Shedd, in the book above quoted,\n remarks: \u201cThough the will to resist sin may die out of a man, the\n conscience to condemn it never can. This remains eternally. And\n when the process is complete; when the responsible creature, in\n the abuse of free agency, has perfected his ruin; when his will to\n good is all gone; there remain these two in his immortal\n spirit\u2014sin and conscience, \u2018_brimstone and fire_\u2019 (_Rev. 21:8_).\u201d\n\n E. G. Robinson: \u201cThe fundamental argument for eternal punishment\n is the reproductive power of evil. In the divine law penalty\n enforces itself. _Rom. 6:19_\u2014\u2018_ye presented your members as\n servants ... to iniquity unto iniquity._\u2019 Wherever sin occurs,\n penalty is inevitable. No man of sense would now hold to eternal\n punishment as an objective judicial infliction, and the sooner we\n give this up the better. It can be defended only on the ground of\n the reactionary power of elective preference, the reduplicating\n power of moral evil. We have no right to say that there are no\n other consequences of sin but natural ones; but, were this so,\n every word of threatening in Scripture would still stand. We shall\n never be as complete as if we never had sinned. We shall bear the\n scars of our sins forever. The eternal law of wrong\u2010doing is that\n the wrong\u2010doer is cursed thereby, and harpies and furies follow\n him into eternity. God does not need to send a policeman after the\n sinner; the sinner carries the policeman inside. God does not need\n to set up a whipping post to punish the sinner; the sinner finds a\n whipping post wherever he goes, and his own conscience applies the\n lash.\u201d\n\n\n(_d_) The actual facts of human life and the tendencies of modern science\nshow that this principle of retributive justice is inwrought into the\nelements and forces of the physical and moral universe. On the one hand,\nhabit begets fixity of character, and in the spiritual world sinful acts,\noften repeated, produce a permanent state of sin, which the soul, unaided,\ncannot change. On the other hand, organism and environment are correlated\nto each other; and in the spiritual world, the selfish and impure find\nsurroundings corresponding to their nature, while the surroundings react\nupon them and confirm their evil character. These principles, if they act\nin the next life as they do in this, will ensure increasing and unending\npunishment.\n\n\n _Gal. 6:7, 8_\u2014\u201c_Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever\n a man soweth, that shall he also reap. For he that soweth unto his\n own flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption_\u201d; _Rev. 21:11_\u2014\u201c_He\n that is unrighteous, let him do unrighteousness still: and he that\n is filthy, let him be made filthy still._\u201d Dr. Heman Lincoln, in\n an article on Future Retribution (Examiner, April 2, 1885)\u2014speaks\n of two great laws of nature which confirm the Scripture doctrine\n of retribution. The first is that \u201cthe tendency of habit is\n towards a permanent state. The occasional drinker becomes a\n confirmed drunkard. One who indulges in oaths passes into a\n reckless blasphemer. The gambler who has wasted a fortune, and\n ruined his family, is a slave to the card\u2010table. The Scripture\n doctrine of retribution is only an extension of this well\u2010known\n law to the future life.\u201d The second of these laws is that\n \u201corganism and environment must be in harmony. Through the vast\n domain of nature, every plant and tree and reptile and bird and\n mammal has organs and functions fitted to the climate and\n atmosphere of its habitat. If a sudden change occur in climate,\n from torrid to temperate, or from temperate to arctic; if the\n atmosphere change from dry to humid, or from carbonic vapors to\n pure oxygen, sudden death is certain to overtake the entire fauna\n and flora of the region affected, unless plastic nature changes\n the organism to conform to the new environment. The interpreters\n of the Bible find the same law ordained for the world to come.\n Surroundings must correspond to character. A soul in love with sin\n can find no place in a holy heaven. If the environment be holy,\n the character of the beings assigned to it must be holy also.\n Nature and Revelation are in perfect accord.\u201d See Drummond,\n Natural Law in the Spiritual World, chapters: Environment,\n Persistence of Type, and Degradation.\n\n _Hosea 13:9_\u2014\u201c_It is thy destruction, O Israel, that thou art\n against me, against thy help_\u201d\u2014if men are destroyed, it is because\n they destroy themselves. Not God, but man himself, makes hell.\n Schurman: \u201cExternal punishment is unthinkable of human sins.\u201d\n Jackson, James Martineau, 152\u2014\u201cOur light, such as we have, we\n carry with us; and he who in his soul knows not God is still in\n darkness though, like the angel in the Apocalypse, he were\n standing in the sun.\u201d Crane, Religion of To\u2010morrow, 313\u2014\u201cTo insure\n perpetual hunger deprive a man of nutritious food, and so long as\n he lives he will suffer; so pain will last so long as the soul is\n deprived of God, after the artificial stimulants of sin\u2019s\n pleasures have lost their effect. Death has nothing to do with it;\n for as long as the soul lives apart from God, whether on this or\n on another planet, it will be wretched. If the unrepentant sinner\n is immortal, his sufferings will be immortal.\u201d \u201cMagnas inter opes,\n inops\u201d\u2014poverty\u2010stricken amid great riches\u2014his very nature compels\n him to suffer. Nor can he change his nature; for character, once\n set and hardened in this world, cannot be cast into the melting\u2010\n pot and remoulded in the world to come. The hell of Robert G.\n Ingersoll is far more terrible than the orthodox hell. He declares\n that there is no forgiveness and no renewal. Natural law must have\n its way. Man is a Mazeppa bound to the wild horse of his passions;\n a Prometheus, into whose vitals remorse, like a vulture, is ever\n gnawing.\n\n\n(_e_) As there are degrees of human guilt, so future punishment may admit\nof degrees, and yet in all those degrees be infinite in duration. The\ndoctrine of everlasting punishment does not imply that, at each instant of\nthe future existence of the lost, there is infinite pain. A line is\ninfinite in length, but it is far from being infinite in breadth or\nthickness. \u201cAn infinite series may make only a finite sum; and infinite\nseries may differ infinitely in their total amount.\u201d The Scriptures\nrecognize such degrees in future punishment, while at the same time they\ndeclare it to be endless (Luke 12:47, 48; Rev. 20:12, 13).\n\n\n _Luke 12:47, 48_\u2014\u201c_And that servant who knew his Lord\u2019s will, and\n made not ready, nor did according to his will shall be beaten with\n many stripes; but he that knew not, and did things worthy of\n stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes_\u201d; _Rev. 20:12,\n 13_\u2014\u201c_And I saw the dead, the great and the small, standing before\n the throne; and books were opened: and another book was opened,\n which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of the\n things which were written in the books, according to their works\n ... judged every man according to their works._\u201d\n\n\n(_f_) We know the enormity of sin only by God\u2019s own declarations with\nregard to it, and by the sacrifice which he has made to redeem us from it.\nAs committed against an infinite God, and as having in itself infinite\npossibilities of evil, it may itself be infinite, and may deserve infinite\npunishment. Hell, as well as the Cross, indicates God\u2019s estimate of sin.\n\n\n _Cf._ _Ez. 14:23_\u2014\u201c_ye shall know that I have not done without\n cause all that I have done in it, saith the Lord Jehovah._\u201d\n Valuable as the vine is for its fruit, it is fit only for fuel\n when it is barren. Every single sin, apart from the action of\n divine grace, is the sign of pervading and permanent apostasy. But\n there is no _single_ sin. Sin is a germ of infinite expansion. The\n single sin, left to itself, would never cease in its effects of\n evil,\u2014it would dethrone God. \u201cThe idea of disproportion between\n sin and its punishment grows out of a belittling of sin and its\n guilt. One who regards murder as a slight offence will think\n hanging an outrageous injustice. Theodore Parker hated the\n doctrine of eternal punishment, because he considered sin as only\n a provocation to virtue, a step toward triumph, a fall upwards,\n good in the making.\u201d But it is only when we regard its relation to\n God that we can estimate sin\u2019s ill desert. See Edwards the\n younger, Works, 1:1\u2010294.\n\n Dr. Shedd maintains that the guilt of sin is infinite, because it\n is measured, not by the powers of the offender, but by the majesty\n of the God against whom it is committed; see his Dogm. Theology,\n 2:740, 749\u2014\u201cCrime depends upon the object against whom it is\n committed, as well as upon the subject who commits it.... To\n strike is a voluntary act, but to strike a post or a stone is not\n a culpable act.... Killing a dog is as bad as killing a man, if\n merely the subject who kills and not the object killed is\n considered.... As God is infinite, offence against him is infinite\n in its culpability.... Any man who, in penitent faith, avails\n himself of the vicarious method of setting himself right with the\n eternal Nemesis, will find that it succeeds; but he who rejects it\n must through endless cycles grapple with the dread problem of\n human guilt in his own person, and alone.\u201d\n\n Quite another view is taken by others, as for example E. G.\n Robinson, Christian Theology, 292\u2014\u201cThe notion that the qualities\n of a finite act can be infinite\u2014that its qualities can be derived\n from the person to whom the act is directed rather than from the\n motives that prompt it, needs no refutation. The notion itself,\n one of the bastard thoughts of medi\u00e6val metaphysical theology, has\n maintained its position in respectable society solely by the\n services it has been regarded as capable of rendering.\u201d Simon,\n Reconciliation, 123\u2014\u201cTo represent sins as infinite, because God\n against whom they are committed is infinite, logically requires us\n to say that trust or reverence or love towards God are infinite,\n because God is infinite.\u201d We therefore regard it as more correct\n to say, that sin as a finite act demands finite punishment, but as\n endlessly persisted in demands an endless, and in that sense an\n infinite, punishment.\n\n\nE. This everlasting punishment of the wicked is not inconsistent with\nGod\u2019s benevolence.\n\n\nIt is maintained, however, by many who object to eternal retribution, that\nbenevolence requires God not to inflict punishment upon his creatures\nexcept as a means of attaining some higher good. We reply:\n\n(_a_) God is not only benevolent but holy, and holiness is his ruling\nattribute. The vindication of God\u2019s holiness is the primary and sufficient\nobject of punishment. This constitutes a good which fully justifies the\ninfliction.\n\n\n Even love has dignity, and rejected love may turn blessing into\n cursing. Love for holiness involves hatred of unholiness. The love\n of God is not a love without character. Dorner: \u201cLove may not\n throw itself away.... We have no right to say that punishment is\n just only when it is the means of amendment.\u201d We must remember\n that holiness conditions love (see pages 296\u2010298). Robert Buchanan\n forgot God\u2019s holiness when he wrote: \u201cIf there is doom for one,\n Thou, Maker, art undone!\u201d Shakespeare, King John, 4:3\u2014\u201cBeyond the\n infinite and boundless reach Of mercy, if thou didst this deed of\n death, Art thou damned, Hubert!\u201d Tennyson: \u201cHe that shuts Love\n out, in turn shall be Shut out from Love, and on the threshold lie\n Howling in utter darkness.\u201d Theodore Parker once tried to make\n peace between Wendell Phillips and Horace Mann, whom Phillips had\n criticized with his accustomed severity. Mann wrote to Parker:\n \u201cWhat a good man you are! I am sure nobody would be damned if you\n were at the head of the universe. But,\u201d he continued, \u201cI will\n never treat a man with respect whom I do not respect, be the\n consequences what they may\u2014so help me\u2014Horace Mann!\u201d (Chadwick,\n Theodore Parker, 330). The spirit which animated Horace Mann may\n not have been the spirit of love, but we can imagine a case in\n which his words might be the utterance of love as well as of\n righteousness. For love is under law to righteousness, and only\n righteous love is true love.\n\n\n(_b_) In this life, God\u2019s justice does involve certain of his creatures in\nsufferings which are of no advantage to the individuals who suffer; as in\nthe case of penalties which do not reform, and of afflictions which only\nharden and embitter. If this be a fact here, it may be a fact hereafter.\n\n\n There are many sufferers on earth, in prisons and on sick\u2010beds,\n whose suffering results in hardness of heart and enmity to God.\n The question is not a question of quantity, but of quality. It is\n a question whether any punishment at all is consistent with God\u2019s\n benevolence,\u2014any punishment, that is to say, which does not result\n in good to the punished. This we maintain; and claim that God is\n bound to punish moral impurity, whether any good comes therefrom\n to the impure or not. Archbishop Whately says it is as difficult\n to change one atom of lead to silver as it is to change a whole\n mountain. If the punishment of _many_ incorrigibly impenitent\n persons is consistent with God\u2019s benevolence, so is the punishment\n of _one_ incorrigibly impenitent person; if the punishment of\n incorrigibly impenitent persons for eternity is inconsistent with\n God\u2019s benevolence, so is the punishment of such persons for a\n limited time, or for any time at all.\n\n In one of his early stories William Black represents a sour\u2010\n tempered Scotchman as protesting against the idea that a sinner he\n has in mind should be allowed to escape the consequences of his\n acts: \u201cWhat\u2019s the good of being good,\u201d he asks, \u201cif things are to\n turn out that way?\u201d The instinct of retribution is the strongest\n instinct of the human heart. It is bound up with our very\n intuition of God\u2019s existence, so that to deny its rightfulness is\n to deny that there is a God. There is \u201c_a certain fearful\n expectation of judgment_\u201d (_Heb. 10:27_) for ourselves and for\n others, in case of persistent transgression, without which the\n very love of God would cease to inspire respect. Since neither\n annihilation nor second probation is Scriptural, our only relief\n in contemplating the doctrine of eternal punishment must come\n from: 1. the fact that eternity is not endless _time_, but a state\n inconceivable to us; and 2. the fact that evolution suggests\n reversion to the brute as the necessary consequence of abusing\n freedom.\n\n\n(_c_) The benevolence of God, as concerned for the general good of the\nuniverse, requires the execution of the full penalty of the law upon all\nwho reject Christ\u2019s salvation. The Scriptures intimate that God\u2019s\ntreatment of human sin is matter of instruction to all moral beings. The\nself\u2010chosen ruin of the few may be the salvation of the many.\n\n\n Dr. Joel Parker, Lectures on Universalism, speaks of the security\n of free creatures as attained through a gratitude for deliverance\n \u201ckept alive by a constant example of some who are suffering the\n vengeance of eternal fire.\u201d Our own race may be the only race (of\n course the angels are not a \u201crace\u201d) that has fallen away from God.\n As through the church the manifold wisdom of God is made manifest\n \u201c_to principalities and powers in the heavenly places_\u201d (_Eph.\n 3:10_); so, through the punishment of the lost, God\u2019s holiness may\n be made known to a universe that without it might have no proof so\n striking, that sin is moral suicide and ruin, and that God\u2019s\n holiness is its irreconcilable antagonist.\n\n With regard to the extent and scope of hell, we quote the words of\n Dr. Shedd, in the book already mentioned: \u201cHell is only a spot in\n the universe of God. Compared with heaven, hell is narrow and\n limited. The kingdom of Satan is insignificant, in contrast with\n the kingdom of Christ. In the immense range of God\u2019s dominion,\n good is the rule and evil is the exception. Sin is a speck upon\n the infinite azure of eternity; a spot on the sun. Hell is only a\n corner of the universe. The Gothic etymon denotes a covered\u2010up\n hole. In Scripture, hell is a \u2018_pit_,\u2019 a \u2018_lake_\u2019; not an ocean.\n It is \u2018_bottomless_,\u2019 not boundless. The Gnostic and Dualistic\n theories which make God, and Satan or the Demiurge, nearly equal\n in power and dominion, find no support in Revelation. The Bible\n teaches that there will always be some sin and death in the\n universe. Some angels and men will forever be the enemies of God.\n But their number, compared with that of unfallen angels and\n redeemed men, is small. They are not described in the glowing\n language and metaphors by which the immensity of the holy and\n blessed is delineated (_Ps. 68:17_; _Deut. 32:2_; _Ps. 103:21_;\n _Mat. 6:13_; _1 Cor. 15:25_; _Rev. 14:1_; _21:16, 24, 25_.) The\n number of the lost spirits is never thus emphasized and enlarged\n upon. The brief, stern statement is, that \u2018_the fearful and\n unbelieving ... their part shall be in the lake that burneth with\n fire and brimstone_\u2019 (_Rev. 21:8_). No metaphors and\n amplifications are added to make the impression of an immense\n \u2018_multitude which no man can number_.\u2019 \u201d Dr. Hodge: \u201cWe have\n reason to believe that the lost will bear to the saved no greater\n proportion than the inmates of a prison do to the mass of a\n community.\u201d\n\n The North American Review engaged Dr. Shedd to write an article\n vindicating eternal punishment, and also engaged Henry Ward\n Beecher to answer it. The proof sheets of Dr. Shedd\u2019s article were\n sent to Mr. Beecher, whereupon he telegraphed from Denver to the\n Review: \u201cCancel engagement, Shedd is too much for me. I half\n believe in eternal punishment now myself. Get somebody else.\u201d The\n article in reply was never written, and Dr. Shedd remained\n unanswered.\n\n\n(_d_) The present existence of sin and punishment is commonly admitted to\nbe in some way consistent with God\u2019s benevolence, in that it is made the\nmeans of revealing God\u2019s justice and mercy. If the temporary existence of\nsin and punishment lead to good, it is entirely possible that their\neternal existence may lead to yet greater good.\n\n\n _A priori_, we should have thought it impossible for God to permit\n moral evil,\u2014heathenism, prostitution, the saloon, the African\n slave\u2010trade. But sin is a fact. Who can say how long it will be a\n fact? Why not forever? The benevolence that permits it now may\n permit it through eternity. And yet, if permitted through\n eternity, it can be made harmless only by visiting it with eternal\n punishment. Lillie on Thessalonians, 457\u2014\u201cIf the temporary\n existence of sin and punishment lead to good, how can we prove\n that their eternal existence may not lead to greater good?\u201d We\n need not deny that it causes God real sorrow to banish the lost.\n Christ\u2019s weeping over Jerusalem expresses the feelings of God\u2019s\n heart: _Mat. 23:37, 38_\u2014\u201c_O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, that killeth the\n prophets, and stoneth them that are sent unto her! how often would\n I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathered her\n chickens under her wings, and ye would not! Behold, your house is\n left unto you desolate_\u201d; _cf._ _Hosea 11:8_\u2014\u201c_How shall I give\n thee up, Ephraim? how shall I cast thee off, Israel? how shall I\n make thee as Admah? how shall I set thee as Zeboiim? my heart is\n turned within me, my compassions are kindled together._\u201d Dante,\n Hell, iii\u2014the inscription over the gate of Hell: \u201cJustice the\n founder of my fabric moved; To rear me was the task of power\n divine, Supremest wisdom and primeval love.\u201d\n\n A. H. Bradford, Age of Faith, 254, 267\u2014\u201cIf one thinks of the Deity\n as an austere monarch, having a care for his own honor but none\n for those to whom he has given being, optimism is impossible. For\n what shall we say of our loved ones who have committed sins? That\n splendid boy who yielded to an inherited tendency\u2014what has become\n of him? Those millions who with little light and mighty passions\n have gone wrong\u2014what of them? Those countless myriads who peopled\n the earth in ages past and had no clear motive to righteousness,\n since their perception of God was dim\u2014is this all that can be said\n of them: In torment they are exhibiting the glorious holiness of\n the Almighty in his hatred of sin? Some may believe that, but,\n thank God, the number is not large.... No, penalty, remorse,\n despair, are only signs of the deep remedial force in the nature\n of things, which has always been at work and always will be, and\n which, unless counteracted, will result sometime in universal and\n immortal harmony.... Retribution is a natural law; it is universal\n in its sweep; it is at the same time a manifestation of the\n beneficence that pervades the universe. This law must continue its\n operation so long as one free agent violates the moral order.\n Neither justice nor love would be honored if one soul were allowed\n to escape the action of that law. But the sting in retribution is\n ordained to be remedial and restorative rather than punitive and\n vengeful.... Will any forever resist that discipline? We know not;\n but it is difficult to understand how any can be willing to do so,\n when the fulness of the divine glory is revealed.\u201d\n\n\n(_e_) As benevolence in God seems in the beginning to have permitted moral\nevil, not because sin was desirable in itself, but only because it was\nincident to a system which provided for the highest possible freedom and\nholiness in the creature; so benevolence in God may to the end permit the\nexistence of sin and may continue to punish the sinner, undesirable as\nthese things are in themselves, because they are incidents of a system\nwhich provides for the highest possible freedom and holiness in the\ncreature through eternity.\n\n\n But the condition of the lost is only made more hopeless by the\n difficulty with which God brings himself to this, his \u201c_strange\n work_\u201d of punishment (_Is. 28:21_). The sentence which the judge\n pronounces with tears is indicative of a tender and suffering\n heart, but it also indicates that there can be no recall. By the\n very exhibition of \u201c_eternal judgment_\u201d (_Heb. 6:2_), not only may\n a greater number be kept true to God, but a higher degree of\n holiness among that number be forever assured. The Endless Future,\n published by South. Meth. Pub. House, supposes the universe yet in\n its infancy, an eternal liability to rebellion, an ever\u2010growing\n creation kept from sin by one example of punishment. _Mat. 7:13,\n 14_\u2014\u201c_few there be that find it_\u201d\u2014\u201cseems to have been intended to\n describe the conduct of men then living, rather than to foreshadow\n the two opposite currents of human life to the end of time\u201d; see\n Hovey, Bib. Eschatology, 167. See Goulburn, Everlasting\n Punishment; Haley, The Hereafter of Sin.\n\n A. H. Bradford, Age of Faith, 239, mentions as causes for the\n modification of view as to everlasting punishment: 1. Increased\n freedom in expression of convictions; 2. Interpretation of the\n word \u201ceternal\u201d; 3. The doctrine of the immanence of God,\u2014if God is\n in every man, then he cannot everlastingly hate himself, even in\n the poor manifestation of himself in a human creature; 4. The\n influence of the poets, Burns, Browning, Tennyson, and Whittier.\n Whittier, Eternal Goodness: \u201cThe wrong that pains my soul below, I\n dare not throne above: I know not of his hate,\u2014I know His goodness\n and his love.\u201d We regard Dr. Bradford as the most plausible\n advocate of restoration. But his view is vitiated by certain\n untenable theological presuppositions: 1. that righteousness is\n only a form of love; 2. that righteousness, apart from love, is\n passionate and vengeful; 3. that man\u2019s freedom is incapable of\n endless abuse; 4. that not all men here have a fair probation; 5.\n that the amount of light against which they sin is not taken into\n consideration by God; 6. that the immanence of God does not leave\n room for free human action; 7. that God\u2019s object in his\n administration is, not to reveal his whole character, and chiefly\n his holiness, but solely to reveal his love; 8. that the\n declarations of Scripture with regard to \u201c_an eternal sin_\u201d (_Mark\n 3:29_), \u201c_eternal punishment_\u201d (_Mat. 25:46_), \u201c_eternal\n destruction_\u201d (_2 Thess. 1:9_), still permit us to believe in the\n restoration of all men to holiness and likeness to God.\n\n We regard as more Scriptural and more rational the view of Max\n M\u00fcller, the distinguished Oxford philologist: \u201cI have always held\n that this would be a miserable universe without eternal\n punishment. Every act, good or evil, must carry its consequences,\n and the fact that our punishment will go on forever seems to me a\n proof of the everlasting love of God. For an evil deed to go\n unpunished would be to destroy the moral order of the universe.\u201d\n Max M\u00fcller simply expresses the ineradicable conviction of mankind\n that retribution must follow sin; that God must show his\n disapproval of sin by punishment; that the very laws of man\u2019s\n nature express in this way God\u2019s righteousness; that the abolition\n of this order would be the dethronement of God and the destruction\n of the universe.\n\n\nF. The proper preaching of the doctrine of everlasting punishment is not a\nhindrance to the success of the gospel.\n\n\nThe proper preaching of the doctrine of everlasting punishment is not a\nhindrance to the success of the gospel, but is one of its chief and\nindispensable auxiliaries.\u2014It is maintained by some, however, that,\nbecause men are naturally repelled by it, it cannot be a part of the\npreacher\u2019s message. We reply:\n\n(_a_) If the doctrine be true, and clearly taught in Scripture, no fear of\nconsequences to ourselves or to others can absolve us from the duty of\npreaching it. The minister of Christ is under obligation to preach the\nwhole truth of God; if he does this, God will care for the results.\n\n\n _Ez. 2:7_\u2014\u201c_And thou shalt speak my words unto them, whether they\n will hear, or whether they will forbear_\u201d; _3:10, 11, 18,\n 19_\u2014\u201c_Moreover he said unto me, Son of man, all my words that I\n shall speak unto thee receive in thine heart, and hear with thine\n ears. And go, get thee to them of the captivity, unto the children\n of thy people, and speak unto them, and tell them, Thus saith the\n Lord Jehovah; whether they will hear, or whether they will\n forbear.... When I say unto the wicked, Thou shalt surely die; and\n thou givest him not warning, nor speakest to warn the wicked from\n his wicked way, to save his life; the same wicked man shall die in\n his iniquity; but his blood will I require at thy hand. Yet if\n thou warn the wicked, and he turn not from his wickedness, nor\n from his wicked way, he shall die in his iniquity; but thou hast\n delivered thy soul._\u201d\n\n The old French Protestant church had as a coat of arms the device\n of an anvil, around which were many broken hammers, with this\n motto: \u201cHammer away, ye hostile bands; Your hammers break, God\u2019s\n anvil stands.\u201d St. Jerome: \u201cIf an offence come out of the truth,\n better is it that the offence come, than that the truth be\n concealed.\u201d Shedd, Dogm. Theology, 2:680\u2014\u201cJesus Christ is the\n Person responsible for the doctrine of eternal perdition.\u201d The\n most fearful utterances with regard to future punishment are those\n of Jesus himself, as for example, _Mat. 23:33_\u2014\u201c_Ye serpents, ye\n offspring of vipers, how shall ye escape the judgment of hell?_\u201d\n _Mark 3:29_\u2014\u201c_whosoever shall blaspheme against the Holy Spirit\n hath never forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal sin_\u201d; _Mat.\n 10:28_\u2014\u201c_be not afraid of them that kill the body, but are not\n able to kill the soul: but rather fear him who is able to destroy\n both soul and body in hell_\u201d; _25:46_\u2014\u201c_these shall go away into\n eternal punishment._\u201d\n\n\n(_b_) All preaching which ignores the doctrine of eternal punishment just\nso far lowers the holiness of God, of which eternal punishment is an\nexpression, and degrades the work of Christ, which was needful to save us\nfrom it. The success of such preaching can be but temporary, and must be\nfollowed by a disastrous reaction toward rationalism and immorality.\n\n\n Much apostasy from the faith begins with refusal to accept the\n doctrine of eternal punishment. Theodore Parker, while he\n acknowledged that the doctrine was taught in the New Testament,\n rejected it, and came at last to say of the whole theology which\n includes this idea of endless punishment, that it \u201csneers at\n common sense, spits upon reason, and makes God a devil.\u201d\n\n But, if there be no eternal punishment, then man\u2019s danger was not\n great enough to require an infinite sacrifice; and we are\n compelled to give up the doctrine of atonement. If there were no\n atonement, there was no need that man\u2019s Savior should himself be\n more than man; and we are compelled to give up the doctrine of the\n deity of Christ, and with this that of the Trinity. If punishment\n be not eternal, then God\u2019s holiness is but another name for\n benevolence; all proper foundation for morality is gone, and God\u2019s\n law ceases to inspire reverence and awe. If punishment be not\n eternal, then the Scripture writers who believed and taught this\n were fallible men who were not above the prejudices and errors of\n their times; and we lose all evidence of the divine inspiration of\n the Bible. With this goes the doctrine of miracles; God is\n identified with nature, and becomes the impersonal God of\n pantheism.\n\n Theodore Parker passed through this process, and so did Francis W.\n Newman. Logically, every one who denies the everlasting punishment\n of the wicked ought to reach a like result; and we need only a\n superficial observation of countries like India, where pantheism\n is rife, to see how deplorable is the result in the decline of\n public and of private virtue. Emory Storrs: \u201cWhen hell drops out\n of religion, justice drops out of politics.\u201d The preacher who\n talks lightly of sin and punishment does a work strikingly\n analogous to that of Satan, when he told Eve: \u201c_Ye shall not\n surely die_\u201d (_Gen. 3:4_). Such a preacher lets men go on what\n Shakespeare calls \u201cthe primrose way to the everlasting bonfire\u201d\n (Macbeth, 2:3).\n\n Shedd, Dogm. Theology, 2:671\u2014\u201cVicarious atonement is incompatible\n with universal salvation. The latter doctrine implies that\n suffering for sin is remedial only, while the former implies that\n it is retribution.... If the sinner himself is not obliged by\n justice to suffer in order to satisfy the law he has violated,\n then certainly no one needs suffer for him for this purpose.\u201d\n Sonnet by Michael Angelo: \u201cNow hath my life across a stormy sea\n Like a frail bark reached that wide port where all Are bidden, ere\n the final reckoning fall Of good and evil for eternity. Now know I\n well how that fond fantasy, Which made my soul the worshiper and\n thrall Of earthly art, is vain; how criminal Is that which all men\n seek unwillingly. Those amorous thoughts that were so lightly\n dressed\u2014What are they when the double death is nigh? The one I\n know for sure, the other dread. Painting nor sculpture now can\n lull to rest My soul that turns to his great Love on high, Whose\n arms, to clasp us, on the Cross were spread.\u201d\n\n\n(_c_) The fear of future punishment, though not the highest motive, is yet\na proper motive, for the renunciation of sin and the turning to Christ. It\nmust therefore be appealed to, in the hope that the seeking of salvation\nwhich begins in fear of God\u2019s anger may end in the service of faith and\nlove.\n\n\n _Luke 12:4, 5_\u2014\u201c_And I say unto you my friends, Be not afraid of\n them that kill the body, and after that have no more that they can\n do. But I will warn you whom ye shall fear: Fear him, who after he\n hath killed hath power to cast into hell; yea, I say unto you,\n Fear him_\u201d; _Jude 23_\u2014\u201c_and some save, snatching them out of the\n fire._\u201d It is noteworthy that the Old Testament, which is\n sometimes regarded, though incorrectly, as a teacher of fear, has\n no such revelations of hell as are found in the New. Only when\n God\u2019s mercy was displayed in the Cross were there opened to men\u2019s\n view the depths of the abyss from which the Cross was to save\n them. And, as we have already seen, it is not Peter or Paul, but\n our Lord himself, who gives the most fearful descriptions of the\n suffering of the lost, and the clearest assertions of its eternal\n duration.\n\n Michael Angelo\u2019s picture of the Last Judgment is needed to prepare\n us for Raphael\u2019s picture of the Transfiguration. Shedd, Dogm.\n Theology, 2:752\u2014\u201cWhat the human race needs is to go to the divine\n Confessional.... Confession is the only way to light and peace....\n The denial of moral evil is the secret of the murmuring and\n melancholy with which so much of modern letters is filled.\u201d\n Matthew Arnold said to his critics: \u201cNon me tua fervida terrent\n dicta; Dii me terrent et Jupiter hostis\u201d\u2014\u201cI am not afraid of your\n violent judgments; I fear only God and his anger.\u201d _Heb.\n 10:31_\u2014\u201c_It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the\n living God._\u201d Daniel Webster said: \u201cI want a minister to drive me\n into a corner of the pew, and make me feel that the devil is after\n me.\u201d\n\n\n(_d_) In preaching this doctrine, while we grant that the material images\nused in Scripture to set forth the sufferings of the lost are to be\nspiritually and not literally interpreted, we should still insist that the\nmisery of the soul which eternally hates God is greater than the physical\npains which are used to symbolize it. Although a hard and mechanical\nstatement of the truth may only awaken opposition, a solemn and feeling\npresentation of it upon proper occasions, and in its due relation to the\nwork of Christ and the offers of the gospel, cannot fail to accomplish\nGod\u2019s purpose in preaching, and to be the means of saving some who hear.\n\n\n _Acts 20:31_\u2014\u201c_Wherefore watch ye, remembering that by the space\n of three years I ceased not to admonish every one night and day\n with tears_\u201d; _2 Cor. 2:14\u201017_\u2014\u201c_But thanks be unto God, who\n always leadeth us in triumph in Christ, and maketh manifest\n through us the savor of his knowledge in every place. For we are a\n sweet savor of Christ unto God, in them that are being saved, and\n in them that are perishing; to the one a savor from death unto\n death; to the other a savor from life unto life. And who is\n sufficient for these things? For we are not as the many,\n corrupting the word of God: but as of sincerity, but as of God, in\n the sight of God, speak we in Christ_\u201d; _5:11_\u2014\u201c_Knowing therefore\n the fear of the Lord, we persuade men, but we are made manifest\n unto God; and I hope that we are made manifest also in your\n consciences_\u201d; _1 Tim. 4:16_\u2014\u201c_Take heed to thyself and to thy\n teaching. Continue in these things; for in doing this thou shalt\n save both thyself and them that hear thee._\u201d\n\n \u201cOmne simile claudicat\u201d as well as \u201cvolat\u201d\u2014\u201cEvery simile halts as\n well as flies.\u201d No symbol expresses all the truth. Yet we need to\n use symbols, and the Holy Spirit honors our use of them. It is\n \u201c_God\u2019s good pleasure through the foolishness of the preaching to\n save them that believe_\u201d (_1 Cor. 1:21_). It was a deep sense of\n his responsibility for men\u2019s souls that moved Paul to say: \u201c_woe\n is unto me, if I preach not the gospel_\u201d (_1 Cor. 9:16_). And it\n was a deep sense of duty fulfilled that enabled George Fox, when\n he was dying, to say: \u201cI am clear! I am clear!\u201d\n\n So Richard Baxter wrote: \u201cI preached as never sure to preach\n again. And as a dying man to dying men.\u201d It was Robert McCheyne\n who said that the preacher ought never to speak of everlasting\n punishment without tears. McCheyne\u2019s tearful preaching of it\n prevailed upon many to break from their sins and to accept the\n pardon and renewal that are offered in Christ. Such preaching of\n judgment and punishment were never needed more than now, when lax\n and unscriptural views with regard to law and sin break the force\n of the preacher\u2019s appeals. Let there be such preaching, and then\n many a hearer will utter the thought, if not the words, of the\n Dies Ir\u00e6, 8\u201010\u2014\u201cRex tremend\u00e6 majestatis, Qui salvandos salvas\n gratis, Salva me, fons pietatis. Recordare, Jesu pie, Quod sum\n causa tu\u00e6 vi\u00e6: Ne me perdas ilia die. Qu\u00e6rens me sedisti lassus,\n Redemisti crucem passus: Tautus labor non sit cassus.\u201d See\n Edwards, Works, 4:226\u2010321; Hodge, Outlines of Theology, 459\u2010468;\n Murphy, Scientific Bases of Faith, 310, 319, 464; Dexter, Verdict\n of Reason; George, Universalism not of the Bible; Angus, Future\n Punishment; Jackson, Bampton Lectures for 1875, on the Doctrine of\n Retribution; Shedd, Doctrine of Endless Punishment, preface, and\n Dogm. Theol., 2:667\u2010754.\n\n\n\n\n\nINDEXES.\n\n\nThe author acknowledges his great indebtness to the Reverend Robert Kerr\nEccles, M. D., of Lemoore, California, for the preparation of the\nexceedingly full and valuable Indexes which follow, and a similar\nobligation to Mr. Herman K. Phinney, Assistant Librarian of the University\nof Rochester, for his care in the proof\u2010reading of the whole work.\n\n\n\n\nIndex Of Subjects.\n\n\nAbility, gracious, 602, 640\n natural, of New School, 640, 641\n not test of sin, 558\n Pelagian, 640\n\nAbiogenesis, 389\n\nAbsolute, its denotation, 9\n as applied to divine attributes, 249\n how related to finite, 58, 255\n Reason, an, the postulate of logical thought, 60\n\nAbydos, triad of, 351\n\n_Acceptilatio_, the Grotian, 740\n\nAcquittal of believing sinners, from punishment, 854\n\nAction, divine, not _in distantia_, 418\n\nActs, evil, God\u2019s concurrence with, 418\n\n_Ad aperturam libri_, 32\n\nAdam, his original righteousness not immutable, 519\n had power of contrary choice, 519\n not created undecided, 519\n his love, God\u2010given, 519\n his exercise of holy will not meritorious, 520\n unfallen, according to Romish theologians, 520\n his physical perfection, 523\n unfallen, according to Fathers and Scholastics, 523\n his relations to lower creation, 524\n his relations to God, 524\n his surroundings and society, 525\n the test of his virtue, 526\n physical immortality possible to, 527\n his Fall, see Fall.\n his twofold death, resulting from Fall, 590\n his communion with God interrupted, 592\n his banishment from God, 593\n imputation of his sin to his posterity, see Imputation.\n in him \u201cthe natural,\u201d had he continued upright, might without death have\n obtained \u201cthe spiritual,\u201d 658\n was Christ in, 759\n Christ, the Last, 678\n Christ, the Second, 680\n\nAdoption, what?, 857\n\n_Aequale temperamentum_, 523\n\nAffections, 362, 815\n holy, authors on, 826\n\nAgency, free, and divine decrees, 359\u2010362\n\nAlexander, unifier of Greek East, 668\n\nAllegorical arrangement in theology, 50\n\n_All\u0153osis_, 686\n\nAltruism, 299\n\nAmbition, what? 569\n\nAmerican theology, 48, 49\n\n_Anacoloutha_, Paul\u2019s, 210\n\nAnalytical method, in theology, 45, 49\n\nAncestry of race, proofs of a common, 476\u2010482\n\n\u201cAngel of the church,\u201d 452, 916\n\n\u201cAngel of Jehovah,\u201d 319\n\nAngelology of Scripture, not derived from Egyptian or Persian sources, 448\n\n\u201cAngels\u2019 food,\u201d 445\n\nAngels, their class defined, 443\n Scholastic subtleties regarding, their influence, 443, 444\n Milton and Dante upon, 443\n their existence a scientific possibility, 444\n faith in, enlarges conception of universe, 444\n list of authors upon, 444\n Scriptural statements and intimations concerning, 441\u2010459\n are created beings, 444\n are incorporeal, 445\n are personal, 445\n possessed of superhuman intelligence, 445\n distinct from and older than man, 445\n not personifications, 445\n numerous, 447\n are a company, not a race, 447\n were created holy, 450\n had a probation, 450\n some preserved their integrity, 450\n some fell from innocence, 450\n the good, confirmed in goodness, 450\n the evil, confirmed in evil, 450\n\nAngels, good, they stand worshiping God, 451\n they rejoice in God\u2019s works, 451\n they work in nature, 451\n they guide nations, 451\n watch over interests of churches, 452\n assist individual believers, 452\n punish God\u2019s enemies, 452\n ministers of God\u2019s special providences, 452\n act within laws of spiritual and moral world, 453\n their influence illustrated by psychic phenomena, 453, 454\n\nAngels, evil, oppose God, 454\n hinder man\u2019s welfare, 455\n tempt negatively and positively, 455\n their intercourse with Christ, 456\n execute God\u2019s will, 457\n their power not independent of human will, 457\n limited by permissive will of God, 458\n the doctrine of, not opposed to science, 459\n not opposed to right views of space or spirit, 459\n not impossible that, though wise, they should rebel, 460\n the continuance and punishment of evil, not inconsistent with divine\n benevolence, 461\n their organization, though sinful, not impossible, 461\n the doctrine of evil, not hurtful, 461, 462\n the doctrine of evil, does not degrade man, 462\n good, the doctrine of, its uses, 462\n evil, the doctrine of, its uses, 463\n fallen, if no redemption provided for, why? 463\n created in Christ, 464\n their salvation, Scripture silent upon, 464\n\nAnger, sometimes a duty, 294\n\nAnnihilation, of infants, held by Emmons, 609\n at death, inequitable, 987, 1036\n disproved by Scripture, 991\u2010998\n terms which seemingly teach, 993\n language adduced to prove, often metaphorical, 994\n old view of, 1036\n the theory that it is a result of the weakening of powers of soul by\n sin, considered, 1036\n \u201csecond death\u201d regarded as dissolution of the soul, 1036\n the theory that a positive punishment proportioned to guilt precedes and\n ends in, 1037\n the tenet of, rests on a defective view of holiness, 1037\n a part of the \u201cconditional immortality\u201d hypothesis, 1037\n as connected with the principle, \u201cEvil is punished by its own increase,\u201d\n 1038\n\nAnnihilationists, 487\n\n\u201cAnswer (Interrogation) of a good conscience,\u201d phrase examined, 821\n\nAnthropological argument for God\u2019s existence, 80\u201085\n\nAnthropological method in theology, 50\n\nAnthropology, a division of theology, 464\n\nAnthropomorphism, 122, 250\n\n\u201cAnthropomorphism inverse,\u201d 468\n\nAntichrist, 1009\n\n\u201cAnticipative consequences,\u201d 403, 658\n\nAntinomianism, 875\n\nAntiquity of race, relation of Scripture to, 224\u2010226\n\nApocalypse, its exegetic not yet found, 1014\n\nApocrypha, 115, 150, 865\n\nApollinarianism, 487, 670, 671\n\nApostasy, man\u2019s state of, 533\u2010664\n\nApostasy of the believer, how treated in Scripture, 884\u2010886\n\n_A posteriori_ reasoning, 66, 86\n\nApostles, 199\u2010201, 909, 971\n\n_Apotelesmaticum genus_, 686\n\n_A priori_ argument for God\u2019s existence, the, see God.\n judgments, 10\n reasons for expecting a divine revelation, 111\u2010114\n\n_Arbitrium_, 557\n\nArgument _ad hominem_ in Scripture, 233\n for existence of God, its value, 65\u201067, 71, 72, 87\u201089\n\nArianism, 328\u2010330, 670\n\nArminianism, 362, 601\u2010606\n\nArrangement of material in theology, 2, 49, 50\n\nArt, 529, 1016\n\nAryan and Semitic languages, their connection, 479\n\nAscension, Christ\u2019s, 708\u2010710\n Christ\u2019s humanity, how related to the Logos in, 709\n\nAseity of God, 256, 257\n not confined to Father, 342\n\n_Assensus_, an element in faith, 837\n\nAssurance of salvation, 808, 845\n\n\u201cAsymptote of God,\u201d man, the, 565\n\nAthanasian Creed, 329\n\nAtoms, 96, 374\n\nAtomism, 600, 635\n\nAtonement, facts in Christ\u2019s sufferings which prove, 713\n defined, 713\n satisfies holiness, the fundamental attribute of God, 713\n meets the conditions of a universe in which happiness is connected with\n righteousness and suffering with sin, 714\n in it Christ as Logos, the Revealer of God in the universe, inflicts the\n penalty of sin, while, as Life of humanity, he endures the\n infliction, 714\n humanity has made, when righteousness in Christ, as generic humanity,\n condemns sin, and love in Christ endures the penalty, 714\n substitutionary and sharing, 715\n in, Christ suffers as the very life of man, 715\n not made, but revealed, by Christ\u2019s historical sufferings, 715\n the sacrifice of, the final revelation of the heart of God and of the\n law of universal life, 716\n a model of, and stimulus to, self\u2010sacrifice, 716\n its subjective effects must not exclude consideration of its ground and\n cause, 716\n Scripture methods of representing, 716\u2010722\n originates in God\u2019s love and manifests it, 716\n an example of disinterested love to secure our deliverance from\n selfishness, 716, 717\n a ransom in which death is the price paid, 717\n an act of obedience to law, 717\n an act of priestly mediation, 718\u2010728\n a sin\u2010offering, 719\n a propitiation, 719\n a substitution, 720\n correct views of, grounded on proper interpretation of the institution\n of sacrifice, 721\n is it to be interpreted according to notions derived from Jewish or\n heathen sacrifices? 728\n theories of, 728\u2010766\n Socinian (example) theory, 728, 729\n objections to above, 735\u2010740\n Bushnellian (moral influence) theory, 733\u2010735\n objections to above, 735\u2010740\n Grotian (governmental) theory of, 740, 741\n Irvingian (gradually extirpated depravity) theory of, 744, 745\n objections to theory, 745\u2010747\n Anselmic (commercial) theory of, 747, 748\n Military theory of, 747\n objections to, 748\u2010750\n Criminal theory of, 748\n the Ethical theory of, 750\u2010771\n a true theory of, resolves two problems, 750, 751\n grounded in holiness of God, 751\n a satisfaction of an ethical demand of the divine nature, 751, 752, 753\n substitution in, an operation of grace, 752\n the righteousness of law maintained in, 752\n maintains, as a first subordinate result, the interests of the divine\n government, 753\n provides, as a second subordinate result, for the needs of human nature,\n 753\n the classical passage with reference to, 753\n sets forth Christ as so related to humanity that he is under obligation\n to pay and does pay, 754\n explains how the innocent can suffer for the guilty in, 755, 756, 757\n Andover theory of, 756\n by one whose nature was purified, but his obligation to suffer\n undiminished, 757\n the guilt resting on Christ in, what it was, 645, 646, 757\n as a member of the race, did he not suffer in, for his own sin?, 758\n showed what had been in the heart of God from eternity, 758\n explanations of Christ\u2019s identification with humanity as a reason why he\n made, 759\u2010761\n exposition of 2 Cor. 5:21, 760\n grounded in the holiness and love of God, 761\n is accomplished through the solidarity of the race, and Christ the\n common life, bearing guilt for men, 761\n ground of, on the part of man, 761\n rather revealed than made by incarnate Christ, 762, 763\n Ethical theory of, philosophically correct, 764\n combines the valuable elements of other theories, 764\n shows most satisfactorily how demands of holiness are met, 764\n presents only explanation of sacrificial rites and language, 765\n alone gives proper place to death of Christ, 765\n is best explanation of sufferings of Christ, 765\n satisfies most completely the ethical demand of human nature, 765, 766\n objected to, as inconsistent with God\u2019s omnipotence or love, 766\n objected to, as presented ideas mutually exclusive, 767\n objected to, as obviating real propitiation, 768\n objected to, as an act of injustice, 768\n objected to, because transfer of punishment is impossible, 768, 769\n objected to, because the remorse implied in it, was impossible to\n Christ, 769\n objected to, because sufferings finite in time cannot satisfy infinite\n demands of law, 769, 770\n objected to, that it renders Christ\u2019s active obedience superfluous, 770\n objected to, as immoral in tendency, 770\n objected to, as requiring faith to complete a satisfaction which ought\n to be itself perfect, 771\n extent of, 771\u2010773\n unlimited, 771\n its application limited, 771\n passages asserting its special efficacy, 771\n passages asserting its sufficiency for all, 771\n secures for all men delay in execution of sentence against sin, 772\n has made objective provision for all, 772, 773\n has procured for all incentives to repentance, 773\n limited, advocates of, 773\n universal, advocates of, 773\n\nAttributes, divine, see God.\n mental, higher than those of matter, inference from, 92\n\nAurignac Cave, its evidence doubtful, 532\n\nAustralian languages, their affinities, 479\n\nAutomatic, mental activity largely, 550\n\n\u201cAutomatic excellence or badness,\u201d 611\n\nAvarice, defined, 569\n\nAvatars, Hindu, 187\n Christ\u2019s incarnation unlike, 698\n\n_Ayat_ of Koran, 213\n\nBaalim, 318\n\nBalaam, inspired, yet unholy, 207\n\nBaptism and Lord\u2019s Supper, only accounted for as monuments, 157\n the formula of, correlates Christ\u2019s name with God\u2019s, 312\n according to Romish church, 522\n of Jesus, its import, 761, 762, 942\n Christian, definition of, 931\n instituted by Christ, 931\n of universal and perpetual obligation, 931\n ignored by Salvation Army and Society of Friends, 931\n John\u2019s recognized by Christ, 931, 932\n John\u2019s, was it a modification of a previously existing rite?, 931, 932\n proselyte, its existence discussed, 931, 932\n John\u2019s, essentially Christian baptism, 732\n made the law of the church, 932\n Christian, complementally related to Lord\u2019s Supper, is of equal\n permanency, 932, 933\n its mode, immersion, 933\n meaning of its original word, according to Greek usage, 933, 934\n meaning of original word as determined by contextual relation, 934\n meaning of original word determined by voice used with \u2019water,\u2019, 935\n meaning of original word determined by prepositional connections, 935\n meaning of original word derived from circumstances, 935\n original meaning of word determined from figurative allusions, 936\n original meaning of word determined by practice of early church, 936\n occasional change in its mode permitted for seeming sufficient reason at\n an early date, 936\n original meaning of word determined by usage of Greek church, 937, 938\n Dr. Dods\u2019 statement as to its mode, 938\n concession to its original method of observance in the introduction of\n baptisteries or \u201cfontgraves\u201d into non Baptist places of\n worship, 938\n the church, being only an executive body, cannot modify Christ\u2019s law\n concerning, 939\n the law of, fundamental, and therefore unalterable save by Legislator\n himself, 939\n any modification of, by church, implies unwisdom in Appointer of rite,\n 939\n any change in mode vacates ordinance of its symbolic significance, 939\n objections to its mode, immersion, 940\n if its mode impracticable, ordinance not a duty, 940\n when its mode dangerous, ordinance not to be performed, 940\n the mode of baptism decently impressive, 940\n the ordinance symbolizing suffering and death is consistently somewhat\n inconvenient, 940\n God\u2019s blessing on an irregular administration of, no sanction of\n irregularity, 940\n its symbolism, 940\u2010945\n what it symbolizes is general, 940\n it symbolizes death and burial of Christ, 940\n it symbolizes union with Christ, 941\n it symbolizes atonement and redemption, 941\n it symbolizes to the believer being baptized his spiritual death and\n resurrection, 941\n it symbolizes union of believers with each other, 942\n it symbolizes the death and resurrection of the body, 942\n the central truth, set forth by, 942\n a correlative truth set forth by, 943\n sets forth purification through communion with death of Christ, 944\n symbolizes regenerating power of Jesus\u2019 death, 944\n immersion in, alone symbolizes the passage from death unto life in\n regeneration and communion with Christ in his death and\n rising, 944\n the substituting for the correct mode of, one which excludes all\n reference to Christ\u2019s death destroys the ordinance, 944\n is a historical monument, 945\n is a pictorial expression of doctrine, 945\n and Lord\u2019s Supper, 945\n subjects of, 945\u2010959\n the proper subjects of, 945\n those only to be baptized who have first been made disciples, 945\n those only to be baptized who have repented and believed, 945\n those only to be baptized who can be members of the church, 945\n those only to be baptized for whom the symbolism is valid, 946\n not a means of regeneration, 946\n the spiritual and the ritual so combined in, that the whole ordinance\n may be designated by its outward aspect, 946\n as a being \u201cborn of water,\u201d 946\n connected with repentance \u201cfor the remission of sins,\u201d, 946\n without baptism, discipleship incomplete, and ineffective, 947\n the teachings of Campbellism regarding, 947, 948\n act of person baptized, 948\n before it is administered, church should require evidence that\n candidates are regenerated, 949\n incorrectly called \u201cdoor into the church,\u201d, 949\n as expressive of inward character of candidate, 950\n as regeneration is once for all, baptism must not be repeated, 950\n as outward expression of inward change, is the first of all duties, 950\n should follow regeneration with least possible delay, 950\n if an actual profession of faith, not to be repeated, 950\n accessories to, matters of individual judgment, 951\n its formula, 951\n Infant, 951\u2010959\n without warrant in scripture, 951\n has no express command, 951\n no clear example, 951\n passages held to imply it, have no reference thereto, 951\n expressly contradicted, 952\n in it the prerequisites of faith and repentance impossible, 952\n in it the symbolism of baptism has lost significance, 952\n its practice inconsistent with constitution of the church, 952\n is unharmonious with prerequisites to the Lord\u2019s Supper, 952\n has led in Greek Church to infant communion, 953\n denied by the Paulicians, 953\n the reasons of its rise and spread, 953\n a necessary concomitant of a State Church, 954\n founded on unscriptural and dangerous reasonings, 954\n it assumes power of church to tamper with Christ\u2019s commands, 954\n contradicts New Testament ideas of church, 954\n assumes a connection of parent and child closer and more influential\n than facts of Scripture and experience will support, 954,\n 955\n its propriety urged on various unsettled grounds, 956\n does it make its subjects members of the church?, 956\n its evil effects, 957\u2010959\n forestalls any voluntary act, 957\n induces superstitious confidence, 957\n has led to baptism of irrational and material things, 957\n has obscured and corrupted Christian truth, 958\n is often an obstacle to evangelical views, 958\n merges church in nation and world, 958\n substitutes for Christ\u2019s command an invention of men, 958, 959\n literature concerning, 959\n\nBaptismal Regeneration, 820\u2010822, 946, 947\n literature upon, 948\n\nBaptist Theology, 47\n\nBaptists, English, 972, 977\n Free Will, 972, 977, 979\n\nBelievers, and the \u201cold man,\u201d, 870\n and the Intermediate State, 998, 999\n\n_Bewusstsein_, in _Gottesbewusstsein_, 63\n\nBible, see Scripture.\n\nBishop, office of, early made sole interpreter of apostles, 912\n in his progress from _primus inter pares_ to Christ\u2019s vicegerent, 912\n ordaining, his qualifications in Episcopal church, 913\n \u201cpresbyter\u201d and \u201cpastor\u201d designate same order, 914, 915\n the duties of, 916, 917\n ordination of, 918\u2010924\n\nBlessedness, what?, 265\n contrasted with glory, 265\n\nBodies, new, of saints, are confined to space, 1032\n\nBody, image of God, mediately or _significative_, 523\n honorable, 488\n suggestions as to reason why given, 488\n immortality of, sought by Egyptians, 995\n not indispensable to activity and consciousness, 1000\n spiritual, what it imports, 1016, 1021\u20101023\n resurrection of, see Resurrection.\n same, though changed annually, 1020\n a \u201cflowing organism,\u201d, 1021\n to regard it as a normal part of man\u2019s being, Scriptural and\n philosophical, 1021, 1022\n\n\u201cBond servant of sin,\u201d what?, 509, 510\n\nBook may be called by name of chief author, 239\n\nBook of Mormon, 141\n of Enoch, 165\n of Judges, 166, 171\n of the Law, its finding, 167\n\nBooks of O. T. quoted by Jesus, 199\n of N. T. received and used, in 2d century, 146\n\nBrahma, 181\n\nBrahmanism, 181\n\nBread, in Lord\u2019s Supper, its significance, 963\n of life, 963\n\nBrethren, Plymouth, 895, 896\n\nBride catching, not primeval, 528\n\n\u201cBrimstone and fire,\u201d sin and conscience, 1049\n\nBrute, conscious but not self conscious, 252, 467\n cannot objectify self, 252, 467\n is determined from without, 252, 468\n none ever thought \u2019I,\u2019 467\n has not apperception, 467\n has no concepts, 467\n has no language, 467\n forms no judgments, 467\n does not associate ideas by similarity, 467\n cannot reason, 467\n has no general ideas, 468\n has no conscience, 468\n has no religious nature, 468\n man came not _from_ the, but _through_ the, 467\n\nBuddha, 181, 182, 183\n\nBuddhism, its grain of truth, 181\n a missionary religion, 181\n its universalism, 181\n its altruism, 181\n its atheism, 182\n its fatalism, 182\n\n\u201cBuncombe,\u201d 17\n\nBurial of food and weapons with the dead body, why practiced by some\n races, 532\n\nBurnt offering, its significance, 726\n\nByzantine and Italian artists differ in their pictures of Jesus Christ,\n 678\n\nC\u00e6sar, writes in the third person, 151\n unifier of the Latin West, 566\n his words on passing the Rubicon, 1032\n\n\u201cCaged eagle theory\u201d of man\u2019s life, 560\n\nCaiaphas, inspired yet unholy, 207\n\nCain, 477\n\nCalixtus, his analytic method in systematic theology, 45, 46\n\nCall to ministry, 919\n\nCalling, efficacious, 777, 782, 790, 791, 793, 794\n general or external, 791\n is general, sincere?, 791, 792\n\nCalvinism, in history, 368\n\nCalvinistic and Arminian views, their approximation, 362, 368\n\nCambridge Platform, 923\n\n\u201cCarnal mind,\u201d its meaning, 562\n\nCarthage, Council of (397), and Epistle to the Hebrews, 152\n Synod of (412), and Pelagius, 597\n\nCaste, what?, 181\n and Buddhism, 181\n and Christianity, 898\n\nCasualism, 427, 428\n\nCasuistry, non scriptural, 648\n\nCatacombs, 191\n\nCatechism, Roman, on _originalis justiti\u00e6 donum additum_, 522\n Westminster Assembly\u2019s, on Infant Baptism, 957\n\nCausality, its law, 73\n does not require a first cause, 74\n\nCause and effect, simultaneity of, 793\n\nCause, equivalent to \u2019requisite,\u2019, 44\n formal, 44\n material, 44\n efficient, 44\n final, 44\n can an infinite, be inferred from a finite universe? 79\n when the efficient, gives place to the final? 125\n various definitions of, 814, 815\n\nCauses, Aristotle\u2019s four, 44\n an infinite series of, does not require a cause of itself, 74\n\nCelsus, derides the same religion for many peoples, 192\n\nCertainty not necessity, 362\n\nChalcedon (451) Symbol, on Mary as \u2019mother of God,\u2019 671, 686\n condemned Eutychianism, 672\n promulgated orthodox doctrine as to the Person of Christ, 673\n its formula negative with a single exception, 673\n\nChance as a name for ignorance, term allowable, 428\n as implying absence of causal connection in phenomena, not allowable,\n 428\n as undesigning cause, insufficient, 428\n\nChange, orderly, requires intelligent cause, 75\n\nCharacter, helped by systematic truth, 16\n changed rather than expressed by some actions, 360\n what it is, 506, 600\n how a man may change, 507\n extent of one\u2019s responsibility for, 605\n sinning makes, 1041\n sinful, renders certain continuance in sinful actions, 1041\n dependent on habit, 1049\n\nChastisement, not punishment, 654, 766\n\nCherubim, 449, 593\n\nChild, unborn, has promise and potency of spiritual manhood, 644\n individuality of the, 492\n visited for sins of fathers, 634\n\nChiliasts in all ages, 1007\n\nChinese, their religion a survival of patriarchial family worship, 180\n their history, its commencement, 225\n may have left primitive abodes while language still monosyllabic, 478\n\nChoice, of an ultimate end, 504\n of means, 504\n decision in favor of one among several conflicting desires, 505, 506\n not creation, our destiny, 508\n New School idea of, 550\n first moral, 611\n evil, uniformity of, what it implies, 611\n contrary, possessed by Adam, 519\n not essential to will, 600\n as at present possessed by man, 605\n God\u2019s, see Election.\n\nChrist, his person and character must be historical, 186\n\nChrist, no source for conception of, other than himself, 187\n conception of, could not originate in human genius, 187\n acceptance of the story of, a proof of his existence, 187\n some of the difficulties in which the assumption that the story of, is\n false, lands us, 188\n if the story of, is true, Christianity is true, 188\n his testimony to himself, its substance, 189\n his testimony to himself, not that of an intentional deceiver, 189\n his testimony to himself, not that of insanity or vanity, 189\n if neither mentally nor morally unsound, his testimony concerning\n himself is true, 190\n in his sympathy and sorrow reveals God\u2019s feeling, 266\n the whole Christ present in each believer, 281\n his supreme regard for God, 302\n recognized as God in certain passages, 305\u2010308\n some passages once relied on to prove his divinity now given up for\n textual reasons, 308\n Old Testament descriptions of God applied to him, 309\n possesses attributes of God, 309\n undelegated works of God are ascribed to him, 310\n receives honor and worship due only to God, 311\n his name associated on equality with that of God, 312\n equality with God expressly claimed for him, 312\n \u201c_si non Deus, non bonus_,\u201d, 313\n proofs of his divinity in certain phrases applied to him, 313\n his divinity corroborated by Christian experience, 313, 682\n his divinity exhibited in hymns and prayers of church, 313\n his divinity, passages which seem inconsistent with, how to be regarded,\n 314\n as pre\u2010incarnate Logos, Angel of Jehovah, 319\n in pre\u2010existent state, the Logos, 335\n in pre\u2010existent state, the Image of God, 335\n in pre\u2010existent state, the Effulgence of God, 335\n the centrifugal action of Deity, 336\n and Spirit, how their work differs, 338\n his eternal Sonship, 340\n if not God, cannot reveal him, 349\n orders of creation to be united in, 444\n his human soul, 493\n his character convinces of sin, 539\n he is the ideal and the way to it, 544\n not law, \u201cthe perfect Image\u201d of God, 548\n his holiness, in what it consisted, 572\n in Gethsemane felt for the race, 635\n with him believers have a connection of spiritual life, 636\n human nature in, may have guilt without depravity, 645\n educator of the race, 666\n the Person of, 669\u2010700\n the doctrine of his Person stated, 669\n a brief historical survey of the doctrine of his Person, 669\n views of the Ebionites concerning, 669\n reality of his body denied by Docet\u00e6, 670\n views of Arians concerning, 670\n views of Apollinarians, 670, 671\n views of Nestorians, 671, 672\n views of Eutychians, 672\n the two natures of, their integrity, 673\n his humanity real, 673\n is expressly called \u201ca man,\u201d, 673\n his genealogies, 673\n had the essential elements of human nature, 674\n had the same powers and principles of normal humanity, 674\n his elocution, 674\n subject to the laws of human development, 675\n in twelfth year seems to enter on consciousness of his divine Sonship,\n 675\n suffered and died, 675\n dies (Stroud) of a broken heart, 675\n lived a life of faith and prayer, and study of Scripture, 675\n the integrity of his humanity, 675\u2010681\n supernaturally conceived, 675\n free from hereditary depravity and actual sin, 676\n his ideal human nature, 678\n his human nature finds its personality in union with the divine, 679\n his human nature germinal, 680\n the \u201cEverlasting Father,\u201d 680\n the Vine man, 680\n Docetic doctrine concerning, confuted, 681\n possessed a knowledge of his own deity, 681\n exercised divine prerogatives, 682\n in him divine knowledge and power, 682\n union of two natures in his one person, 683\u2010700\n possesses a perfect divine and human nature, 683, 684\n proof of this union of natures in, 684\n speaks of himself as a single person, 684\n attributes of both his natures ascribed to one person, 684, 685\n Scriptural representation of infinite value of atonement and union of\n race with God prove him divine, 685\n Lutheran view as to communion of natures in, 686\n four _genera_ regarding the natures of Christ, 686\n union of natures in, 686\n theory of his incomplete humanity, 686\n objections to this theory, 687, 688\n theory of his gradual incarnation, 688, 689\n objections to this view, 689\u2010691\n real nature of union of persons in, 691\u2010700\n importance of correct views of the person of, 691, 692\n chief problems in the doctrine of the person of, 692\n why the union of the natures in the person of Christ is inscrutable, 693\n on what the possibility of the union of deity and humanity in his person\n is grounded, 693, 694\n no double personality in, 694\u2010696\n union of natures in, its effect upon his humanity, 696, 697\n union of natures in, its effect upon the divine, 697\n this union of natures in the person of, necessary, 698\n the union of natures in, eternal, 698, 699\n the infinite and finite in, 699, 700\n the two states of, 701\u2010710\n the nature of his humiliation, 701\u2010706\n not the union in him of Logos and human nature, 701\n his humiliation did not consist in the surrender of the relative divine\n attributes, 701\n objections to above view, 701\u2010703\n his humiliation consisted in the surrender of the independent exercise\n of the Divine attributes, 703\n his humiliation consisted in the assumption by the pre\u2010existent Logos of\n the servant\u2010form, 703\n his humiliation consisted in the submission of the Logos to the Holy\n Spirit, 703\n his humiliation consisted in the surrender as to his human nature of all\n advantages accruing thereto from union with deity, 703, 704\n the five stages of his humiliation, 704\u2010706\n his state of exaltation, 706\u2010710\n the nature of his exaltation, 706, 707\n the stages of his exaltation, 707\u2010710\n his quickening and resurrection, 707, 708\n his ascension, 708\u2010710\n his offices, 710\u2010776\n his offices three, 710\n his Prophetic work, 710\u2010713\n prophet, its meaning as applied to him, 710\n three methods of fulfilling the prophet\u2019s office, 711\n his preparatory work as Logos, 711\n his ministry as incarnate, 711, 712\n his ascended guidance and teaching of the church on earth, 712\n his final revelation of the Father to the saints in glory, 712, 713\n his Priestly office, 713\u2010775\n in what respects he was a priest, 713\n his atoning work, see Atonement.\n as immanent in the universe, see Logos.\n bearer of our humanity, life of our race, 715\n his sufferings not atonement but revelation of atonement, 715\n his death a moral stimulus to men, 716\n did he ever utter the words \u201cgive his life a ransom for many\u201d?, 717\n did not preach, but established the gospel, 721\n a noble martyr, 729\n his death the central truth of Christianity, 733, 764\n his death set forth by Baptism and Lord\u2019s Supper, 733\n the Great Penitent, 734, 737, 760\n the Savior of all men, 739\n refused \u201cthe wine mingled with myrrh,\u201d, 742\n never makes confession of sin, 746\n a stumbling\u2010block to modern speculation, 746\n had not hereditary depravity but guilt, 747, 762\n was he slain by himself or another?, 747\n does he suffer intensively the infinite punishment of sin?, 747\n his obedience, active and passive, needed in salvation, 749, 770\n died for all, 750\n incorporate with humanity, became our substitute, 750\n how \u201clifted up,\u201d, 751\n mediator between the just God and the merciful God, 754\n in his organic union with the race is the vital relation which makes his\n vicarious sufferings either possible or just, 754\n as God immanent in humanity, is priest and victim, condemning and\n condemned, atoning and atoned, 755\n created humanity, and as immanent God sustains it, while it sins, thus\n becoming responsible for its sin, 755, 769\n as Logos smitten by guilt and punishment, 755\n the \u201cmust be\u201d of his sufferings, what?, 755\n his race\u2010responsibility not destroyed by incarnation, or purification in\n womb of Virgin, 756\n his sufferings reveal the cross hidden in the divine love from\n foundation of the world, 756, 763\n in womb of Virgin purged from depravity, guilt and penalty remaining,\n 757, 759\n the central brain of our race through which all ideas must pass, 757\n his guilt, what?, 757\n innocent in personal, but not race relations, 758\n his secular and church priesthood, 758\n did he suffer only for his own share in sin of the race?, 758\n his incarnation an expression of a prior union with race beginning at\n creation, 758\n various explanations of his identification with race, 759\n he longed to suffer, 759\n he could not help suffering, 760\n all nerves and sensibilities of race meet in him, 760\n his place in 2 Cor. 5:21, 760, 761\n when and how did he take guilt and penalty on himself, 761\n import of his submission to John\u2019s baptism, 762\n was he unjustified till his death?, 762\n his guilt first purged on Cross, 762\n as incarnate, revealed, rather than made, atonement, 762\n the personally unmerited sufferings of, the mystery of atonement, 768\n may have felt remorse as central conscience of humanity, 769\n his sufferings, though temporal, met infinite demands of law, 769\n paid a penalty equivalent, though not identical, 769, 770\n how Savior of all men, 772\n specially Savior of those who believe, 773\n his priesthood, everlasting, 773\n as Priest he is intercessor, see Intercession.\n his Kingly office, 775\n his kingship defined, 775\n his kingdom of power, 775\n his kingdom of grace, 775, 776\n the only instance of _Fortwirkung_ after death, 776\n his kingdom of glory, 776\n his kingdom, the antidote to despair concerning church, 776\n his kingship, two practical remarks upon, 776\n union with, see Union.\n ascended, communicates life to church, 806\n heathen may receive salvation from Christ without knowing giver or how\n gift was purchased, 843\n his sufferings secure acquittal from penalty of law, 858\n his obedience secures reward of law, 858\n union with, secures his life as dominant principle in soul, 860\n his life in believer will infallibly extirpate all depravity, 860\n \u201cwe in,\u201d Justification, 862\n \u201cin us,\u201d Sanctification, 862\n his twofold work in the world, 869\n a new object of attention to the believer, 873\n union with, secures impartation of spirit of obedience, 875\n his commands must not be modified by any church, 939\n submitted to rites appointed for sinners, 943\n God\u2019s judicial activity exercised through, 1027\n qualified by his two natures to act as judge, 1027\n his body confined to space, 1032\n his soul not limited to space, 1032\n\nChristianity, its triumph over paganism, the wonder of history, 191\u2010193\n its influence on civilization, 193, 194\n its influence on individuals, 194, 195\n submits to judgment by only test of a religion, not ideals, but\n performances, 195\n and pantheism, 282\n circumstances favorable to its propagation, 666\n Japanese objection to its doctrine of brotherhood, 898\n\nChristological method in theology, 50\n\nChristology, 665\u2010776\n\nChronology, schemes of, 224, 225\n\nChurch, its safety and aggressiveness dependent on sound doctrine, 18\n its relation to truth, 33\n polity and ordinances of, their purpose, 546\n a prophetic institution, 712\n doctrine of the, 887\u2010980\n constitution of the, or its Polity, 887\u2010929\n in its largest signification, 887\n and kingdom, difference between, 887, 889\n definition of, in Westminster Confession, 887\n the universal, includes all believers, 888\n universal, the body of Christ, 888\n a transcendent element in, 888\n union with Christ, the presupposition of, 888\n the indwelling Christ, its elevating privilege, 888\n the universal or invisible distinguished from the local or visible, 889\n individual, defined, 890\n the laws of Christ on which church gathered, 890\n not a humanitarian organization, 890\n the term employed in a loose sense, 891\n significance of the term etymologically, 891\n the secular use of its Greek form, 891\n used as a generic or collective term, 891\n the Greek term translated, its derivation, 891\n applied by a figure of rhetoric to many churches, 891\n the local, a divine appointment, 892\n the Hebrew terms for, its larger and narrower use, 892\n Christ took his idea of, from Hebrew not heathen sources, 892\n exists for sake of the kingdom, 892\n will be displaced by a Christian state, 893\n the decline of, not to be deplored, 893\n a voluntary society, 893\n membership in, not hereditary or compulsory, 893\n union with, logically follows union with Christ, 893\n its doctrine, a necessary outgrowth of the doctrine of regeneration, 893\n highest organism of human life, 894\n is an organism such as the religion of spirit necessarily creates, 891\n its organization may be informal, 894\n its organization may be formal, 894\n its organization in N. T. formal, 894\n its developed organization indicated by change of names from Gospels to\n Epistles, 895\n not an exclusively spiritual organization, 895\n doctrine of Plymouth Brethren concerning, 895, 896\n organization of the, not definitely prescribed in N. T. and left to\n expediency; an erroneous theory, 896\n government of, five alleged forms in N. T., 897\n regenerate persons only members of, 897\n Christ law giver of, 897\n members on equality, 898\n one member of, has no jurisdiction over another, 898\n independent of civil power, 899\n local, its sole object, 899\n local, united worship a duty of, 899\n its law, the will of Christ, 900\n membership in, qualifications prescribed for, 900\n membership in, duties attached to, 900\n its genesis, 900\n in germ before Pentecost, 900\n three periods in life of, 901\n officers elected as occasion demanded, 901\n Paul\u2019s teaching concerning, progressive, 902\n how far synagogue was model of, 902\n a new, how constituted, 902\n in formation of, a council not absolutely requisite, 902, 903\n at Antioch, its independent career, 903\n its government, 903\u2010926\n its government, as to source of authority, an absolute monarchy, 903\n its government, as to interpretation and execution of Christ\u2019s law, an\n absolute democracy, 903\n should be united in action, 904\n union of, in action should be, not passive submission, but intelligent\n co\u2010operation, 904\n peaceful unity in, result of Spirit\u2019s work, 904\n Baptist, law of majority rule in, 904\n as a whole responsible for doctrinal and practical purity, 905\n ordinances committed to custody of whole, 905\n as a whole, elects its officers and delegates, 906\n as a whole, exercises discipline, 907\n the self government of, an educational influence, 908\n pastor\u2019s duty to, 908\n the world church or Romanist theory of, considered, 908\u2010911\n Peter as foundation of, what meant by the statement, 909\u2010911\n See also Peter.\n the hierarchical government of, corrupting and dishonoring to Christ,\n 911\n the theory of a national, considered, 912\u2010914\n Presbyterian system of the, authors upon, 912\n independence of, when given up, 912\n a spiritual, incapable of delimitation, 913\n officers of the, 914\u2010924\n offices in, two, 914\u2010916\n a plurality of eldership in the primitive, occasional, 915, 916\n the pastor, bishop or elder of the, his three fold duty, 916, 917\n the deacon, his duties, 917, 918\n did women in the early church discharge diaconal functions?, 918\n ordination of officers in, 918\u2010924\n See Ordination.\n local, highest ecclesiastical authority in N. T., 920\n discipline of, 924\u2010926\n relation of, to sister churches, 926\u2010929\n each, the equal of any other, 926\n each, directly responsible to Christ, and with spiritual possibilities\n equal to any other, 926\n each, to maintain fraternity and co\u2010operation with other churches, 926\n each, should seek and take advice from other churches, 927\n the fellowship of a, with another church may be broken by departures\n from Scriptural faith and practice, 928\n independence of, qualified by interdependence, 928\n what it ought to do if distressed by serious internal disagreements, 928\n its independence requires largest co\u2010operation with other churches, 929\n list of authorities on general subject of the, 929\n ordinances of the, 930\u2010980\n See Ordinances, Baptism, and Lord\u2019s Supper.\n\n_Circulatio_, 333\n\nCircumcision, of Christ, its import, 761\n its law and that of baptism not the same, 954, 955\n\n_Circumincessio_, 333\n\nCivilization, can its arts be lost?, 529\n\nCoffin, called by Egyptians \u2019chest of the living,\u2019, 995\n\n_Cogito ergo Deus est_, 61\n\n_Cogito ergo sum = cogito scilicet sum_, 55\n\n_Cogito = cogitans sum_, 55\n\nCognition of finiteness, dependence, etc., the occasion of the direct\n cognition of the Infinite, Absolute, etc., 52\n\nComing, second, of Christ, 1003\u20101015\n the doctrine of, stated, 1003\n Scriptures describing, 1003, 1004\n statements concerning, not all spiritual, 1004\n outward and visible, 1004\n the objects to be secured at, 1004\n said to be \u201cin like manner\u201d to his ascension, 1004, 1005\n analogous to his first, 1005\n can all men at one time see Christ at the?, 1005\n the time of, not definitely taught, 1005\n predictions of, parallel those of his first, 1007\n patient waiting for, disciplinary, 1007\n precursors of, 1008\u20101010\n a general prevalence of Christianity, a precursor of, 1008\n a deep and wide spread development of evil, a precursor of, 1008\n a personal antichrist, a precursor of, 1008\n four signs of, according to some, 1010\n millennium, prior to, 1010, 1011\n and millennium as pointed out in Rev. 20:4\u201010, 1011\n immediately connected with a general resurrection and judgment, 1011\n of two kinds, 1014\n a reconciliation of pre\u2010millenarian and post\u2010millenarian theories\n suggested, 1014\n is the preaching which is to precede, to nations as wholes, or to each\n individual in a nation?, 1014\n the destiny of those living at, 1015\n\nComings of Christ, partial and typical, 1003\n\nCommenting, its progress, 35\n\nCommission, Christ\u2019s final, not confined to eleven, 906\n\nCommercial theory of Atonement, 747\n\nCommon law of church, what?, 970\n\nCommunion, prerequisites to, 969\u2010980\n limitation of, commanded by Christ and apostles, 969\n limitation of, implied in its analogy to Baptism, 969\n prerequisites to, laid down not by church, but by Christ and his\n apostles expressly or implicitly, 970\n prerequisites to, are four, 970\n Regeneration, a prerequisite to, 971\n Baptism, a prerequisite to, 971\n the apostles were baptized before, 971\n the command of Christ places baptism before, 971\n in all cases recorded in N. T. baptism precedes, 971\n the symbolism of the ordinances requires baptism to precede, 971, 972\n standards of principal denominations place baptism before, 972\n where baptism customarily does not precede, the results are\n unsatisfactory, 972\n church membership, a prerequisite to, 973\n a church rite, 973\n a symbol of Christian fellowship, 973\n an orderly walk, a prerequisite to, 973\n immoral conduct, a bar to, 973, 974\n disobedience to the commands of Christ, a bar to, 974\n heresy, a bar to, 974\n schism, a bar to, 975\n restricted, the present attitude of Baptist churches to, 976\n local church under responsibility to see its, preserved from disorder,\n 975, 976\n open, advocated because baptism cannot be a term of communion, not being\n a term of salvation, 977\n open, contrary to the practice of organised Christianity, 977\n no more binding than baptism, 978\n open, tends to do away with baptism, 978\n open, destroys discipline, 978\n open, tends to do away with the visible church, 979\n strict, objections to, answered briefly, 979, 980\n open, its justification briefly considered, 980\n a list of authors upon, 980\n\nCompact with Satan, 458\n\nComplex act, part may designate whole, 946\n\nConcept, not a mental image, 7\n in theology, may be distinguished by definition from all others, 15\n\nConcupiscence, what?, 522\n Romish doctrine of, 604\n\nConcurrence in all operations at basis of preservation, 411\n divine efficiency in, does not destroy or absorb the efficiency\n assisted, 418\n God\u2019s, in evil acts only as they are natural acts, 418, 419\n\nConfession, Romanist view of, 834\n\nConflagration, final, 1012\n\nConfucianism, 180, 181\n\nConfucius, 180, 181\n\nConnate ideas, 53, 54\n\nConscience, what?, 82, 83\n proves existence of a holy Lawgiver and Judge, 82\n its supremacy, 82\n warns of existence of law, 82\n speaks in imperative, 82\n represents to itself some other as judge, 82\n the will it expresses superior to ours, 83\n witness against pantheism, 103\n thirst of, assuaged by Christ\u2019s sacrifice, 297\n its nature, 498\n not a faculty, but a mode, 498\n intellectual element in, 498\n emotional element in, 498\n solely judicial, 498\n discriminative, 498\n impulsive, 498\n other mental processes from which it is to be distinguished, 499\n the moral judiciary of the soul, 500\n must be enlightened and cultivated, 500\n an echo of God\u2019s voice, 501\n in its relation to God as holy, 502\n the organ by which the human spirit finds God in itself, and itself in\n God, 503\n rendered less sensitive, but cannot be annulled, by sin, 647\n needs Christ\u2019s propitiation, 736\n absolute liberty of, a distinguishing tenet of Baptists, 898, 899\n\nConsciousness, Christian, not _norma normans_, but _norma normata_, 28\n defined, 63\n not source of other knowledge, 63\n self, primarily a distinguishing of itself from itself, 104\n comes logically before consciousness of the world, 104\n self consciousness, what?, 252\n\nConsubstantiation, 968\n\nContrary choice, in Adam, 519\n not essential to will, 600, 605\n its present limits, 605\n\nContrition, Romish doctrine of, 834\n\nConversion, God\u2019s act in the will in, 793\n sudden, 827\n defined, 829\n relation to regeneration, 829\n voluntary, 829\n man\u2019s relation to God in, 830\n conversions other than the first, 831\n relations of the divine and human in, 831\n\nCosmological argument, see God.\n\nCovetousness, what?, 569\n\nCranial capacity of man and apes, 473\n\nCreatianism, its advocates, 491\n its tenets, 491\n its untenability, 491\u2010493\n\nCreation, attributed to Christ, 310\n attributed to Spirit, 316\n doctrine of, 371\u2010410\n definition of, 371, 372\n by man of ideas and volitions and indirectly of brain modifications, 371\n is change of energy into force, 371\n Lotzean, author\u2019s view of, 372\n is not \u201cproduction out of nothing,\u201d, 372\n is not \u201cfashioning,\u201d, 372, 373\n not an emanation from divine substance, 372\n the divine in, the origination of substance, 373\n free act of a rational will, 373\n externalization of God\u2019s thought, 373\n creation and \u201cgeneration\u201d and \u201cprocession,\u201d, 373\n is God\u2019s voluntary limitation of himself, 373\n how an act of the triune God, 373\n not necessary to a trinitarian God, 373\n the doctrine of, proved only from Scripture, 374\n direct Scripture statements concerning, discussed, 374\u2010377\n idea of, originates, when we think of things as originating in God\n immediately, 375\n Paul\u2019s idea of, 376\n absolute, heathen had glimpses of, 376\n best expressed in Hebrew, 376\n found among early Babylonians, 376\n found in pre\u2010Zoroastrian, Vedic, and early Egyptian religions, 376\n in heathen systems, 377\n literature on, 377\n \u201cout of nothing,\u201d its origin, 377\n indirect evidence of, from Scripture, 377, 378\n theories which oppose, 378\u2010391\n Dualism opposes, see Dualism.\n Emanation opposes, see Emanation.\n\nCreation from eternity, theory stated, 386\n not necessitated by God\u2019s omnipotence, 387\n contradictory in terms and irrational, 387\n another form of the see\u2010saw philosophy, 387\n not necessitated by God\u2019s timelessness, 387\n inconceivable, 387\n not consistent with the conception of universe as an organism, 388\n not necessitated by God\u2019s immutability, 388\n not necessitated by God\u2019s love, 388, 389\n inconsistent with God\u2019s independence and personality, 389\n outgrowth of Unitarian tendencies, 389\n\nCreation, opposed by theory of spontaneous generation, see Generation,\n Spontaneous.\n Mosaic account of, 391\u2010397\n asserts originating act of God in, 391\n makes God antedate and create matter, 391\n recognizes development, 392\n lays the foundation for cosmogony, 392\n can be interpreted in harmony with mediate creation or evolution, 392\n not an allegory or myth, 394\n Mosaic account of, not the blending of inconsistent stories,\u2010394\n not to be interpreted in a hyperliteral way, 394\n does not use \u201cday\u201d for a period of twenty\u2010four hours, 394\n is not a precise geological record, 395\n its scheme in detail, 395\u2010397\n literature upon, 396, 397\n\nCreation, God\u2019s end in, 397\u2010402\n God\u2019s end in, his own glory, 398\n God\u2019s chief end in, the manifestation of his glory, 398\n his glory most valuable end in, 399\n his glory only end in, consistent with his independence and sovereignty,\n 399\n his glory the end in, which secures every interest of the universe, 400\n his glory the end in, because it is the end proposed to his creatures,\n 401\n its final value, its value for God, 402\n the doctrine of, its relation to other doctrines, 402\u2010410\n its relation to the holiness and benevolence of God, 402\n first, in what senses \u201cvery good,\u201d, 402\n pain and imperfection in, before moral evil, reasons for, 402\n sets forth wisdom and free\u2010will of God, 404\n Christ in, the Revealer of God, and the remedy of pessimism, 405\n presents God in Providence and Redemption, 407\n gives value to the Sabbath, 408\n\nCreation of man, exclusively a fact of Scripture, 465\n Scripture declares it an act of God, 465\n Scripture silent on method of, 465\n Scripture does not exclude mediate creation of body, if this method\n probable from other sources, 465, 491\n and theistic evolution, 466\n his soul, its creation, though mediate, yet immediate, 466, 491\n not from brute, but _from_ God, _through_ brute, 467, 469, 472\n the last stage in the development of life, 469\n unintelligible unless the immanent God is regarded as giving new\n impulses to the process, 470\n as to soul and body, in a sense immediate, 470\n natural selection, its relations to, 470\n by laws of development, which are methods of the Creator, 472\n when finished presents, not a brute, but a man, 472\n constitutes him the offspring of God, and God his Father, 474\n as taking place through Christ, made its product a son of God by\n relationship to the Eternal Son, 474\n theory of its occurrence at several centres, 481\n and his new creation compared, 694\n in it body made corruptible, soul incorruptible, 991\n\nCreation, continuous, its doctrine, 415\n its advocates, 416\n the element of truth in, 416\n its error, 416\n contradicts consciousness, 416\n exaggerates God\u2019s power at expense of other attributes, 417\n renders personal identity inexplicable, 417\n tends to pantheism, 417\n\n_Creatura_, 392\n\n_Credo quia impossibile est_, 34\n\nCreeds, 18, 42\n\nCrime best prevented by conviction of its _desert_ of punishment, 655\n\n_Crimen l\u00e6s\u00e6 majestatis_, 748\n\nCriminal theory, 748\n\nCriticism, higher, 169\u2010172\n what it means, 169\n influenced by spirit in which conducted, 169, 170\n its teachings on Pentateuch and Hexateuch, 170\n reveals God\u2019s method in making up record of his revelation, 172\n literature upon, 172\n\nCumulative argument, 71\n\n_Cur Deus Homo_, synopsis of, 748\n\n\u201cCurse\u201d in Gal. 3:13, 760\n\n\u201cCustom, immemorial,\u201d binding, 970\n\n\u201cDamn,\u201d its present connotation acquired from impression made on popular\n mind by Scriptures, 1046\n\n\u201cDamnation\u201d in 1 Cor. 11:22, its meaning, 960\n\nDarwinism, its teaching, 470\n its truth, 470\n is not a complete explanation of the history of life, 470\n fails to account for origin of substance and of variations, 470\n does not take account of sudden appearance in the geological record of\n important forms of life, 470\n leaves gap between highest anthropoid and lowest specimen of man\n unspanned, 471\n fails to explain many important facts in heredity, 471\n must admit that natural selection has not yet produced a species, as far\n as we know, 472\n as its author understood it, was not opposed to the Christian faith, 473\n\nDay in Gen. 1, 35\n its meaning, 223, 224, 394, 395\n\nDeacons, their duties, 917, 918\n ordination of, 919\n\nDeaconesses, 918\n\nDead, Christ\u2019s preaching to, 707, 708\n\nDead, Egyptian Book of the, 995\n extracts from, 995\n resurrection in, 1022\n judgment in, 1024\n\n\u201cDeadly sins, the seven,\u201d of Romanism, 571, 572\n\nDeath, spiritual, a consequence of the Fall, 591\n spiritual, in what it consists, 591, 659, 660, 982\n physical, its nature, 656, 982\n physical, a part of the penalty of sin proved from Scripture, 656, 657\n and sin complemental, 657\n a natural law, on occasion of man\u2019s sin, appointed to a moral use, 657\n the liberator of souls, 658\n the penalty of sin, proved from reason, 658\n its universality how alone explained consistently with idea of God\u2019s\n justice, 658\n not a necessary law of organized being, 658\n higher being might have been attained without its intervention, 658\n to Christian not penalty, but chastisement and privilege, 659, 983, 984\n eternal, what?, 660\n second, 648, 982, 983, 1013\n not cessation of being, 984\n as dissolution, cannot affect indivisible soul, 984\n as a cessation of consciousness preparatory to other development,\n considered, 986\n cannot terminate the development for which man was made, 986\n cannot so extinguish being that no future vindication of God\u2019s moral\n government is possible, 987\n cannot, by annihilation, falsify the testimony of man\u2019s nature to\n immortality, 989\n man\u2019s body only made liable to, 991\n as applied to soul, designates an unholy and unhappy state of being, 992\n consciousness after, indicated in many Scriptures, 993, 994\n a \u201csleep,\u201d, 994\n of two kinds, 1013\n its passionless and statuesque tranquility prophetic, 1016\n\nDecree to act not the act, 354, 359\n\nDecree, the divine, permissive in case of evil, 354, 365\n\nDecree, not a cause, 360\n of end and means combined, 353, 363, 364\n does not efficiently work evil choices in men, 365\n to permit sin, and the fact of the permission of sin equally equitable,\n 365\n to initiate a system in which sin has a place, how consistent with God\u2019s\n holiness?, 367\n\nDecrees of God, the, 353\u2010370\n their definition, 353\u2010355\n many to us, yet in nature one plan, 353\n relations between, not chronological but logical, 353\n without necessity, 353\n relate to things outside of God, 53\n respect acts, both of God and free creatures, 354\n not addressed to creatures, 354\n all human acts covered by, 354\n none of them read \u201cyou shall sin,\u201d, 354\n sinful acts of men, how related to, 354\n how divided, 355\n declared by Scripture to include all things, 355\n declared by Scripture to deal with special things and events, 355\n proved from divine foreknowledge, 356\n respect foreseen results, 356\n proved from divine wisdom, 358\n proved from divine immutability, 358, 359\n proved from the divine benevolence, 359\n a ground of thanksgiving, 359\n not inconsistent with man\u2019s free agency, 359\n do not remove motive for exertion, 363\n and fate, 363\n encourage effort, 364\n they do not make God the author of sin, 365\n practical uses of the doctrine of, 368\n the doctrine of, dear to matured understanding and deep experience, 368\n how the doctrine should be preached, 369\n\nDeism, defined, 414\n some of its advocates, 414\n an exaggeration of God\u2019s transcendence, 414\n rests upon a false analogy, 415\n a system of anthropomorphism, 415\n denies providential interference, 415\n tends to atheism, 415\n \u201cDelivering to Satan,\u201d 457\n\nDelphic oracle, 136\n\nDemons, see Angels, evil.\n\nDepravity, explained by a personal act in the previous timeless state of\n being, 488\n of nature, repented of by Christians, 555\n Arminian theory of, 601, 602\n New School theory of, 606, 607\n Federal theory of, 612, 613\n Augustinian theory of, 619, 620\n defined, 637\n total, its meaning, 637\u2010639\n is subjective pollution, 645, 646\n Christ had no, 645, 756\u2010758\n of human will, requires special divine influence, 784\n of all humanity, 813\n\n_Determinatio est negatio_, 9\n\nDeterminism, 362, 507\u2010510\n\n_Deus nescit se quid est quia non est quid_, 244\n\nDeuteronomy, 167\u2010169, 171, 239\n\nDevil, 454, 455\n\n_Dextra Dei ubique est_, 708\n\n_Diabolus nullus, nullus Redemptor_, 462\n\nDiatoms, and natural selection, 471\n\nDichotomous and Dichotomy, see Man.\n\n_Dies Ir\u00e6_, the, 645, 1056\n\nDignity, the plural of, 318\n\nDisciples or Campbellites, 821, 840, 947\n\nDiscrepancies, alleged, in Scripture, 107, 108, 173, 174\n\nDivorce, permitted by Moses, 230\n\nDocet\u00e6, 670\n\n_Doctor angelicus_, 44\n\n_Doctor subtilis_, 45\n\nDoctrine, 17, 33, 34\n\nDocumentary evidence, 141, 142\n\nDoddridge\u2019s dream, 453\n\nDogmatic system implied in Scripture, 15\n\nDogmatism, 42\n\n_Domine, quousque?_ Calvin\u2019s motto, 1008\n\n_Donum supernaturale_, 522\n\nDort, Synod of, 614, 777\n\nDouay version, Mat. 26:28 in, 965\n\nDualism, two forms of, 378\n a form of, holds two distinct and co\u2010eternal principles, 378\n a history of this form of, 378\u2010380\n this form of, presses the maxim _ex nihilo nihil fit_ too far, 380\n this form of, applies the test of inconceivability too rigidly, 380\n this form of, unphilosophical, 381\n this form of, limits God\u2019s power and blessedness, 381\n this form of, fails to account for moral evil, 381\n another form of, holds the existence of two antagonistic spirits, 381,\n 382\n this form of, at variance with the Scriptural representation of God, 382\n this form of, opposed to the Scriptural representation of the Prince of\n Evil, 382\n\n_Ducit quemque voluptas_, 299\n\nDuties, our, not all disclosed in revelation, 545\n\nEbionism, 669\n\nEbionites, 669, 670\n\nEcclesiastes, 240\n\nEcclesiology, 887\u2010980\n\nEden, adapted to infantile and innocent manhood, 583\n\nEducation, by impersonal law, and by personal dependence, 434\n\nEfficacious call, its nature, 792, 793\n\n\u201cEffulgence,\u201d, 335\n\nEgo, cognition of it logically precedes that of non ego, 104\n\nEgyptian language, old, its linguistic value, 497\n idea of blessedness of future life dependent on preservation of body,\n 995\n idea of permanent union of soul and body, 1022\n way of representing God, 376, 377\n knowledge of future state, 995\n\n_Einzige, der_, every man is, 353\n\nEldership, plural, 915, 916\n\nElection, its relation to God\u2019s decrees, 355\n logically subsequent to redemption, 777\n not to share in atonement but to special influence of Spirit, 779\n doctrine of, 779\u2010790\n definition, 779\n proof from Scripture, 779\u2010782\n statement preliminary to proof, 779\n asserted of certain individuals, 780\n asserted in connection with divine foreknowledge, 780, 781\n asserted to be a matter of grace, 781\n connected with a giving by Father to Son of certain persons, 781\n connected with union with Christ, 781\n connected with entry in the Lamb\u2019s Book of Life, 781\n connected with allotment as disciples to certain believers, 782\n connected with a special call of God, 782\n connected with a birth by God\u2019s will, 782\n connected with gift of repentance and faith, 782\n connected with holiness and good works as a gift, 782\n Lutheran view of, 782, 783\n Arminian view of, 783\n a group of views concerning, 783\n proved from reason, 783\u2010785\n is the purpose or choice which precedes gift of regenerating grace, 783\n is not conditioned on merit or faith in chosen, 784\n needed by depravity of human will, 784\n other considerations which make it more acceptable to reason, 785\n objections to, 785\u2010790\n is unjust, 785\n is partial, 786\n the ethical side of natural selection, 786\n is arbitrary, 787\n is immoral, 787, 788\n fosters pride, 788\n discourages effort, 788, 789\n implies reprobation, 789, 790\n list of authors on, 790\n\nElijah, his translation, 995\n John the Baptist as, 1013\n\nElizabeth, Queen, immersed, 937\n\nElohim, 318, 319\n\nEmanation theory of origin of universe, 378\u2010383\n\nEmpirical theory of morals, truth in, 501\n reconciled with intuitional theory, 501\n\nEncratites, deny to woman \u201cthe image of God,\u201d, 524\n\nEndor, woman of, 966\n\n\u201cEnemies,\u201d Rom. 5:10, 719\n\nEnergy, mental, life, 252\n resisted, force, 252\n universe derived from, 252\n its change into force is creation, 252\n dissipation of, 374, 415\n\nEnghis and Neanderthal crania, 471\n\nEnmity to God, 569, 817, 818\n\nEnoch, translation of, 658, 994\n\nEnvironment, 426, 1034, 1049\n\nEophyte and Eozoon, 395\n\nEpicureanism, 91, 184, 299\n\nError, systems of, suggest organizing superhuman intelligences, 457\n\nErrors in Scripture, alleged, 222\u2010236\n\nEschatology, 981\u20101056\n\n_Esprit gel\u00e9_ (matter) Schelling\u2019s bon mot, 386\n\nEssenes, 787\n\nEsther, book of, 237, 309\n\n\u201cEternal sin, an,\u201d, 1034, 1048\n\nEternity, 276\n\nEthics, how conditioned, 3\n Christian and Christian faith inseparable, 636\n\nEucharist, see Supper, the Lord\u2019s.\n\nEutaxiology, 75\n\nEutychians (Monophysites), 672\n\nEve, 525, 526, 676\n\nEvidence, principles of, 141\u2010144\n\nEvil, 354, 1053\n\nEvolution, behind that of our own reason stands the Supreme Reason, 25\n and revelation constitute nature, 26\n an, of Scripture as of natural science, 35\n of ideas, not from sense to nonsense, 64\n has given man the height fromwhich he can discern stars of moral truth\n previously hidden below the horizon, 65\n a process, not a power, 76\n only a method of God, 76\n spells purpose, 76\n awake to ends within the universe, but not to the great end of the\n universe itself, 76\n answers objections by showing the development of useful collocations\n from initial imperfections, 78\n has reinforced the evidences of intelligence in the universe, 79\n transfers cause to an immanent rational principle, 79\n a materialized, logical process, 84\n of universe inexplicable unless matter is moved from without, 92\n extension and, being, having thought and will, reveals itself in, 101\n only another name for Christ, 109\n views nature as a progressive order consisting of higher levels and\n phenomena unknown before, 121\n its principle, the Logos or Divine Reason, 123\n its continuity that of plan not of force, 128\n depends on increments of force with persistency of plan, 123\n irreconcilable with Deism and its distant God, 123\n the basis and background of a Christianity which believes in a dynamical\n universe of which a personal and loving God is the inner\n source of energy, 123\n implies not the _uniformity_, but _universality_ of law, 126\n has successive stages, with new laws coming in, and becoming dominant,\n 125\n of Hegel, a fact but fatalistic, 176\n of human society not primarily intellectual, but religious, 194\n is developing _reverence_ with its allied qualities, 194\n if not recognized in Scripture leads to a denial of its unity, 217\n of \u201cTruth\u2014evolvable from the whole, evolved at last painfully,\u201d, 218\n has given us a new Bible\u2014a book which has grown, 224, 230, 231\n in a progress in prophecy, doctrine and church\u2010polity seen in Paul\u2019s\n epistles, 236\n not a tale of battle, but a love\u2010story, 264\n the object of nature, and altruism the object of evolution, 264\n explains the world as the return of the highest to itself, 266\n in the idea of holiness and love exhibited in the pal\u00e6ontological\n struggle for life and for the life of others, 268, 393\n is God\u2019s omnipresence in time, 282\n of his own being, God not shut up to a necessary, 287\n working out a nobler and nobler justice is proof that God is just, 292\n a method of Christ\u2019s operation, 311\n in its next scientific form will maintain the divineness of man and\n exalt Jesus of Nazareth to an eminence secure and supreme,\n 328\n \u201cFather,\u201d more than symbol of the cause of organic, 334\n and gravitation, all the laws of, are the work and manifestation of the\n present Christ, 337\n the conception of God in, leads to a Trinitarian conception, 349\n theological, are the heathen trinities stages in?, 352\n is a regress terminating in the necessity of a creator, 374\n a self, of God, so Stoic monism regarded the world, 389\n implies previous involution, 390\n assumes initial arrangements containing the possibilities of the order\n afterwards evolved, 390\n unable to create something out of nothing, 390\n the attempt to comprehend the world of experience in terms of\n fundamental idealistic postulates, 390\n that ignores freedom of God is pantheistic, 390\n from the nebula to man, unfolds a Divine Self, 390\n but a habitual operation of God, 390\n not an eternal or self\u2010originated process, 391\n natural selection without teleological factors cannot account for\n biological, 391\n and creation, no antagonism between, 391\n its limits, 392\n Spencer\u2019s definition of, stated and criticized, 392\n illustrated in progress from Orohippus to horse of the present, 392\n of inorganic forces and materials, an, in this the source of animate\n species, yet the Mosaic account of creation not discredited,\n 392\n in all forms of energy, higher and lower, dependent directly on will of\n God, 393\n the struggle for life to pal\u00e6ontological stages of, the beginning of the\n sense of right and justice, 268, 393\n the struggle for the life of others in pal\u00e6ontological stages of, the\n beginning of altruism, 268, 393\n the science of, has strengthened teleology, 397\n its flow constitutes the self\u2010revelation of the Infinite One, 413\n process of, easier believed in as a divine self\u2010evolution than as a\n mechanical process, 459\n of man, physical and psychical, no exception to process of, yet faith in\n God intact, 465\n cannot be explained without taking into account the originating agency\n of God, 465\n does not make the idea of Creator superfluous, 466\n theist must accept, if he keep his argument for existence of God from\n unity of design, 466\n of music depends on power of transmitting intellectual achievements, 466\n unintelligible except as immanent God gives new impulses to the process,\n 470\n according to Mivart, it can account neither for body or soul of man, 472\n still incomplete, man is still on all fours, 472\n an atheistic, a reversion to the savage view, 473\n theistic, regards human nature as efflux and reflection of the Divine\n Personality, 473\n atheistic, satirized, 473\n a superior intelligence has guided, 473\n phylogenetic, in the creation of Eve, 525\n normal, man\u2019s will may induce a counter\u2010evolution to, 591\n the goal of man\u2019s, is Christ, 680\n the derivation of spiritual gifts from the Second Adam consonant with,\n 681\n of humanity, the whole, depicted in the Cross and Passion, 716\n the process by which sons of God are generated, 967\n\nExample, Christ did not simply set, 732\n\nExegesis based on trustworthiness of verbal vehicle of inspiration, 216\n\nExercise\u2010system of Hopkins and Emmons, 45, 416, 417, 584, 607, 822\n\nExistence of God, see God.\n\n_Ex nihilo nihil fit_, 380\n\nExperience, 28, 63\u201065\n\nExpiation, representative, recognized among Greeks, 723\n\nEzra, his relation to O. T., 167\n\nFact local, truth universal, 240\n\nFacts not to be neglected, because relations are obscure, 36\n\nFaculties, mental, man\u2019s three, 487\n\nFaith, a higher sort of knowledge, 3\n physical science rests on, 3\n never opposed to reason, 3\n conditioned by holy affection, 3\n act of integral soul, 4\n can alone furnish material for a scientific theology, 4\n not blind, 5\n its _fiducia_ includes _notitia_, 5\n its place in the Arminian system, 605, 864\n in a truth, possible in spite of difficulties to us insoluble, 629\n does not save, but atonement which it accepts, 771\n saving, is the gift of God, 782\n an effect, not cause, of election, 784\n involves repentance, 836\n defined, 836\n analyzed, 837\n an intellectual element (_notitia_, _credere Deum_) in, 837\n must lay hold of a present Christ, 837\n an emotional element (_assensus_, _credere Deo_) in, 837\n a voluntary element (_fiducia_, _credere in Deum_) in, 838\n self\u2010surrender to good physician, 838\n the reflection of the Divine knowing and willing in man\u2019s finite spirit,\n 838\n its most important element, will, 838\n is a bond between persons, 839\n appropriates Christ as source of pardon and life, 839\n its three elements illustrated, 839\n phrases descriptive of, 839\n no element in, must be exaggerated at expense of the others, 839\n views refuted by a proper conception of, 840\n an act of the affections and will, 840\n not a purely intellectual state, 841\n is a moral act, and involves responsibility, 841\n saving, its general and particular objects, 842\n is believing in God as far as he has revealed himself, 842,\n is it ever produced \u201cwithout a preacher\u201d? 843, 844\n its ground of faith, the external word, 844\n its ground of assurance, the Spirit\u2019s inward witness, 844\n it is possible without assurance?, 845\n necessarily leads to goods works, 846\n is not to be confounded with love or obedience, 847\n a work and yet excluded from the category of works, 847\n instrumental cause of salvation, 847\n the intermediate factor between undeveloped tendency toward God and\n developed affection for God, 847\n must not be confounded with its fruits, 848\n the actinic ray, 848\n is susceptible of increase, 848\n authors on the general subject of, 849\n why justified by faith rather than other graces?, 864\n not with the work of Christ a joint cause of justification, 864\n its relation to justification, 865\n the mediate cause of sanctification, 872\n secures righteousness (justification plus sanctification), 873\n\nFaithfulness, Divine, 288, 289\n\nFall, Scriptural account of temptation and, 582\u2010585\n if account of, mythical, yet inspired and profitable, 582\n reasons for regarding account of, as historical, 582, 583\n the stages of temptation that preceded, 584, 585\n how possible to a holy being?, 585, 586\n incorrect explanations of, 585\n God not its author, 586\n was man\u2019s free act of revolt from God, 587\n cannot be explained on grounds of reason, 587\n was wilful resistance to the inworking God, 587\n was choice of supreme love to the world and self rather than supreme\n devotion to God, 587\n cannot be explained psychologically, 587\n is an ultimate fact, 587\n an immanent preference which was first a choice and then an affection,\n 588\n God\u2019s permission of the temptation preceding, benevolent, 588\n not Satanic, because not self\u2010originated, 588\n its temptation objectified in an embodied seducer, an advantage, 588\n presented no temptation having tendency in itself to lead astray, 588,\n 589\n the slightness of the command in, the best test of obedience, 589\n the command in, was not arbitrary, 589\n the greatness of the sanction incurred in, had been announced and should\n have deterred, 590\n the revelation of a will alienated from God, 590\n physical death a consequence of, 590\n brought death at once, 590\n mortal effects of the, counteracted by grace, 590\n death said by some not to be a consequence of the, 591\n spiritual death, a consequence of, 591\n arrested the original tendency of man\u2019s whole nature to God, 591\n depraved man\u2019s moral and religious nature, 591\n left him with his will fundamentally inclined to evil, 592\n darkened the intuition of reason, 592\n rendered conscience perverse in its judgments, 592\n terminated man\u2019s unrestrained intercourse with God, 592, 593\n imposed banishment from the garden, 593\n constituted Adam\u2019s posterity sinful, see Imputation.\n of human nature could only occur in Adam, 629\n repented of, because apostasy of our common nature, 629\n all responsible for the one sin of the, as race\u2010sin, 630\n has depraved human nature, 637\n has rendered human nature totally unable to do that which is good in\n God\u2019s sight, 640\n has brought the race under obligation to render satisfaction for self\u2010\n determined violation of law, 644\n\nFallen condition of man, Romanist and Protestant views of, 521, 522\n\nFalsehood, what?, 569\n\nFatalism, 427\n\nFate and the decrees of God, 363\n\nFather, God as, see Trinity.\n\n\u201cFather,\u201d how applied to whole Trinity, 333\n \u2019our,\u2019 import, 334\n\nFederal theology, 45, 46, 50, 612\u2010616\n\nFeeling, 17, 20, 21\n\nFellowship, Christian, not church, 979\n\nFetichism, 56, 532\n\nFiction, the truest, has no heroes, 575\n\nFinal cause, 44, 52, 60, 62, 75\u201077\n\nFinal Things, doctrine of, 981\u20101056\n\nFinality, 75, 76, 78, 79\n\nFishes, the earliest, ganoids large and advanced in type, 470\n\nFlesh, 562, 588, 673\n\n\u201cFold,\u201d none under New Dispensation, 807\n\n_Fons Trinitatis_, 341\n\nForce, no mental image of, 7\n not the atom, the real ultimate, 91\n a property of matter, 91, 96\n behind all its forms, co\u2010ordinating mind, 95\n atom a centre of, 96\n matter a manifestation of, 96, 109\n expressed in vibrations foundation of all we know of extended world, 96\n the only, we know is that of our own wills, 96\n real, lies in the Divine Being, as living, active will, 97\n matter and mind as respectively external and internal centres of, 98\n as a function of will, 99, 109, 415, 416\n all except that of men\u2019s free will, is the will of God, 99\n the product of will, 109\n in universe works in rational ways and must be product of spirit, 109\n Christ, the principle of every manifestation of, 109\n is God with his moral attributes omitted, 259\n is energy under resistance, 371\n is energy manifesting itself under self\u2010conditioning or differential\n forms, 371\n identified with the Divine Will, theories in which, 412\n and will are one in God, 412\n every natural, a generic volition of God, 413\n a portion of God\u2019s, disjoined from him in the free\u2010will of intelligent\n beings, 414\n _super cuncta, subter cuncta_, 414\n not always Divine will, 416\n in its various differentations adjusted by God, 436\n\nForeknowledge of God of all future acts directly, 284\n acts of free will excepted by some, 284, 285\n denial of the absolute, productive of dread, 285\n regarded by some as insoluble, 285\n perhaps explicable by the possibility of an all\u2010embracing present, 285\n constant teaching of Scripture favors, 285\n mediate, what?, 285\n immediate, what?, 285\n if intuitive, difficulty removed, 285, 357, 362\n rests on fore\u2010ordination, 356\n preceded logically by decree, 356, 357\n of undecreed actuals (_scientia media_), not possible, 357\n two kinds of, 358\n the middle knowledge of Molina, 358\n of individuals, 781\n distinguished from fore\u2010ordination, 781\n\nForgiveness, not in nature but in grace, 548\n cannot be granted unconditionally by public bodies, 766\n more than the taking away of penalty, 767\n optional with God since he makes satisfaction, 767\n human accorded without atonement, why not divine?, 835\n defined in personal, ethical and legal terms, 854, 855\n God\u2019s act as Father, 855\n none in nature, 855\n does not ensure immediate removal of natural consequences of sin, 855\n the peculiar characteristic of Christian experience, 856\n\nFore\u2010ordination, its nature, 355, 381\n the basis of foreknowledge, 356\n distinguished from foreknowledge, 781\n\nForms of thought are facts of nature, 10\n\nFourth gospel, its genuineness, 151\n\nFree agency defined, 360\n can predict its action, 360\n\nFreedom, man\u2019s, consistent with the divine decrees, 359\u2010362\n four senses of word, 361\n of indifference, 362\n of choice, which is not incompatible with the complete bondage of will,\n 509, 510\n remnants of, left to man, 510, 640\n\n_Freundlos war der grosse Weltenmeister_, 386\n\n_F\u00fcrsehung_ and _Vorsehung_ combined in \u201cProvidence,\u201d 419\n\nFuture life, the evidence of Jewish belief in a, 994\n Egyptian ideas about, 995\n Moses instructed in Egyptian \u201clearning\u201d concerning, 995\n proof\u2010texts for, 996\n doctrine of Pharisees supports, 996\n Christ\u2019s argument for, 996\n argument for, presupposes the existence of a truthful, wise and good\n creator, 996\n the most conclusive proof of, Christ\u2019s resurrection, 997\n Christ taught the doctrine of, 997\n a revelation of, needed, 997\n\nFuturist method of interpreting Revelation, 1009\n\nGalton\u2019s view of piety, 83\n\nGanoids, the first geologic fishes, 470\n\n_Gemachte, das_, sin is, 566\n\nGenealogies of Scripture, 229\n\nGeneration, as applied to the Son, 340\u2010343\n spontaneous, 389\n\nGenuineness of the Christian documents, 143\u2010154\n of the books of O. T., 165\u2010172\n\n_Genus apotelesmaticum_, 686\n _idiomaticum_, 686\n _majestaticum_, 686\n\n_Genus tapeinoticon_, 686\n\n_Gesetz_, 533\n\nGethsemane, 677, 731\n\n_Gewordene, das_, is not sin, 566\n\nGlory, final state of righteous, 1029\n his own, why God\u2019s end in creation?, 397\u2010402\n\nGnostic Ebionism, 669, 670\n\nGnostics, 20, 378, 383, 487\n\nGod, the subject of theology, though aprehended by faith, yet a subject of\n science, 3\n human mind can recognize God, 4\n though not phenomenal, can be known, 5\n because of analogies between his nature and ours, can be known, 7\n though no adequate image of, can be formed, yet may be known, 7\n since all predicates of God are not negative, he may be known, 9\n so limited and defined, that he may be known, 10\n his laws of thought ours, and so he may be known, 10\n can reveal himself by external revelation, 12\n revealed in nature, history, conscience, Scripture, 14\n Christ the only revealer of, 14\n the existence of, 52\u2010110\n definitions of the term, 52\n his existence a first truth, or rational intuition, 52\n his existence conditions observation and reasoning, 52\n his existence rises into consciousness on reflection on phenomena of\n nature and mind, 52\n knowledge of his existence, universal, 56\u201058\n knowledge of his existence, necessary, 58, 59\n knowledge of his existence, logically independent of and prior to, all\n other knowledge, 59\u201062\n other suggested sources of our idea of, 62\u201067\n idea of, not from external revelation, 62, 63\n idea of, not from tradition, 63\n idea of, not from experience, 63\u201065\n idea of, not from sense perception and reflection, 63, 64\n idea of, not from race\u2010experience, 64, 65\n idea of, not from actual contact of our sensitive nature with God, 65\n rational intuition of, sometimes becomes presentative, 65\n idea of, does not arise from reasoning, 65, 66\n faith in, not proportioned to strength of reasoning faculty, 65\n we know more of, than reasoning can furnish, 65, 66\n idea of, not derived from inference, 66, 67\n belief in, not a mere working hypothesis, 67\n intuition of, its contents, 67\u201070\n what he is, men to some extent know intuitively, 67\n a presentative intuition of, possible, 67\n a presentative intuition of, perhaps normal experience, 67\n loss of love has weakened rational intuition of, 67\n the passage of the intuition of, into personal and presentative\n knowledge, 68\n his existence not proved but assumed and declared in Scripture, 68\n evidence of his existence inlaid in man\u2019s nature, 68\n knowledge of, though intuitive may be explicated and confirmed by\n argument, 71\n the intuition of, supported by arguments probable and cumulative, 71\n the intuition of, explicated by reflection and reasoning, 72\n arguments for existence of, classified, 72\n Cosmological Argument for his existence, 73\u201075\n its proper statement, 73\n its defects, 73, 74\n its value, 74, 75\n Teleological Argument for his existence, 75\u201080\n its nature, 75\u201078\n its defects, 78\u201080\n its value, 80\n Anthropological Argument for his existence, 80\u201085\n its nature, 80\u201083\n its defects, 84\n its value, 84, 85\n Historical Argument for his existence, 85\n Biblical Argument for his existence, 85\n Ontological Argument for his existence, 85\u201089\n its three forms, 85, 86\n its defects, 87\n its value, 87\u201089\n evidence of his existence from the intellectual starting\u2010point, 88\n evidence of his existence from the religious starting\u2010point, 88\n the nature, decrees and works of, 243\u2010370\n the attributes of, 243\u2010306\n his acts and words arise from settled dispositions, 243\n his dispositions inhere in a spiritual substance, 243\n his attributes, definition of, 244\n relation of his attributes to his essence, 244\u2010246\n his attributes have an objective existence, 244\n his attributes are distinguishable from his essence and from each other,\n 244\n regarded falsely as being of absolute simplicity, 244\n he is a being infinitely complex, 245\n nominalistic notion, its error, 245\n his attributes inhere in his essence, 245, 246\n is not a compound of attributes, 245\n extreme realism, its danger, 245\n attributes of, belong to his essence, 245\n his attributes distinguished from personal distinctions in his Godhead,\n 246\n his attributes distinguished from his relations to the world, 246\n illustrated by intellect and will in man, 246\n his attributes essential to his being, 246\n his attributes manifest his essence, 246\n in knowing his attributes, we know the being to whom attributes belong,\n 246\n his attributes, methods of determining, 246, 247\n rational method of determining, 247\n three _vi\u00e6_ of rational method of determining his attributes, 247\n Biblical method, 247\n his attributes, how classified, 247\u2010249\n absolute or immanent, 247\n his relative or transitive attributes, 247\n his attributes, a threefold division of the relative or transitive, 248\n his attributes, schedule of, 248\n order in which they present themselves to the mind, 248\n his moral perfection involves relation of himself to himself, 249\n his absolute or immanent attributes, 249\u2010275\n his spirituality, 249\u2010254\n is not matter, 249\n is not dependent upon matter, 249\n the material universe, not his sensorium, 250\n his spirituality not denied by anthropomorphic Scriptures, 250\n pictures of him, degrading, 250\n desire for an incarnate God, satisfied in Christ, 251\n his spirituality involves life and personality, 251, 252\n life as an attribute of, 251\n life in, has a subject, 251\n life in, not correspondence with environment, 251\n life in, is mental energy, the source of universal being and activity,\n 252\n personality, an attribute of, 252\n his personality, its content, 252\n his infinity, its meaning, 254\n his infinity, a positive idea, 254\n does not involve identity with \u2019The All,\u2019, 255\n intensive rather than extensive, 255\n his infinity enables him to love infinitely the single Christian, 256\n his infinity qualifies his other attributes, 256\n what his infinity involves, 256\u2010260\n his self\u2010existence, what?, 256\n he is _causa sui_, 256\n his aseity, what?, 256\n exists by necessity of his own being, 257\n his immutability, what?, 257\n said to change, how explained, 257\n his immutability secures his adaptation to the changing conditions of\n his children, 258\n his immutability consistent with the execution in time of his eternal\n purposes, 258\n permits activity and freedom, 258\n his unity, what?, 259\n notion of more than one, self\u2010contradictory and unphilosophical, 259\n his unity not inconsistent with Trinity, 259\n his unity, its lessons, 259\n his perfection, explanation of the term, 260\n involves moral attributes, 260\u2010275\n himself, a sufficient object for his own activity, 260\n his truth, what?, 260\n his immanent truth to be distinguished from veracity and faithfulness,\n 260\n he is truth, as the truth that is known, 261\n his truth, a guarantee of revelation, and ground of eternal divine self\u2010\n contemplation, 262\n his love, what?, 263\n his immanent love to be distinguished from mercy and goodness, 263\n his immanent love finds a personal object in his own perfection, 263\n his immanent love, not his all\u2010inclusive ethical attribute, 263\n his immanent love, not a regard for mere being in general, 263\n his immanent love, not a mere emotional or utilitarian affection, 264\n his immanent love, rational and voluntary, 264\n his immanent love subordinates its emotional element to truth and\n holiness, 265\n his immanent love has its standard in his holiness, and a perfect object\n in the image of his own infinite perfections, 265\n his immanent love, a ground of his blessedness, 265\n his immanent love involves the possibility of his suffering on account\n of sin, which suffering is atonement, 266\n is passible, 266\n blessedness consistent with sorrow, 266\n a suffering being, a N. T. thought, 267\n his passibility, authors on, 267\n his holiness, self\u2010affirming purity, 268\n his holiness, not its expression, justice, 269\n his holiness is not an aggregate of perfections, but simple and\n distinct, 269\n his holiness is not utilitarian self\u2010love, 270\n his holiness is neither love nor its manifestation, 271\n his holiness is purity of substance, 273\n his holiness is energy of will, 273\n his holiness is God\u2019s self\u2010willing, 274\n his holiness is purity willing itself, 274\n his holiness, authors on, 275\n his relative or transitive attributes, 275\u2010295\n his eternity, defined, 275\n his eternity, infinity in its relation to time, 276\n regards existing time as an objective reality, 277\n in what sense the past, present and future are to him \u2019one eternal\n now,\u2019, 277\n his immensity, what?, 278\n not under law of space, 279\n is not in space, 279\n space is in him, 279\n to him space has an objective reality, 279\n his omnipresence, what?, 279\n his omnipresence not potential but essential, 280\n in what sense he \u201cdwells in Heaven,\u201d, 280\n his omnipresence mistaken by Socinian and Deist, 280\n his whole essence present in every part of his universe at the same\n time, 281\n his omnipresence not necessary, but free, 283\n his omniscience, what?, 283\n his omniscience, from what deducible, 283\n its characteristics, as free from all imperfections, 283\n his knowledge direct, 283\n his omniscience, Egyptian symbol of, 283\n his intense scrutiny, 283\n knows things as they are, 284\n foreknows motives and acts by immediate knowledge, 284\n his prescience not causative, 286\n his omniscience embraces the actual and the possible, 286\n his omniscience called in Scripture \u201cwisdom,\u201d, 286\n his omnipotence, what?, 286\n his omnipotence does not extend to the self contradictory or the\n contradictory to his own nature, 287\n has power over his own power, 287\n can do all he will, not will do all he can, 287\n has a will\u2010power over his nature\u2010power, 287\n his omnipotence implies power of self\u2010limitation, 288\n his omnipotence permits human freedom, 288\n his omnipotence humbles itself in the incarnation, 288\n his attributes which have relation to moral being, 288\u2010295\n his veracity and faithfulness, or transitive truth, 288\n his veracity secures the consistency of his revelations with himself,\n and with each other, 288\n his veracity secures the fulfilment of all promises expressed or\n implied, 289\n his mercy and goodness, or transitive love, 289\n his mercy, what?, 289\n his goodness, what?, 289\n his love finds its object in his own nature, 290\n his love, men its subordinate objects, 290\n his justice and righteousness or transitive holiness, 290\n his righteousness, what?, 291\n his justice, what?, 291\n his justice and righteousness not mere benevolence, nor so founded in\n the nature of things as to be apart from God, 291\n his justice and righteousness are revelations of his inmost nature, 292\n do not bestow reward, 293\n are devoid of passion and caprice, 294\n revulsion of his nature from impurity and selfishness, 294\n his attributes, rank and relations, 295\u2010303\n his attributes related, 295\n his moral attributes more jealously guarded than his natural, 295\n his fundamental attribute is holiness, 296\n may be merciful, but must be holy, 296\n his holiness put most prominently in Scripture, 296\n his holiness, its supremacy asserted by conscience, 296\n his holiness conditions exercise of other attributes, 297\n his holiness, a principle in his nature which must be satisfied before\n he can redeem, 298\n his holiness, the ground of moral obligation, 298\u2010303\n commands us to be holy on the ground of his own holiness, 302\n as holy, the object of the love that fulfils the law, 302\n his holy will, Christ, our example, supremely devoted to, 302\n the Doctrine of the Trinity in the One God, 304\u2010352\n see Trinity.\n is _causa sui_, 338\n is \u201cself willing right,\u201d 338\n relations sustained by, in virtue of personal distinctions, 343\n unity and threeness equally essential to, 346\n independence and blessedness of, require Trinity, 347\n Doctrine of his Decrees, 353\u2010370\n definition of his decrees, itemized, 353\u2010355\n evil acts, how objects of the decrees of, 354\n his permissive, not conditional agency, 354\n his decrees, how classified, 355\n his decrees referred to in Scripture and supported by reason, 355\u2010359\n can preserve from sin without violation of moral agency, 366\n his works, or the execution of his decrees, 371\u2010464\n not a demiurge working on eternal matter, 391\n his supreme end in creation, his own glory, 397\u2010402\n \u201chis own sake,\u201d the fundamental reason of activity in, 399\n his self expression not selfishness, but benevolence, 400\n the only Being who can rightly live for himself, 401\n that he will secure his end in creation, the great source of comfort,\n 401\n his rest, a new exercise of power, 411\n not \u201cthe soul of the universe,\u201d 411\n the physical universe in no sense independent of, 413\n has disjoined in the free will of intelligent beings a certain amount of\n force from himself, 414\n the perpetual Observer, 415\n does not work all, but all in all, 418\n represented sometimes by Hebrew writers as doing what he only permits,\n 424\n his agency, natural and moral, distinguished, 441\n his Fatherhood, 474\u2010476\n implied in man\u2019s divine sonship, 474\n extends in a natural relation to all, 474\n provides the atonement, 474\n special, towards those who believe, 474\n secures the natural and physical sonship of all men, 474\n this natural sonship preliminary in some to a spiritual sonship, 474\n texts referring to, in a natural or common sense, 474\n in the larger sense, what it implies, 474\n natural, mediated by Christ, 474\n texts referring to, in a special sense, 474, 475\n to the race rudimental to the actual realization in Christ, 475\n extends to those who are not his children, 475\n controversy on the doctrine mere logomachy, 475\n as announced by Jesus, a relation of love and holiness, 475\n if not true, then selfishness logical, 475\n this relationship realized in a spiritual sense through atoning and\n regenerating grace, 475\n logical outcome of the denial of, 475, 476\n universal ground for accepting, 476\n authors upon, 476\n our knowledge of, conditioned by love, 519, 520\n \u201cGod prays\u201d fulfilled in Christ, 675\n reflected in universe, 714\n the immanent, is Christ, the Logos, 714\n exercises his creative, preserving and providential activity through\n Christ, 714\n the Revealer of, is Christ, the Logos, 714\n personal existence grounded in him, 714\n all perceptions or recognitions of the objective through him, 714\n as Universal Reason, at the basis of our self consciousness and\n thinking, 714, 715\n is the common conscience, over finite, individual consciences, 715\n the eternal suffering of, on account of human sin, manifested in the\n historical sufferings of the incarnate Christ, 715\n the heart of, finally revealed in the historic sacrifice of Calvary, 716\n dealings of repentant sinner with, rather than with government, 741\n salvation of all, in which sense desired by, 791, 792\n\nGolden Age, classic references to, 526\n\nGood deeds of an unregenerated man, how related to the tenor of his life,\n 814\n\nGoodness, defined, 289\n\nGoodness of God, witness to among heathen, 113\n\nGospel, testimony of, conformable with experience, 173\n its initial successes, a proof of its divine origin, 191\n makes men moral, 863\n\nGospels, run counter to Jewish ideas, 156\n superior in literary character to contemporary writings, 158\n their relation to a historical Christ, 159\n coincidence of their statements with collateral circumstances, 173, 174\n\n_Gottesbewusstsein_, knowledge of God, 63\n\nGovernment, common, not necessary in church of Christ, 913\n\nGovernment, church, 903\u2010926\n\nGrace, supplements law as the expression of the whole nature of the\n lawgiver, 547, 548, 752\n without works on the sinner\u2019s part, and without necessity on God\u2019s, 548\n an expression of the heart of God, beyond law, and in Christ, 548\n does not abrogate but reinforces and fulfils law, 548\n secures fulfilment of law by removing obstacles to pardon in the divine\n mind, and enabling man to obey, 548\n has its law which subsumes but transcends \u201cthe law of sin and death,\u201d\n 548\n has its place between the Pelagian and Rationalistic ideas of penalty,\n 548\n a revelation partly of law, but chiefly of love, 549\n the Pelagian idea of, 598\n universal, according to Wesley, 603\n what, from the Arminian point of view, 605\n may afford sinners a better security for salvation than if they were\n Adams, 635\n a kingdom of, 775\n men as sinners, its objects, 778\n certain sinful men chosen to be recipients of special, 779\n \u201cunmerited favor to sinners,\u201d 779\n more may be equitably bestowed on one man than on another, 779\n\nGracious Ability, 602\u2010604\n\nGuilt, defined, 614, 644\n how related to sin, 644, 645\n how incurred, 644\n not mere liability to penalty, 644\n constructive, has no place in divine government, 644\n to be distinguished from depravity, 645, 762\n is obligation to satisfy outraged holiness of God, 645\n of sin, how set forth in Scripture, 645\n how Christ may have, without depravity, 645\n and depravity, _reatus_ and _macula_, 645\n of race, how Christ bears, 646, 759\n not to be confounded with the consciousness of, 647\n first a relation to God, then to conscience, 647\n administers its own anesthetics, 647\n degrees of, 648\u2010652\n degrees of, set forth in Mosaic ritual, 648\n casuistical refinements upon, not to be regarded, 648\n variety of award in Judgment explained by degrees in, 648\n measured by men\u2019s opportunities and powers, 649\n measured by the energy of evil will, 649\n measured by degrees of unreceptiveness in soul, 650\n of race, shared in by Christ, 759\n imparted and imputed to Christ, 759\n\nHabit and character, 1049\n\n\u201cHands of the Living God,\u201d what? 539\n\nHatred, what? 569\n\nHeart, its meaning in Scripture, 4\n\nHeathen, the, their virtues, what? 570\n may be saved who have not heard the gospel, 664, 843\n their religious systems corrupting, 666\n whatever good in their religions, God in, 666\n in proportion to their culture, become despairing, 666\n have an external revelation, 666\n instances of apparently regenerated, 843, 844\n\nHeathenism, a negative preparation for redemption, 665, 666\n partly a positive preparation for redemption, 665\n in it Christ as Logos or immanent God revealed himself in conscience and\n history, 665\n had the starlight of religious knowledge, 666\n their religions not the direct work of the devil, 666\n authors on heathenism as an evangelical preparation, 666\n\nHeaven, conception of, 1030\n elements of its happy perfection, 1031\n rewards in, equal yet various, 1031\n is deliverance from defective physical organization and circumstances,\n 1031\n its rest, 1031\n how perfect on entering, 1031\n a city, 1031\n its love, 1031\n its activities, 1031\n is it a place as well as a state? 460, 1032\n probably a place, 460, 1032\n may be a state, 460\n the essential presence of Christ\u2019s body would imply place, 1032\n is it on a purified and prepared earth? 1032, 1033\n\nHebrews, genuineness and authorship, 152\n anti\u2010Ebionite, 669\n\nHell, essentially an inward condition, 460, 1034\n the outward corresponds with inward, 1034\n the pains of, not necessarily positive inflictions of God, 1035\n is not an endless succession of sufferings, 1035\n its extent and scope, 1052\n compared with heaven, narrow and limited, 1052\n only a spot, a corner in the universe, 1052\n\nHenotheism, what? 259\n\nHeredity, none in the race to predetermine self\u2010consciousness, 467\n some facts which heredity cannot explain, 471\n often presents a product differing from both the producing agents, 492\n its influence in fiction, 492\n laws of, simply descriptions not explanations, 493\n illustrations of heredity, 495, 496\n cause of variations in, discussed, 497\n Weismann\u2019s views of, 466, 497, 631\n works for theology, 621, 632\n is God working in us, 624\n the law by which living beings tend to reproduce themselves in their\n descendants, 625\n the scientific attitude of mind in regard to, 632\n the opposing views of, illustrated, 632\n the conclusion best warranted by science in relation to, 632\n when modifications are transmitted by, 632\n may be intensified by individual action, 632\n has given new currency to doctrine of \u201cOriginal Sin,\u201d 636\n\nHeresy, what? 800\n\n_Hingewandt zu_, Dorner\u2019s translation of \u03c0\u03c1\u03cc\u03c2 in John 1:3, 337\n\nHipparion, the two\u2010toed horse, 472\n\nHoliness of God, see God.\n\nHoly Spirit, 13, 337\n organ of internal revelation, 13, 337\n recognized as God, 315\n possession of, 322, 343\n is a person, 323\n his work other than that of Christ, 338, 339\n sin against, 648, 650\u2010652\n relation to Christ in his state of humiliation, 669, 697, 703\n application of redemption through work of, 777\u2010886\n\n_Honestum_ and _utile_, 300\n\nHost, Romish adoration of, 968\n\n\u201cHost,\u201d Scriptural use of, 448\n\nHumanity, capable of religion, 58\n full concept of, marred in First Adam, realized in Second, 678\n its exaltation in Christ, the experience of his people, 707\n justified in Christ\u2019s justification, 862\n\nHumanity of Christ, 673\u2010681\n atonement as related to, 754\u2010763\n see Christ.\n\nHumiliation of Christ, 701\u2010706\n see Christ.\n\nHumility, what? 832\n\nHyperphysical communication between minds perhaps possible, 1021\n\n\u201cI Am,\u201d as a Divine title, 253\n\nIdea of God, origin of our, 52\u201070\n see God.\n\nIdeal human nature in Christ, 678\n\nIdealism, its view of revelation, 11, 12\n\nIdealism, Materialistic, 95\u2010100\n\nIdeas have decided fate of world, 426\n\nIdentity, Edwards\u2019s theory of, 607\n what it consists in, 1020\u20101023\n\n_Idiomaticum genus_, 686\n\n\u201cIdle word,\u201d 554\n\nIdolatry, 7, 133, 251, 457, 532, 968\n\nIgnorance, sins of, 554, 649\n invincible, 967\n\n_Ignorantia legis neminem excusat_, 558\n\nImage, what it suggests, 335, 514\n and likeness, 520\n\nImage of God, in what it consisted, 514\n its natural element, 514\n its moral element, 514\n personality, an element in, 515\n holiness, an element in, 515, 516\n its original righteousness, 517, 518\n not confined to personality, 519, 520\n not consisting in a natural capacity for religion, 520\u2010523\n reflects itself in physical form, 523\n in soul _proprie_, in body _significative_, 523\n subjects sensuous impulses to control of spirit, 523, 524\n gives dominion over lower creation, 524\n secures communion with God, 524, 525\n had suitable surroundings and society, 525\n furnished with tests of virtue, 526\n had associated with it, an opportunity of securing physical immortality,\n 527\n combated by those who hold that civilization has proceeded from\n primitive savagery, 527\u2010531\n combated by those who hold that religion begins in fetichism, 531, 532\n\nImmortality, metaphysical argument for, 984, 985\n teleological argument for, 986, 987\n ethical argument for, 987, 988\n historical argument, 989\n widespread belief in, 989, 990\n a general appetency for, 990\n idea of, congruous with our nature, 990\n authors for and against, 991\n maintained on Scriptural grounds, 991\u2010998\n an inference from the intuition of the existence of God, 996\n the resurrection of Jesus Christ the most conclusive proof of, 997\n Christ taught, 997\n\nImprecatory Psalms, 231\n\n_Imputatio metaphysica_, 615\n\nImputation of Adam\u2019s sin to his posterity, 593\u2010637\n taught in Scripture, 593\n two questions demanding answer, 593\n the meaning of the phrase, 354\n has a realistic basis in Scripture, 594\n two fundamental principles in, 595\n theories of New and Old Schools, 596, 597\n theories of, 597\u2010637\n Pelagian theory of, considered, 597\u2010601\n Arminian theory of, considered, 601\u2010606\n New School theory of, considered, 606\u2010612\n Federal theory of, considered, 612\u2010616\n Mediate theory of, 616\u2010619\n Augustinian theory of, considered, 619\u2010637\n grounded on organic unity of mankind, 619\n tabular views, 628\n objections to Augustinian theory, 629\u2010637\n authors on, 637\n of sin to Christ, grounded on a real union, 758\n of Christ\u2019s righteousness to us, grounded on a real union, 805, 862\n\nIndwelling of God, 693, 798\n\n_Inexistentia_, 333\n\nInfant salvation, 602, 609\n doctrine of, 660\u2010664\n is assured, 661\n its early advocates, 664\n leads to the conclusion that no one is lost solely for sin of nature,\n 664\n\nInfanticide might have been encouraged by too definite assurances of\n infant salvation, 663\n\nInfants, their death proves their sinful nature, 579\n are regarded by some as animals, 579, 611, 957\n are unregenerate and in a state of sin, 661\n relatively innocent, 661\n objects of special divine care, 661, 662\n chosen by Christ to eternal life, 662\n salvation assured to those who die prior to moral consciousness, 662\n in some way receive and are united to Christ, 662\n at final judgment among the saved, 662\n regeneration effected at soul\u2019s first view of Christ, 663\n\nInference, its nature and kinds, 66\n\nInfinite, 9, 87, 254\n\nInfinity of God, 254\u2010256\n see God.\n\nInfirmity, sins of, 649, 650\n\nInnate or connate ideas, what?, 54\n\n_Insit\u00e6 vel potius innat\u00e6 cogitationes_, 53\n\nInspiration of Scripture, 196\u2010242\n definition of, 196\u2010198\n defined by result, 196\n may include revelation, 196\n may include illumination, 196\n list of works on, 198\n proof of, 198\n presumption in favor of, 198\n of the O. T., vouched for by Jesus, 199\n promised by Jesus, 199, 200\n claimed by the apostles, 200, 201\n attested by miracle or prophecy, 201\n chief proof of, internal characteristics, 201\n theories of, 202\u2010222\n the Intuition\u2010theory of, 202\n this theory of, its doctrinal connections, 202\n this theory of, uses only man\u2019s natural insight, 203\n this theory of, denies to man\u2019s insight, vitiated in matters of religion\n and morals, an indispensable help, 203\n this theory of, is self\u2010contradictory, 203\n is \u201cthe growth of the Divine through the capacities of the human,\u201d, 204\n this theory of, makes moral and religious truth purely subjective, 204\n this theory of, practically denies a God who is Truth and its Revealer,\n 204\n the Illumination\u2010theory of, 204\n this theory of, its doctrinal connections, 204\n this theory of, principal advocates of, 205\n in some cases amounted only to illumination, 206\n more than an illumination, which cannot account for revelation of new\n truth, 206\n if illumination only, cannot secure writers from serious error, 207\n as mere illumination can enlighten truth already imparted but not impart\n it, 207\n the Dictation\u2010theory of, 208\n this theory of, its doctrinal connections, 208\n this theory of, its principal advocates, 208\n this theory of, post\u2010reformation, 209\n this theory of, covers the few cases in which definite words were used\n with the command to write them down, 209\n this theory of, rests on an imperfect induction of Scriptural facts, 210\n this theory of, fails to account for the human element in Scripture, 210\n this theory of, spendthrift in means, as dictating truth already known\n to recipient, 210\n this theory of, reduces man\u2019s highest spiritual experience to mechanism,\n 210\n the Dynamical theory of, 211\u2010222\n distinguished from other theories of, 211\n no theory of, necessary to Christian faith, 211\n union of the Divine and human elements in, 212\u2010222\n its mystery, the union of the divine and human, 212\n and hypnotic suggestion, 212\n the speaking and writing the words of God from within, in the conscious\n possession and exercise of intellect, emotion and will, 212\n pressed into service all the personal peculiarities, excellencies and\n defects of its subjects, 213\n uses all normal methods of literary composition, 214\n may use even myth and legend, 214\n a gradual evolution, 214, 215\n the divine side of what on its human side is discovery, 215\n does not guarantee inerrancy in things not essential to its purpose, 215\n in it God uses imperfect means, 215\n is divine truth in historical and individually conditioned form, 216\n did not directly communicate the words which its subjects employed, 216\n has permitted no form of words which would teach essential error, 216\n verbal, refuted by two facts, 216\n constitutes its Scriptures an organic whole, 217\n develops a progressive system with Christ as centre, 217\n furnishes, in the Bible as a whole, a sufficient guide to truth and\n salvation, 218\n overstatement of, has made sceptics, 218\n constitutes Scripture an authority, but subordinate to the ultimate\n authority, Christ, 219\n three cardinal principles regarding, 220\n three common questions regarding, 220, 221\n objections to the doctrine of, 222\u2010242\n objected to, on the ground of errors in secular matters, 222\n said to be erroneous in its science, 223\n reply to above allegation against, 223\u2010226\n said to be erroneous in its history, 226\n reply to above allegation against, 226\u2010229\n said to be erroneous in its morality, 230\n reply to above allegation against, 230\u2010232\n said to be erroneous in its reasoning, 232\n reply to above allegation against, 232, 233\n said to be erroneous in quotation and interpretation, 234\n reply to above allegation against, 234, 235\n said to be erroneous in its prophecy, 235\n reply to above allegation against, 235, 236\n admits books unworthy of a place as inspired, 236\n reply to above allegation against, 236\u2010238\n admits as authentic portions of books written by others than the persons\n to whom they are ascribed, 238\n reply to above allegation against, 238\u2010240\n admits sceptical or fictitious narratives, 240\n reply to above allegation against, 240\u2010242\n acknowledges non\u2010inspiration of its teachers and writers, 242\n reply to above allegation against, 242\n\nIntercession of Christ, 773\u2010775\n see Christ.\n\nIntercessors, saints on earth are, 775\n\n_Intercommunicatio_, 333\n\nIntercommunion of the Persons in the Trinity, 332\u2010334\n\nIntermediate State, 998\u20101003\n of the righteous, 988, 999\n of the wicked, 999, 1000\n not a sleep, 1000\n not purgatorial, 1000\n one of incompleteness, 1002\n a state of thought, 1002\n sin if preferred in this more spiritual state becomes demoniacal, 1002\n some place the end of man\u2019s probation at the close of the, 1002\n\nIntuition, 52, 53, 67, 72, 125, 499\n\nIntuition\u2010theory of inspiration, see Inspiration.\n\nIntuitional theory of morals, 501\n reconciled with the empirical theory, 501\n\nIntuitions, 52, 53, 67, 248\n\nIsaiah, its composite character, 239\n\nIslam, 186, 427\n\nJames, the apostle, his position on Justification, 851\n\nJefferson, Thomas, on a Baptist church as the truest form of democracy,\n 908\n\nJehovah, 256, 309\n\nJesus, bowing at the name of, 969\n\nJews, the only forward\u2010looking people, 666\n educated in three great truths, 666, 667\n above truths presented by three agencies, 667, 668\n this education first of all by law, 667\n this education by prophecy, 667\n this education by judgment, 668\n effects of the exile upon, 668\n as propagators of the gospel, 668\n authors on Judaism as a preparation for Christ, 668\n\nJob, the book of, when written, 241\n is a dramatic poem, 240, 241\n\nJohn, gospel of, differs from synoptics in its account of Jesus, 143\n its genuineness, 151, 152\n compared with Revelation, 151, 152\n does its characteristic Logos doctrine necessitate a later date?, 320,\n 321\n\nJudas, 884, 1043\n\n_Judex damnatur cum nocens absolvitur_, 293\n\nJudge, Christ the final, 1027, 1028\n\nJudgment, the last, a final and complete vindication of God\u2019s\n righteousness, 1023, 1024\n its nature outward, visible, definite in time, 1024, 1025\n its object, the manifestation of character, and assignment of\n corresponding condition, 1025, 1026\n evidences of, and preparation for, already in the nature of man, 1026,\n 1027\n single acts and words adduced in, why?, 1027, 1028\n the judge in, see preceding item, the subjects of, men and evil angels,\n 1028, 1029\n the grounds of, the law of God and grace of Christ, 1029\n list of authors on, 1029\n\nJustice of God, 290\u2010295\n see God.\n\nJustification, involved in union with Christ, 805\n the doctrine of, 849\u2010868\n defined, 849\n declarative and judicial, 849\n held as sovereign by Arminians, 849, 855\n Scriptural proof of, 849, 850\n its nature determined by Scriptural use of \u2019justify\u2019 and its\n derivatives, 850\u2010854\n James and Paul on, 851\n includes remission of punishment, 854\u2010856\n a declaration that the sinner is just or free from condemnation of law,\n 854\n is pardon or forgiveness as God is regarded as judge or father, 855\n is on the ground of union with Christ who has borne the penalty, 855\n includes restoration to favor, 856\n since it treats the sinner as personally righteous it must give him the\n rewards of obedience, 856\n is reconciliation or adoption as God is regarded as friend or father,\n 857\n this restoration rests solely on the righteousness of Christ to whom\n sinner is united by faith, 858\n its difficult feature stated, 859\n believed on testimony of Scripture, 860\n the difficulty in, relieved by three considerations, 860\n is granted to a sinner in whose stead Christ has borne penalty, 860\n is bestowed on one who is so united to Christ as to have Christ\u2019s life\n dominating his being, 860\n is declared of one in whom the present Christ life will infallibly\n extirpate all remaining depravity, 860\n its ground is not the infusion into us of righteousness and love (Romish\n view), 861\n its ground is not the essential righteousness of Christ become the\n sinner\u2019s by faith, (Osiander) 861\n its ground is the satisfaction and obedience of Christ the head of a new\n humanity of which believers are members, 861\n is ours, not because Christ is in us, but because we are in Christ, 862\n its relation to regeneration and sanctification delivers it from\n externality and immorality, 862, 863\n and sanctification, not different stages of same process, 863\n a declarative, as distinguished from the efficient acts of God\u2019s grace,\n regeneration and sanctification, 863\n gifts and graces accompaniments, not consequences of, 864\n why \u201cby faith\u201d rather than other graces?, 864\n produced efficiently by grace, meritoriously by Christ, instrumentally\n by faith, evidentially by works, 865\n as being complete at the moment of believing, is the ground of peace,\n 865\n is instantaneous, complete and final, 867\n not eternal in the past, 867\n in, God grants actual pardon for past sin, and virtual pardon for future\n sin, 867\n cannot be secured by future obedience, 868\n must be secured by accepting Christ and manifesting trust and submission\n by prompt obedience, 868\n list of authors on, 868\n\n_Justitia civilis_, 639\n\n_Justus et justificans_, 753\n\nKalpa, 352\n\nKaren tradition, 116\n\nKenosis, 701, 704, 705\n\nKeri and Kethib, 309\n\n\u201cKnow,\u201d its meaning in Scripture, 780\n\nKnowledge includes faith as a higher sort of, 3, 4, 5\n analogy to one\u2019s nature or experience not necessary to, 7\n is \u201crecognition and classification,\u201d, 7\n mental image, not essential to, 7\n of whole not essential to partial, and of a part, 8\n may be adequate though not exhaustive, 8\n involves limitation or definition, 9\n relative to knowing agent, 10\n is of the thing as it is, 10\n though imperfect, valuable, 37\n requires pre\u2010supposition of an Absolute Reason, 61\n does not ensure right action, 111, 460\n aggravates, but is not essential to, sin, 558\n two kinds of, and _scientia media_, 357\n sins of, 649\n final state of righteous one of, 1029\n\nKoran, 115, 186\n\nKung\u2010fu\u2010tse, see Confucius.\n\nLanguage, difficulty of putting spiritual truths into, 35\n dead only living, 39\n not essential to thought, 216\n defined, 467\n is the effect, not the cause of mind, 467\n\nLaw, cause and force known without mental image, 7\n is method, not cause, 76\n the transcript of God\u2019s nature, 293\n in general, 533\u2010536\n its essential idea, 533\n its implications, 533\n first used of voluntary agents, 533\n its use in physics implicitly confesses a Supreme Will, 533\n its derivation in several languages, 533\n because of its ineradicable implications, \u201cmethod\u201d has been suggested as\n a substitute, 533\n definitions of, 533, 534\n cannot reign, 534\n its generality, 534\n deals in general rules, 534\n implies power to enforce, 534, 535\n without penalty is advice, 535\n in the case of rational and free agents implies duty and sanctions, 535\n expresses and demands nature, 535\n formulates relations arising in nature, 535\n of God in particular, 536\u2010547\n elemental, 536\u2010544\n physical or natural, 536\n moral law, 537\n moral law, its implications, 537\n is discovered, not made, 538\n not constituted, but tested, by utility, 538\n of God, what?, 538\n the method of Christ, 539\n authors upon, 539\n not arbitrary, 539\n not temporary, or provisional, 540\n not merely negative, 540\n as seen in Decalogue, 540\n not addressed to one part of man\u2019s nature, 540\n not outwardly published, 540, 541\n not limited by man\u2019s consciousness of it, 541\n not local, 541\n not modifiable, 541\n not violated even in salvation, 541\n the ideal of human nature, 542\n reveals love and mercy mandatorily, 542, 549\n is all\u2010comprehensive, 542\n is spiritual, 543\n is a unit, 543\n is not now proposed as a method of salvation, 543\n is a means of discovering and developing sin, 543, 544\n reminds man of the heights from which he has fallen, 544\n as positive enactment, 544\u2010547\n as shown in general moral precepts, 545\n as shown in ceremonial or special injunctions, 545\n its positive form a re\u2010enactment of its elemental principles, 545\n the written, why imperfect?, 546\n the Puritan mistake in relation to, 546\n its relation to the grace of God, 547\u2010549\n is a general expression of God\u2019s will, 547\n is a partial, not an exhaustive, expression of God\u2019s nature, 547\n pantheistic mistake in relation to, 547, 548\n alone, leaves parts of God\u2019s nature to be expressed by gospel, 548\n is not, Christ is, the perfect image of God, 548\n not abrogated by grace, but republished and re\u2010enforced, 548\n of sin and death, 548\n in the manifestation of grace, combined with a view of the personal love\n of the Lawgiver, 549\n its all\u2010embracing requirement, 572\n identical with the constituent principles of being, 629\n all\u2010comprehending demand of harmony with God, 637\n the Mosaic, inspired hope of pardon and access to God, 667\n its basis in the nature of God, 764\n as a moral rule unchanging, 875\n freedom from, what?, 876\n believer not free from obligation to observe, 876\n as a system of penalty, believer free from, 876\n as a method of salvation, believer free from, 876\n as an outward and foreign compulsion, believer free from, 876\n not a sliding scale graduated to one\u2019s moral condition, 877\n God\u2019s, as known in conscience and Scripture, a ground of final judgment,\n 1029\n\nLaws of knowing correspond to nature of things, 10\n of theological thought, laws of God\u2019s thought, 10\n of nature, not violated in miracle, 121\n of nature, act not merely singly, but in combination, 434, 435\n\n\u201cLaying\u2010on of hands,\u201d its significance, 920\n\nLetter\u2010missive calling council of ordination, 922\n\n_Lex_, its derivation, 533\n\nLicensure, its nature, 919\n\nLife contains promise and potency of every form of matter, 91\n not produced from matter, 93\n as it ascends, it differentiates, 240\n not definable, 251\n not a mere process, 251\n more than environmental correspondence, 251\n ascribed to Christ, 309\n ascribed to Holy Spirit, 315\n animal, though propagated, not material, 495\n has power to draw from the putrescent material for its living, 677\n its various relations honored by being taken into union with Divinity in\n Christ, 682\n man\u2019s physical, conscious of a life within not subject to will, 799\n man\u2019s spiritual, conscious of life within its life, 799\n man\u2019s natural, preserved by God, much more his spiritual, 883\n Christian, attains completeness in future, 981\n sinful, attains completeness in future, 981\n \u201cbook of,\u201d the book of justification, 1029\n\n_Lineamenta extrema_, 614\n\n_Locutiones vari\u00e6, sed non contrari\u00e6_; _divers\u00e6, sed non advers\u00e6_, 227\n\nLogos, the whole, present in the man, Christ Jesus, 281\n John\u2019s doctrine of the, radically different from Philo\u2019s, 320, 321\n John\u2019s doctrine of the, related to the \u201cmemra\u201d doctrine, 320\n doctrine of the, authorities on, 321\n significance of term, 335\n the pre\u2010incarnate, granted to men a natural light of reason and\n conscience, 603\n purged of depravity that portion of human nature which he assumed in\n Incarnation, in the very act of taking it, 677\n during earthly life of Jesus existed outside of flesh, 704\n the whole present in Christ, and yet present everywhere else, 704\n can suffer on earth, and yet reign in heaven at same time, 714\n his surrender of independent exercise of divine attributes, how best\n conceived, 705\n his part in evangelical preparation, 711\n\n\u201cLord of Hosts,\u201d its significance, 448\n\nLord\u2019s Day, 410\n\nLord\u2019s Supper, 959\u2010980\n\nLord\u2019s Supper and Baptism, historical monuments, 151\n\nLove, necessary to right use of reason with regard to God, 3, 29, 519, 520\n its loss obscures rational intuitions of God, 67\n God\u2019s, nature cannot prove it, 84\n God\u2019s immanent, what?, 263\n not to be confounded with mercy and goodness, 265\n God\u2019s, finds a personal object within the Trinity, 285\n constitutes a ground of divine blessedness, 285\n God\u2019s transitive, what?, 289\n God\u2019s transitive, is mercy and goodness, 289\n distinct from holiness, 290, 567\n attributed to Christ, 309\n attributed to Holy Spirit, 316\n revealed in grace rather than in law, 548\n defined, 567\n to God, all\u2010embracing requirement of law, 572\n eternity of God\u2019s, an effective element in appeal, 788\n God\u2019s, fixed on sinners of whom he knows the worst, 788\n God\u2019s unchanging, 788\n God\u2019s, has dignity, 1051\n brotherly, in heaven implies knowledge, 1031\n\n_Maat_, the Egyptian goddess, 1024\n\nMaccabees, First, no direct mention of God in, 309\n\n_Magister sententiarum_, 44\n\nMagnetism, personal, what? 820\n\n_Majestaticum genus_, 686\n\nMalice, what? 569\n\n_Malum metaphysicum_, what? 424\n\nMan, in what sense supernatural, 26\n furnishes highest type of intelligence and will in nature, 79\n as to intellect and freedom, not eternal _a parte ante_, 81\n his intellectual and moral nature, implies an intellectual and moral\n author, 81\n his moral nature proves existence of a holy Lawgiver, 82\n his emotional and voluntary nature proves the existence of a Being who\n may be a satisfying object of human affection and end of\n human activity, 83\n recognizes in God, not his like, but his opposite, 83\n mistakes as to his own nature lead him into mistakes as to the First\n Cause, 84, 253\n his consciousness, Royce\u2019s view, 99\n his will above nature, 121\n a concave glass towards God, 252\n can objectify self, 252\n is self\u2010determining, 252\n not explicable from nature, 411\n a spiritually reproductive agent, yet God begets, 418\n a creation, and child of God, 465\u2010476\n his creation a fact of Scripture, 465\n exists by creative acts of God, 465\n though result of evolution, yet originating agency of God needed, 465\n whether mediately or immediately created Scripture does not explicitly\n state, 465\n the true doctrine of evolution consistent with the Scriptural doctrine\n of creation, 466\n certain psychological human endowments cannot have come from the brute,\n 466\n God\u2019s breathing into men was such a re\u2010inforcement of the processes of\n life as turned the animal into man, 467\n and brute, both created by the immanent God, the former comes to his\n status not _from_ but _through_ the latter, 467\n the beginnings of his conscious life, 467\n some simple distinctions between man and brute, 467, 468\n if of brute ancestry, yet the offspring of God, 469\n Scripture teaches that man\u2019s nature is the creation of God, 469\n his relations to animals, authors upon, 469\n immediate creation of his body not forbidden by comparative physiology,\n 470\n that his physical system is descended by natural generation from the\n simi\u00e6, an irrational hypothesis, 470\n as his soul was an immediate creation of God, so, in this sense, was his\n body also, 470\n does not degenerate as we travel back in time, 471\n no natural process accounts for his informing soul nor for the body\n informed by that soul, 472\n the laws of development followed in man\u2019s origin from a brute ancestry\n are but methods of God, and proofs of his creatorship, 472\n comes upon the scene not as a brute but as a self\u2010conscious, self\u2010\n determining being, 472\n his original and new creation, both from within, 472\n an emanation of that Divine Life of which the brute was a lower\n manifestation, 472\n his nature not an undesigned result of atheous evolution but the efflux\n of the divine personality, 473\n natural selection may account for man\u2019s place _in_ nature, but not for\n his place as a spiritual being above nature, 473\n his intellectual and moral faculties have only an adequate cause in the\n world of spirits, 473\n apart from the controlling action of a higher intelligence, the laws of\n the material universe insufficient for his production, 473\n his brute ancestry, list of authors on, 473, 474\n his racial unity, 476\u2010483\n his racial unity, a fact of Scripture, 476\n his racial unity at foundation of certain Pauline doctrines, 476\n his racial unity, the ground of natural brotherhood, 476\n the pre\u2010Adamite, 476, 477\n his racial unity, sustained by history, 477, 478\n his racial unity, sustained by philology, 478, 479\n his racial unity, sustained by psychology, 479\n his racial unity, sustained by physiology, 480, 483\n a single species under several varieties, 480\n unity of species of, argues unity of origin, 481\n according to Agassiz from eight centres of origin, 481\n his racial unity, consistent with all existing physical varieties, 481,\n 482\n physiological change in, illustrated, 482\n his \u201coriginally greater plasticity,\u201d 482\n his racial unity, authorities on, 482, 483\n the essential elements of his nature, 483\u2010488\n the dichotomous theory of his nature, 483, 484\n the dichotomous theory of, supported by consciousness, 483\n the dichotomous theory of, supported by Scripture, 483, 484\n the trichotomous theory of his nature, 484\u2010488\n his \u03c8\u03c5\u03c7\u03ae and \u03c0\u03bd\u03b5\u1fe6\u03bc\u03b1, 484\n his spirit and soul, texts on, 484\n trichotomous theory of his nature, element of truth in, 484\n the trichotomous theory of his nature untenable, 485, 486\n the true relation of \u03c0\u03bd\u03b5\u1fe6\u03bc\u03b1 and \u03c8\u03c5\u03c7\u03ae in his nature, 486\u2010488\n is different in kind from the brute, though possessed of certain powers\n in common with it, 486\n since spirit is soul when in connection with the body, soul cannot be\n immortal unless with spiritual body, 486\n the trichotomous theory of the nature of, untenable on psychological\n grounds, 486\n a true view of the spiritual nature of, refutes six errors, 486, 487\n some who have held the trichotomous view of, 487\n his body, why honorable? 488\n has been provided with a fleshly body, for two suggested reasons, 488\n origin of his soul, 488\u2010497\n the theory of the pre\u2010existence of his soul, 488\u2010491\n the advocates, ancient and modern, of this theory of soul pre\u2010existence,\n 488, 489\n the truth at the basis of soul pre\u2010existence, 488\n the theory of soul pre\u2010existence, founded on an illusion of memory, 488\n explanations of this illusion, 488\n the theory of the soul\u2019s pre\u2010existence, without Scriptural warrant, 489,\n 490\n if his soul was conscious and personal in the pre\u2010existent state, why is\n recollection even of important decisions so defective? 490\n the pre\u2010existence theory of the soul of, is of no theological\n assistance, 490\n M\u00fcller\u2019s view of pre\u2010existence stated and examined, 490, 491\n the creatian theory of his soul, 491\u2010493\n its advocates, 491\n Scripture does not teach that God immediately creates his soul, 491\n creatianism repulsively false as representing him as not father of his\n offspring\u2019s noblest part, 492\n his individuality, how best explained, 492\n the creatian theory of his birth makes God the author of sin, 493\n the creatian theory of his birth, certain mediating modifications of,\n 493\n the traducian theory of his birth, 493\u2010497\n the traducian theory, its advocates, 493\n the traducian theory explained, 494\n the traducian theory best accords with Scripture, 494\n the traducian theory is favored by the analogy of animal and vegetable\n life, 495\n the traducian theory supported by the transmission of physical, mental,\n and moral characteristics, 495, 496\n the traducian theory embraces the element of truth in the creatian\n theory in that it holds to a divine concurrence in the\n development of the human species, 497\n his moral nature, 497\u2010513\n the powers which enter into his moral nature, 497\n his conscience defined, 498\n has no separate ethical faculty, 498\n his conscience discriminative and impulsive, 498\n his conscience distinguished from related mental processes, 499\n his conscience the moral judiciary of the soul, 500\n his conscience an echo of God\u2019s voice, 501\n has the authority of the personal God, of whose nature law is but a\n transcript, 502\u2010504\n his will, 504\u2010513\n his will defined, 504, 505\n his will and the other faculties, 505\n his will and permanent states, 505, 506\n his will and motives, 506, 507\n his will and contrary choice, 507, 508\n his will and his responsibility, 509, 510\n his responsibility for the inherited selfish preferences of his will,\n its Scriptural explanation, 510\n his natural bent of will to evil so constant, inveterate, and powerful\n that only regeneration can save him from it, 510\n the hurtful nature of a deterministic theory of his will, 511\u2010513\n and his will, authors upon, 513\n his original state, 514\u2010532\n his original state described only in Scripture, 514\n list of authors on his original state, 514\n essentials of his original state, 514\u2010523\n made \u201cin the image of God,\u201d what implied?, 514\n made in natural likeness to God or personality, 514\n made in moral likeness to God or holiness, 514\n the elements in his original likeness to God, more clearly explicated,\n 514, 515\n indwelt by the Logos or divine Reason, 515\n never wholly loses \u201cthe image of God,\u201d, 515\n in a minor sense \u201cgods\u201d and \u201cpartakers of the divine nature,\u201d, 515\n has \u201ca deeper depth\u201d rooted and grounded in God, 515\n created a personal being with power to know and determine self, 515\n his natural likeness to God inalienable and the capacity that makes\n redemption possible, 515\n his personality further defined, 515\n should reverence his humanity, 515, 516\n originally possessed such a direction of affections and will as\n constituted God the supreme end of his being, and himself a\n finite reflection of God\u2019s moral attributes, 517\n his chief endowment, holiness, 517\n his original righteousness as taught in Scripture, 517\n in what the dignity of his human nature consists, 517\n his original righteousness not the essence of his human nature, 518\n his original righteousness not a gift from without and after creation,\n 518\n his original righteousness a tendency of affections and will to God, 518\n his original righteousness propagable to descendants, 518\n his likeness to God, more than the perfect mutual adjustment of his\n spiritual powers, 519\n his fall assigned by some to pre\u2010existent state, 519\n \u201cthe image of God\u201d in, was, some say, merely the possibility (_Anlage_)\n of real likeness, 519\n his individual will not the author of his condition of sin or of\n holiness, 519\n since he originally knew God, must have loved God, 519, 520\n primal \u201cimage of God,\u201d not simply ability to be like God, but actual\n likeness, 520\n if morally neutral, is a violator of God\u2019s law, 520\n the original \u201cimage of God\u201d in, more than capacity for religion, 520\n scholastics and the Romanist church distinguished between \u201cimage\u201d and\n \u201clikeness\u201d as applied to his first estate, 520\n his nature at creation, according to Romanism, received a _donum\n superadditum_ of grace, 520\n his progress from the state _in puris naturalibus_ to the state\n _spoliatus a nudo_, as the Romish church teaches,\n pictorially stated, 521\n the Romish theory as to his original state considered in detail, 520\u2010523\n results of his original possession of the divine image, 523\u2010525\n his physical form reflects his original endowment, 523\n originally possessed an _\u00e6quale temperamentum_ of body and spirit which,\n though physically perfect, was only provisional, 523\n had dominion over the lower creation, 524\n enjoyed communion with God, 524, 525\n concomitants of his possession of the divine image, 525\u2010532\n his surroundings and society fitted to afford happiness and help, 525,\n 526\n his wife and her creation, 525\n was perhaps hermaphrodite, 526\n his garden, Eden, 526\n provisions for trying his virtue, 526, 527\n opportunity for securing for himself physical immortality, 527\n the first, had he maintained his integrity, would have been developed\n and transformed without undergoing death, 527\n the Scriptural view of his original state opposed by those who hold a\n prehistoric development of the race from savagery to\n civilization, 527\n the originally savage condition of, an ill\u2010founded assumption, 527\u2010531\n the Scriptural account of his original state opposed by those who hold\n the Positivist theory of the three consecutive conditions of\n knowledge, 531\n the assumption that he must hold fetichism, polytheism, and monotheism\n in successive steps, if he progresses religiously,\n contradicted by facts, 531, 532\n monotheistic before polytheistic, 531, 532\n in some stocks never practiced fetichism, 532\n the earliest discovered sepulchral remains of, prove by presence of food\n and weapons an advance upon fetichism, 532\n his theologic thought not transient but rooted in his intuitions and\n desires, 532\n in what sense a law unto himself, 539\n as finite needs law, 542\n as a free being needs moral law, 542\n as a progressive being needs an ideal and infinite standard of\n attainment, 542\n according to Scripture responsible for more than his merely personal\n acts, 634\n not wholly a spontaneous development of inborn tendencies, 649\n the ideal, realized only in Christ, 678, 679\n his reconciliation to God, 777\u2010885\n his perfection reached only in the world to come, 981\n\nManhood of Christ, ideal, 678, 679\n\nManich\u00e6anism, 382, 670\n\nMoriolatry, invocation of saints, and transubstantiation, origin of, 673\n\nMarriage, a type of human and divine nature in Christ, 693\n\n\u2019Mary, mother of God,\u2019, 671, 686\n\nMaterial force as little observable as divine agency, 8\n organism, not necessarily a hindrance to activity of spirit, 1021\n\nMaterialism, idealism, and pantheism, arise from desire after scientific\n unity, 90\n\nMaterialism, what?, 90\n element of truth in, 90\n objection to, from intuition, 92\n objection to, from mind\u2019s attributes, 92, 93\n cannot explain the psychical from the physical, 93\n furnishes no sufficient cause for highest phenomena of universe, 94\n furnishes no evidence of consciousness in others, 94, 95\n Sadducean, denies resurrection of body, 1018\n recent, its services to proper views of body, 1018\n\nMaterialistic Idealism, 95\u2010100\n its definition, 95\n its development, 95\u201097\n defective in its definition of matter, 97\n defective in its definition of mind, 97, 98\n opposed to the imperative assumptions of non\u2010empirical, transcendent\n knowledge of things\u2010in\u2010themselves, 98\n however modified, cumbered with the difficulties of pure materialism,\n 98, 99\n a view of, held by many Christian thinkers, 99, 100\n\nMathematics, a disclosure of the divine nature, 261\n crystallized, the heavens are, 261\n\nMatter, regarded as atoms which have force as a universal and inseparable\n property, 90, 91\n in its more modern aspect, a manifestation of force, 91\n the Tyndall and Crookes deliverances regarding, 91\n mind intuitively regarded as different from it in kind, and higher in\n rank, 92\n to be regarded as secondary and subordinate to mind, 93\n and mind, relations between, 93, 94\n does it provide \u201cthe needful objectivity for God\u201d?, 347\n its eternity not disprovable by reason, 374\n not stuff that emanated from God, 385\n not stuff, but an activity of God, 385\n according to Schelling, _esprit gel\u00e9_, 386\n its continuance dependent on God, 413\n made by God, and, therefore, pure, 560\n its capacities, as subservient to spirit, inestimable, 1021, 1022\n\nMemory, its impeccability in the case of the apostles, secured by promised\n Spirit, 207\n a preparation for the final judgment, 1026\n of an evil deed, becomes keener with time, 1029\n\n_Memra_, relation to Johannine Logos, 320\n\n_Mendacium officiosum_, 262\n\nMennonites, 970\n\n_Mens humana capax divin\u00e6_, 212\n\n_Mens rea_, essential to crime, 554\n\nMercy, in the God of nature, some indications which point to, 113\n optional, 271, 296, 297\n defined, 289\n divine, a matter of revelation, 296\n election a matter of, 779\n\nMessiah, 321, 667, 668\n\nMetaphysical generation of the soul, 493\n\nMilitary theory of atonement, 747\n\nMillennium, 1008\u20101015\n\nMind, has no parts, yet divisible, 9\n its organizing instinct, 15, 16\n gives both final and efficient cause, 76\n recognizes itself as another and higher than the material organization\n it uses, 92\n its attributes and itself different in kind and higher in rank than\n matter, 92, 93\n not transformed physical force, 93\n the only substantive thing in the universe, all else is adjective, 94\n unsatisfactorily defined as a \u201cseries of feelings aware of itself,\u201d, 97\n Absolute, not conditioned as the finite mind, 104\n \u201ccarnal,\u201d its meaning, 592\n\nMinister, his chief qualification, 17\n his relation to church work, 898\n forfeiture of his standing as, 923, 924\n\nMiracle, a preliminary definition, 117\n modified definition suggested by Babbage, 117, 118\n \u201csignality\u201d must be preserved in definition of, 118\n preferable definition, 118, 119\n never regarded in Scripture as an infraction of law, 119\n natural processes may be in, 119\n the attitude of some theologians towards, irrational, 120\n a number of opinions upon, presented, 120\n possibility of, 121\u2010123\n not beyond the power of a God dwelling in and controlling the universe,\n shown in some observations, 121\u2010123\n possibility of, doubly strong to those who give the Logos or Divine\n Reason his place in his universe, 122\n possible on Lotzean view of universe, 123\n possible because God is not far away, 123\n possible because of the action and reaction between the world and the\n personal Absolute, 123\n a presumption against, 124\n presupposes, and derives its value from, law, 124\n a uniformity of nature, inconsistent with miracle, non\u2010existent, 124\n no one is entitled to say _a priori_ that it is impossible (Huxley), 124\n but the higher stage as seen from the lower, 125\n when the efficient cause gives place to the final cause, 125\n exists because the uniformity of nature is of less importance in the\n sight of God than the moral growth of the human spirit, 125\n \u201cthe greatest I know, my conversion\u201d (Vinet), 125\n our view of, determined by our belief in a moral or a non\u2010moral God, 126\n is extraordinary, never arbitrary, 126\n not a question of power, but of rationality and love, 126\n implies self\u2010restraint and self\u2010unfolding, 126\n accompanied by a sacrifice of feeling on the part of Christ, 126\n probability of, greater from point of view of ethical monism, 126\n a work in which God lovingly limits himself, 126\n probability of, drawn from the concessions of Huxley, 127\n the amount of testimony necessary to prove a, 127\n Hume\u2019s misrepresentation of the abnormality of, 127\n Hume\u2019s argument against, fallacious, 127\n evidential force of, 128\u2010131\n accompanies and attests new communications from God, 128\n its distribution in history, 128, 129\n its cessation or continuance, 128, 132, 133\n certifies directly not to the truth of a doctrine, but of a teacher, 129\n must be supported by purity of life and doctrine, 129\n to see in all nature the working of the living God removes prejudice\n against, 130\n the revelation of God, not the proof of that revelation, 130\n does not lose its value in the process of ages, 130\n of the resurrection sustains the authority of Christ as a teacher, 130\n of Christ\u2019s resurrection, is it \u201can obsolete picture of an eternal\n truth\u201d?, 130\n of Christ\u2019s resurrection, has complete historical attestation, 130, 131\n of Christ\u2019s resurrection, not explicable by the _swoon\u2010theory_ of\n Strauss, 131\n of Christ\u2019s resurrection, not explicable by the _spirit\u2010theory_ of Keim,\n 131\n of Christ\u2019s resurrection, not explicable by the _vision\u2010theory_ of\n Renan, 131\n of Christ\u2019s resurrection, its three lessons, 131\n the counterfeit, 132\n only a direct act of God a, 132\n the counterfeit, attests the true, 132\n how the false, may be distinguished from the true, 132, 133\n\nMiracles as attesting Divine Revelation, 117\u2010133\n\nMohammedanism, 186, 347, 427\n\nMolecular movement and thought, 93\n\nMolecules, manufactured articles, 77\n\nMolluscs, their beauty inexplicable by \u201cnatural selection,\u201d, 471\n\nMonarchians, 327\n\nMonism presents that deep force, in which effects, psychical and bodily,\n find common origin, 69\n there must be a basal, 80\n\nMonism, Ethical, defined, 105\n consistent with the teachings of Holy Writ, 105\n the faith of Augustine, 105\n the faith of Anselm, 105, 106\n embraces the one element of truth in pantheism, 106\n is entirely consistent with ethical fact, 106\n is Metaphysical Monism qualified by Psychological Monism, 106\n is supplanting Dualism in philosophic thought, 106\n it rejects the two main errors of pantheism, 107, 109\n it regards the universe as a finite, partial, and progressive revelation\n of God, 107, 108\n it regards matter as God\u2019s limitation under law of necessity, 107\n it regards humanity as God\u2019s self\u2010limitation under law of freedom, 107\n it regards incarnation and atonement as God\u2019s self\u2010limitation under law\n of grace, 107\n regards universe as related to God as thought to the thinker, 107\n regards nature as the province of God\u2019s pledged and habitual causality,\n 107\n is the doctrine largely of the poets, 107, 108\n guarantees individuality and rights of each portion of universe, 108\n in moral realm estimates worth by the voluntary recognition and\n appropriation of the divine, 108\n does not, like pantheism, involve moral indifference to the variations\n observed in universe, 108\n does not regard saint and sensualist, men and mice as of equal value,\n 108\n it regards the universe as a graded and progressing manifestation of\n God\u2019s love for righteousness and opposition to wrong, 108\n it recognizes the mysterious power of selfhood to oppose the divine law,\n 108\n it recognizes the protective and vindicatory reaction of the divine\n against evil, 108\n it gives ethical content to Spinoza\u2019s apophthegm, \u2019all things serve,\u2019,\n 108\n it neither cancels moral distinctions, nor minifies retribution, 108\n recognizes Christ as the Logos of God in its universal acceptance, 109\n recognizes as the Creator, Upholder, and Governor of the universe, Him\n who in history became incarnate and by death made atonement\n for human sin, 109\n rests on Scriptural statements, 109\n secures a Christian application of modern philosophical doctrine, 109\n gives a more fruitful conception of matter, 109\n considers nature as the omnipresent Christ, 109\n presents Christ as the unifying reality of physical, mental and moral\n phenomena, 109\n its relation to pantheism and deism, 109\n furnishes a foundation for new interpretation in theology and\n philosophy, 109\n helps to acceptance of Trinitarianism, 109\n teaches that while the natural bond uniting to God cannot be broken, the\n moral bond may, 109, 110\n how it interprets \u201crejecting\u201d Christ, 110\n enables us to understand the principle of the atonement, 110\n strengthens the probability of miracle, 126\n teaches that God is pure and perfect mind that passes beyond all\n phenomena and is their ground, 255\n teaches that \u201cthat which hath been made was life in him,\u201d Christ, 311\n teaches that in Christ all things \u201cconsist,\u201d hold together, as cosmos\n rather than chaos, 311\n teaches that gravitation, evolution, and the laws of nature are Christ\u2019s\n habits, and nature but his constant will, 311\n teaches that in Christ is the intellectual bond, the uniformity of law,\n the unity of truth, 311\n teaches that Christ is the principle of induction, the medium of\n interaction, and the moral attraction of the universe,\n reconciling all things in heaven and earth, 311\n teaches that God transcendent, the Father, is revealed by God immanent,\n the Son, 314\n teaches that Christ is the life of nature, 337\n teaches that creation is thought in expression, reason externalized, 381\n teaches a dualism that holds to underground connections of life between\n man and man, man and nature, man and God, 386\n teaches that the universe is a life and not a mechanism, 391\n teaches that God personally present in the wheat makes it grow, and in\n the dough turns it into bread, 411\n teaches that every man lives, moves, and has his being in God, and that\n whatever has come into being, whether material or spiritual,\n has its life only in Christ, 413\n teaches that \u201c_Dei voluntas est rerum natura_,\u201d, 413\n teaches that nothing finite is only finite, 413\n its further teaching concerning natural forces and personal beings, 413,\n 414, 418, 419\n allows of \u201csecond cause,\u201d, 416\n\nMonogenism, modern science in favor of, 480\n\nMonophysites, 672\n see Eutychians.\n\nMonotheism, facts point to an original, 56, 531\n Hebrew, preceeds polytheistic systems of antiquity, 531, 532\n more and more evident in heathen religions as we trace them back, 531,\n 532\n an original, authors on, 531, 532\n\nMontanists, 304\n\nMontanus, 712\n\nMoral argument for the existence of God, the designation criticized, 81\n faculty, its deliverances, evidences of an intelligent cause, 82\n freedom, what?, 361\n nature of man, 497\u2010513\n likeness to himself, how restored by God, 518\n law, what?, 537\u2010544\n law, man\u2019s relations to, reach beyond consciousness, 594\n government of God, recognizes race\u2010responsibilities, 594\n union of human and divine in Christ, 671\n analogies of atonement, 716\n evil, see Sin.\n obligation, its grounds determined, 298\u2010303\n judgments, involve will, 841\n\nMorality, Christian, a fruit of doctrine, 16\n of N. T., 177, 178\n Christian, criticized by Mill, 179\n heathen systems of, 179\u2010186\n of Bible, progressive, 230\n mere insistence on, cannot make men moral, 863\n\n\u201cMorning stars,\u201d, 445\n\n\u201cMother of God,\u201d, 681\n\nMotive, not cause but occasion, 360, 506\n man never acts without or contrary to, 360\n a ground of prediction, 360\n influences, without infringing on free agency, 360\n the previously dominant, not always the impulsive, 360\n\nMotives, man can choose between, 360\n persuade but never compel, 362, 506, 649\n not wholly external to mind influenced by them, 506, 817\n lower, sometimes seemingly appealed to in Scripture, 826, 827\n\nMuratorian Canon, 147\n\nMusic, reminiscent of possession lost, 526\n\nMystic, 31, 81\n\nMysticism, true and false, 32\n\n_Mystik_ and _Mysticismus_, 31\n\nMyth, its nature, 155\n as distinguished from _saga_ and legend, 155\n \u201cthe Divine Spirit can avail himself of\u201d (Sabatier), 155\n \u2019may be made the medium of revelation\u2019 (Denney), 214\n not a falsehood, 155, 214\n early part of Genesis may be of the nature of a, 214\n\nMyth\u2010theory of the origin of the gospels (Strauss), 155\u2010157\n described, 155, 156\n objected to, 156, 157\n authors on, 157\n\n_Nachwirkung_ and _Fortwirkung_, 776\n\n\u201cName, in my,\u201d, 807\n\nNames of God, the five Hebrew,\n Ewald on, 318\n\n_Nascimur, pascimur_, 972\n\n_Natura_, 392\n\n_Natura enim non nisi parendo vincitur_, 541\n\n_Natura humana in Christo capax divin\u00e6_, 694\n\n_Natura naturans_ (Spinoza), 244, 287\n\n_Natura naturata_ (Spinoza), 244, 287, 700\n\n_Natur\u00e6 minister et interpres_, 2\n\nNatural = psychical, 484\n\nNatural insight as to source of religious knowledge, 203\n\nNatural law, advantages of its general uniformity, 124\n events aside from its general fixity to be expected if moral ends\n require, 125\n life, God\u2019s gift of, foreshadows larger blessings, 289\n realism, and location of mind in body, 280\n revelation supplemented by Scripture, 27\n\nNatural Selection, artificial after all, 93\n its teaching, 470\n is partially true, 470\n is not a complete explanation of the history of life, 470\n gives no account of origin of substance or variations, 470\n by the _survival_ does not explain the _arrival_ of the fittest, 470\n does not explain the sudden and apparently independent appearance of\n important geologic forms, 470\n certain entomological and anatomical facts are inexplicable upon the\n theory of, 471\n fails to explain the beauty in lower forms of life, 471\n no species has as yet been produced by either artificial or, 472\n does not necessarily make the idea of Creator superfluous, 473\n may account for man\u2019s place in, but not above, nature, 473\n requires, according to Wallace, a superior intelligence to guide in\n definite direction or for special purpose, 473\n a list of authors upon, 474\n atheistically taught, is election with hope and pity left out, 784\n\nNatural theology, what?, 260\n\nNature, its usual sense, 26, 121\n its proper sense, 26, 121\n its witness to God, outward and inward, 26\n argument for God\u2019s existence from change in, 73\u201075\n argument for God\u2019s existence from useful collocation in, 75\u201080\n Mill\u2019s indictment of, 78\n apart from man, cannot be interpreted, 79\n does not assure us of God\u2019s love and provision for the sinner, 113, 114\n by itself furnishes a presumption against miracles, 124\n as synonym of substance, 243\n according to Schleiermacher, 287\n its forces, dependent and independent, 414\n the brute submerged in, 468\n human, why it should be reverenced, 515\n in what sense sin a, 518\n as something inborn, 518, 577, 578\n the race has a corrupted nature, 577\u2010582\n sinful acts and dispositions explained by a corrupt, 577\n a corrupt, belongs to man from first moment of his being, 578\n a corrupt, underlies man\u2019s consciousness, 578\n a corrupt, which cannot be changed by a man\u2019s own power, 578\n a corrupt, the common heritage of the race, 578\n designates, not substance, but corruption of substance, 578\n how responsible for a depraved, which one did not personally originate,\n 593\n human, Pelagian view of, 598\n human, semi\u2010Pelagian view of, 598\n human, Augustinian view of, 598\n human, organic view of, 600\n human, atomistic view of, 600\n the whole human race once a personality in Adam, 629\n human, can apostatize but once, 630\n human, totally depraved, 637\u2010639\n man can to a certain extent modify his, 642\n sin of, and personal transgression, 648\n impersonal human, 694\n and person, 694, 695\n Robinson\u2019s definition of, 695\n human, is it to develop into new forms, 986\n\n\u201cNature of things, in the,\u201d the phrase examined, 357\n\nNazarenes, 669\n see Ebionites.\n\nNebular hypothesis, 395\n\nNecessitarian philosophy, correct for the brute, 468\n\nNegation, involves affirmation, 9\n\n_Neron Kaisar_, and \u201c666\u201d, 1009\n\nNescience, divine, 286\n see God.\n\nNestorians, 671\n\nNeutrality, moral, never created by God, 521\n moral, a sin, 521\n\nNew England theology, 48, 49\n\nNew Haven theology, 49\n\nNew School theology, 48, 49, 606\n its definition of holiness, 271, 272\n its definition of sin, how it differs from that of Old School, 549, 550\n ignores the unconscious and subconscious elements in human character,\n 550\n its watchword as to sin, 595\n its theory of imputation, an evasion, 596\n its theory of imputation explained, 606, 607\n development of its theory of inspiration, 607, 608\n modifications of view within, 608\n contradicts Scripture, 608, 609\n its advocates cannot understand Paul, 609\n rests upon false philosophical principles, 609, 610\n impugns the justice of God, 610, 611\n inconsistent with facts, 611, 612\n its aim that of all the theories of imputation, 612\n\n_Nihil in intellectu nisi quod ante fuerit in sensu_, 63\n\nNineveh, winged creatures of, 449\n\n_Nirvana_, 182\n\n_Noblesse oblige_, 301\n\n_Nomina_ become _numina_, 245\n\nNominalism inconsistent with Scripture, 244\n\nNominalist notion of God\u2019s nature, 244\n\nNon\u2010apostolic writings recommended by apostles, 201\n\nNon\u2010inspiration, seeming, of certain Scriptures, 242\n\n_Non pleni nascimur_, 597\n\n\u201cNothing, creation out of,\u201d, 372\n\n_Notitia_, an element in faith, 837\n\n_Noumenon_ in external and internal phenomena, 6\n\n_Nullus in microcosmo spiritus, nullus in macrocosmo Deus_, 79\n\nObduracy, sins of, incomplete and final, 650\n\nObedience, Christ\u2019s active and passive, 749, 770\n\n\u201cObey,\u201d not the imperative of religion, 21\n\nObligation to obey law based on man\u2019s original ability, 541\n\nOffences between men, 766\n between church members, 924, 925\n\nOld School theology, 49, 606, 607\n\nOmission, sins of, 554, 648\n\n_Omne vivum e vivo_ (_ex ovo_), 389\n\n_Omnia mea mecum porto_, 1032\n\nOmnipotence of God, 286\u2010288\n see God.\n\nOmnipresence of God, 279\u2010282\n see God.\n\nOmnipresent, how God might cease to be, 282\n\nOmniscience of God, 282\u2010286\n see God.\n\n\u201cOne eternal now,\u201d how to be understood, 277\n\nOntological argument for existence of God, 85\u201089\n see God.\n\nOptimism, 404, 405\n\nOracles, ancient, 135\n\nOrdinances of the church, 929\u2010980\n\nOrdination of church officers, 918\u2010929\n\n_Ordo salutis_, 794\n\nOrganic and organized substances, 93\n\nOrganic, the, and atomistic views of human nature, 600\n\nOriginal \u201cimage of God\u201d in man, its nature, 514\u2010523\n\nOriginal natural likeness to God, or personality, 515, 519, 520\n moral likeness to God, man\u2019s, or holiness, 516\u2010518\n righteousness, what? 517, 518\n knowledge of God, man\u2019s, implied a direction of the affections and will\n toward God, 519\n sin, as held by Old School theologians, 49\n two\u2010fold problem of, 593\n its definition, 594, 595\n two principles fundamental to consideration of, 595\n a correct view of race\u2010responsibility essential to a correct view of,\n 595\n some facts in connection with the guilt of, 596\n substance of Scriptural teaching concerning, 625\u2010627\n a misnomer, if applied to any theory but that of its author, Augustine,\n 636\n no one finally condemned merely on account of, 596, 663, 664\n state of man, 514\u2010533\n essentials of, 514\u2010522\n results of, 523\u2010525\n concomitants of, 525\u2010532\n Romish and Protestant views of, 521, 522\n\n_Os sublime_, manifestation of internal endowments, 523\n\nPain, physical, existed before entrance of moral evil into world, 402\n this supralapsarian pain, how to be regarded, 402\n due not to God, but to man, 402\n verdicts declarative of the secondary place of, 402\n cannot explain its presence here by the good it may do, 403\n it is God\u2019s protest against sin, 403\n has its reason in the misconduct of man, 403\n supralapsarian pain an \u201canticipative consequence,\u201d, 403\n God\u2019s frown upon sin, and warning against it, 403\n\nPalestine, 174, 421\n\nPantheism, Idealistic, defined, 100\n the elements of truth in, 100\n its error, 100\n denies real existence of the finite, 100\n deprives the infinite of self\u2010consciousness and freedom, 100\n in it the worshiped is the worshiper, 100\n the later Brahmanism is, 100\n the fruit of absence of will and longing for rest as end of existence,\n as among Hindus, 100\n in Hegelianism, presents the alternative, no God or no man, 100\n of Hegel and Spinoza, 100, 101\n of Hegel, its different interpreters, 101\n of Hegel, as modified by Schopenhauer, 101\n its idea of God self\u2010contradictory, 101, 102\n its asserted unity of substance without proof, 102\n it assigns no sufficient cause for highest fact of universe, personal\n intelligence, 102\n it contradicts the affirmations of our moral and religious nature, 103\n antagonizes our intuitive conviction of the absolute perfection of God,\n 104\n its objection that in eternity there was not not\u2010self over against the\n Infinite to call forth self\u2010consciousness, without\n foundation, 104\n denies miracle, 122\n denies inspiration, 204\n anti\u2010trinitarianism leads to, 347\n involved in doctrine of emanation, 383\n assumes that law fully expresses God, 547\n should worship Satan, 566\n at basis of Docetism, 676\n not involved in doctrine of Union with Christ, 800\n\nParables, 240, 784\n\nParadise, 403, 998, 999\n\n_Paradoxon summum evangelicum_, 753\n\nPardon, limited by atonement, objections to, refuted, 766\n its conditions can of right be assigned by God, 767\n the act of God as judge in justification, 855\n and justification distinguished, 858, 859\n through Christ, honors God\u2019s justice and mercy, 860\n\nParseeism, 185\n\nParsimony, law of, 74, 87\n\nPassion, the, necessitated by Christ\u2019s incarnation, 760\n\nPassover, 157, 723, 726, 960\n\nPastor, 908, 914, 915, 917\n\n\u201cPastors and teachers,\u201d, 915\n\nPatripassians, 327\n\nPaul, 210, 235, 851, 999\n\nPeace, 865\n\n_Peccatum alienum_, 616\n\nPelagianism, a development of rationalism, 89\n its theory of imputation, 597\u2010601\n its principal author and present advocates, 597\n its exposition, 597\n its view of Romans 5:12, 597\n its seven points, 597\n its sinless men, 597\n its \u201c_non pleni nascimur_,\u201d, 597\n its misinterpretation of the divine influence in man, 597\n is deism applied to man\u2019s nature, 598\n ignores his dignity and destiny, 598\n unformulated and sporadic, 598\n unscriptural, 598, 599\n a survival of paganism, 598\n its key doctrine: _Homo libero arbitrio emancipatus a Deo_, 598\n its unscriptural tenets specified, 598, 599\n regards sins as isolated volitions, 599\n its method contrasted with that of Augustinianism, 599\n presents an Ebionitic view of Christ, 599\n its principles false in philosophy, 600\n ignores law by which acts produce states, 600\n\nPenalty, what?, 294, 652, 653\n\nPenalty, 652\u2010660\n its idea, 652\n more than natural consequences of transgression, 652\n not essentially reformatory, 653\n what essentially?, 653\n not essentially to secure social or governmental safety, 653, 655\n not essentially deterrent, 655\n of sin, two\u2010fold, 656\n of sin, is physical death, 656\u2010659\n of sin, is spiritual death, 659, 660\n\nPenitence, 766\n\nPentateuch (Hexateuch), its authorship, 170\u2010172\n literature upon, 172\n\nPerfect, as applied to men, 574\n\nPerfection, in God, 9, 260\u2010275\n of Christian and church reached in world to come, 981\n\nPerfectionism, its tenet, 877\n its teachers, 877\n its modifications, 877\n authorities upon, 877\n its fundamental false conceptions, 877, 878\n is contradicted by Scripture, 878\u2010886\n disproved by Christian experience, 880\n how best met, 880, 881\n\nPermanent states of the faculties, 506, 550, 551\n\nPerseverance, human side of sanctification, 868, 881\n definition, 881\n its proof from Scripture, 882\n its proof from reason, 882, 883\n is not inconsistent with human freedom, 883\n does not tend to immorality, 883, 884\n does not lead to indolence, 884\n the Scriptural warnings against apostasy do not oppose it, 884, 885\n apparent instances of apostasy do not oppose it, 885, 886\n list of authors on general subject of, 886\n\n\u201cPerson\u201d in doctrine of Trinity, only approximately accurate, 330\n\nPerson, how communicated in different measures, 324\n\nPerson and character of Christ, as proof of revelation, 186\u2010190\n\nPerson of Christ, the doctrine of, 669\u2010700\n historical survey of views regarding, 669\u2010673\n the two natures in their reality and integrity, 673\u2010683\n the union of the two natures in one, 683\u2010700\n\nPersonal identity, 92, 417\n intelligences cannot be accounted for by pantheism, 102\n influence, often distinct from word spoken, 820\n\nPersonality, defined, 82, 252, 253, 330, 335, 515, 695\n of God, the conclusion of the anthropological argument, 84\n of God, denied by pantheism, 100\n the highest dependent on infiniteness, 104\n self\u2010conscious and self\u2010determining, 253\n triple, in Godhead, consistent with essential unity, 330\n in man, inalienable, 515\n involves boundless possibilities, 515\n foundation of mutual love among men, 515\n constitutes a capacity for redemption, 515\n\nPessimism, 404, 405\n\nPeter, how he differed with Paul, 214\n Romish assumptions regarding, 909\n\nPeter, Second, 147, 149, 153\n\nPharaoh, the hardening of his heart, 434\n\nPhenomena, 6\n\nPhilemon and Onesimus, moralized, 767\n\nPhilosophy, defined, 42\n\nPhysico\u2010theological argument, a term of Kant\u2019s, 75\n\nPhysiology, comparative, favors unity of race, 480\u2010483\n\nPictures of Christ, 251\n\n_Pie hoc potest dici, Deum esse Naturam_, 107\n\nPlasticity of species, greater toward origin, 482\n\nPlural quantitative, 318\n\n_Pluralis majestaticus_, 318\n\nPoesy and poem, 852\n\nPoetry, 526\n\nPolytheism, 259, 347\n\nPools of modern Jerusalem, 934\n\nPositive Philosophy, 6, 9, 535, 545, 632\n\nPossession by demons, 456\n\nPr\u00e6terist interpreters of Revelation, 1009\n\nPrayer, relation of Providence to, 433\n its effect, not solely reflex influence, 433\n its answers not confined to spiritual means, 433\n not answered by suspension or breach of the order of nature, 434\n has no direct influence on nature, 434\n is answered by new combinations of natural forces, 434\n as an appeal to a personal and present God, it moves God, 435\n its answer, while an expression of God\u2019s will, may come through the use\n of appointed means, 435\n God\u2019s immanency in nature helps to a solution of the problem, how prayer\n is answered, 436\n how the potency of prayer may be tested, 437, 438\n\nPrayer\u2010book, English, Arminian, 46\n on infant baptism, 957\n\nPrayer\u2010book of Edward VI, mode of baptism in, 957\n\nPreaching of doctrinal sermons, 19\n of the decrees, 369\n of the organic unity of the race in transgression, 634\n larger part of, should consist in application of Divine law to personal\n acts, 648, 649\n addressed to elect and non\u2010elect, 789\n must press immediate submission to Christ, 830\n of everlasting punishment an auxiliary to the gospel appeal, 1053\n\nPre\u2010Adamites, 476\n\nPrecedent, N. T., the \u2019common\u2010law\u2019 of the church, 970\n\n\u201cPreconformity to future events,\u201d, 76\n\nPredestination, 355, 360, 781\n\n_Predicata_, not attributes, 245\n\nPrediction, only a part of prophecy, 134, 710\n\n\u201cPre\u2010established harmony,\u201d, 93\n\nPre\u2010existence of soul, 488\u2010491\n\nPreference, immanent, 514\n \u201celective,\u201d, 557\n\nPreparation, historical, for redemption, 665\u2010668\n\nPrerational instinct, 98\n\nPrescience, Divine, 286\n\nPresentative intuition, 52, 53, 67\n\nPreservation, 410\u2010419\n definition of, positive and negative, 410, 411\n proofs of, from Scripture and reason, 411\u2010414\n deism, with its God withdrawn, denies, 414, 415\n continuous creation, with momently new universe, inconsistent with,\n 415\u2010418\n divine concurrence in, considered, 418, 419\n\nPretermission of sin, 772\n\nPreventive providence, 423\n\nPride, 569\n\n\u201cPriest\u201d and \u201cminister,\u201d, 915, 967\n\nPriestly office of Christ, 713\u2010775\n\nProbability, 71\n\nProbation after death, 707, 1002, 1031\u20101044\n in Adam, 629\n\nProcession of the Holy Spirit, its true formula, 323\n consistent with his equality in Trinity, 340, 341\n\nProgress of early Christianity, what principally conduced to?, 187\n\nProlegomena, 1\u201015\n\nProof of Divine Revelation, principles of evidence applicable to, 41\u201044\n\nProphecy, as attesting a divine revelation, 134\u2010141\n defined in its narrow sense, 134, 135\n its relation to miracles, 135\n requirements in, 135\n general features of Scriptural, 135, 136\n Messianic in general, 136\n as used by Christ, 136\u2010138\n the double sense of, 138\u2010140\n evidential force of, 140, 141\n alleged errors in, 235, 236\n Christians have gifts of, 712\n modern, as far as true, what?, 712\n\nProphet, not always aware of meaning of his own prophecies, 139\n later may elucidate earlier utterances, 235, 236\n his soul, is it rapt into God\u2019s timeless existence and vision?, 278\n larger meaning of the word, 710\n\n_Prophet\u00e6 priores_, 710\n\nProphetic office of Christ, 710\u2010713\n see Christ.\n its nature, 710, 711\n fulfilled in three ways, 711\n its four stages, 711\u2010713\n in his Logos\u2010work, 711\n in his earthly ministry, 711, 712\n in his guidance and teaching of the church since his ascension, 712\n in his revelations of the Father to the saints in glory, 712, 713\n will be eternal, 712\n\nPropitiation, 719, 720\n\n_Proprietates_, distinguished from attributes, 246\n\nProselyte\u2010baptism, 931, 932\n\nProtevangelium, Scripture germinally, 175\n\nProvidence, doctrine of, 419\u2010443\n defined, 419\n explains evolution and progress of universe, 419, 420\n doctrine of, its proof from Scripture, 421\u2010425\n a general providential control, 421, 422\n a control extending to free actions of men in general, 422, 423\n four sorts, preventive, permissive, directive, determinative, 423\u2010425\n rational proof of, 425\u2010427\n arguments _a priori_, 425, 426\n arguments _a posteriori_, 426\n opposed by theory of fatalism, 427\n opposed by casualism, 427, 428\n opposed by theory of a merely general providence, 428\u2010431\n its relation to miracles and works of grace, 431\u2010433\n its relation to prayer, 433\u2010439\n its relation to Christian activity, 439\u2010441\n to evil acts of free agents, 441\u2010443\n\n\u2019Providential miracles,\u2019, 432\n\nPsychic phenomena, 117\n\nPunctiliousness, warning against, 428\n\nPunishment, implied in man\u2019s moral nature, 82\n does not proceed from love, 272\n proceeds from justice, 293\n its idea, 652, 752\n what implied in its idea, 652\u2010656\n has in it, beyond the natural consequences of transgression, a personal\n element, 652\n its object not the reformation of the sufferer, 653\n is the necessary reaction of divine holiness against sin, 653\n is not essentially deterrent, 655\n of sin is physical death, 656\u2010659\n of sin is spiritual death, 659, 660\n an ethical need of the divine nature, 751\n an ethical need in man\u2019s moral nature, 751\n of guilty, Christ\u2019s sufferings substituted for, 752\n is borne by the judge and punisher in the nature that has sinned, 752\n as presented in atonement, what it secures, 753\n endured by Christ righteously, because of his relation to the sinning\n race, 754, 755\n remitted in justification, 854\n remitted on the ground of what Christ, to whom the sinner is united by\n faith, has done, 854, 858\n the final, of the wicked described in Scriptural figures, 1033, 1034\n the final, of the wicked, summed up, 1034\n future, some concessions regarding, 1035\n of wicked, the future, not annihilation, 1035, 1036\n not a weakening process ending in cessation of existence, 1036, 1037\n not an annihilating punishment after death, 1037\n light from the evolutionary process thrown on, 1038\n excludes new probation and ultimate restoration of the wicked, 1039\n declared in Scripture to be eternal, 1044\n is a revelation of God\u2019s justice, 1046\n as the reaction of holiness against sin must continue while sin\n continues, 1046, 1047\n is endless since guilt is endless, 1048\n is eternal since sin is \u201ceternal,\u201d, 1048\n the facts of human life and tendencies of scientific thought point to\n the perpetuity of, 1049\n may have degrees yet be eternal, 1050\n may be eternal as the desert of sin of infinite enormity, 1050\n not inconsistent with God\u2019s benevolence, 1051\u20101054\n its proper preaching not a hindrance to success of the gospel, 1054\n if it is a fact, it ought to be preached, 1054\n to ignore it in pulpit teaching lowers the holiness of God, 1055\n the fear of, not the highest but a proper motive to seek salvation, 1055\n in preaching it, the misery of the soul should have special emphasis,\n 1056\n\nPurgatory, 659, 866, 1000\u20101002\n\nPurification of Christ, the ritual, 761, 942, 943\n\nPuritans, 546, 557\n\nPurpose of God includes many decrees, 353\n in election, what?, 355\n in reprobation, what?, 355\n to save individuals, passages which prove, 780\u2010783\n to do what he does, eternal, 783\n to save, not conditioned upon merit or faith, 784\n\n_Quasi carcere_, Christ not thus in Heaven, 709\n\n_Quia voluit_ of Calvin, not final answer as to God\u2019s acts, 404\n\nQuickening, Christ\u2019s, distinguished from his resurrection, 707\n\nQuietism, 439, 440\n\n_Quo non ascendam?_ not Christ\u2019s query, 764\n\nRace, Scripture teaches its descent from a single pair, 476\n its descent from a single pair a foundation truth of Paul\u2019s, 476\n its descent from a single pair the foundation of brotherhood, 476\n its descent from a single pair corroborated by history, 477, 478\n its descent from a single pair corroborated by language, 478, 479\n its descent from a single pair corroborated by psychology, 479, 480\n its descent from a single pair corroborated by physiology, 480\u2010483\n\nRace\u2010responsibility, 594\u2010597\n\nRational intuition, 52, 67\n\nRationalism and Scripture, 29, 30, 89\n\nReadings, various, 226\n\nRealism, in relation to God, 245\n\nReason, definition of, 4, 29\n its office, 29\n says _scio_, not _conscio_, 500\n moral, depraved, 501\n\nReasoning, not reason, 29\n not a source of the idea of God, 65\n errors of, in Bible, 232, 233\n\nRecognition, post\u2010resurrectional, 1020, 1021\n\nRecollection of things not before seen, the seeming, explained, 488\n memory greater than, 705\n\nReconciliation, removal of God\u2019s wrath, 719\n of man to God, 777\u2010886\n objective, secured by Christ\u2019s union with race, 802\n subjective, secured by Christ\u2019s union with believers, 802\n\nRedemption and resurrection, what is secured by, 527\n wrought by Christ, 665\u2010776\n its meaning, 707\n legal, of Christ, its import, 761\n its application, 777\u2010886\n application of, in its preparation, 777\u2010793\n application of, in its actual beginning, 793\u2010868\n application of, in its continuation, 868\u2010886\n\nRedi\u2019s maxim, 389\n\nReformed theology, 44\u201046\n\nRegenerate, some apparently such, will fall away, 884\n the truly, not always distinguishable in this life from the seemingly\n so, 884\n their fate if they should not persevere described, 885\n these warnings secure their perseverance, 885\n\nRegeneration, illustrative of inspiration, 212\n ascribed to Holy Spirit, 316\n its nature, according to Romanists, 522\n the view that a child may be educated into, 606\n its place in the _ordo salutis_, 793\n does a physical miracle attend?, 806\n defined, 809\n its active and passive aspects, 809\n how represented in Scripture, 810\u2010812\n indispensable, 810\n a change in the inmost principle of life, 810\n a change in governing disposition, 810\n a change in moral relations, 810, 811\n wrought through use of truth, 811\n is instantaneous, 811\n wrought by God, 811\n through union of soul with Christ, 811, 812\n its necessity, 812\u2010814\n its efficient cause, 814\u2010820\n the will not the efficient cause, 815\u2010817\n is more than self\u2010reformation, 815\n is not co\u2010operation with divine influence, which to the natural man is\n impossible, 816\n the truth is not the efficient cause, 817, 818\n the Holy Spirit, the efficient cause of, 818\u2010820\n the Spirit in, operates not on the truth but on the soul, 819\n the Spirit in, effects a change in the moral disposition, 820\n the instrumentality used in, 820\u2010823\n baptism a sign of, 821\n as a spiritual change cannot be effected by physical means, 821\n is accomplished through the instrumentality of the truth, 822\n man not wholly passive at time of his, 822\n man\u2019s mind at time of, active in view of truth, 822\n nature of the change wrought in, 823\u2010829\n is a change by which governing disposition is made holy, 823\u2010825\n does not affect the quantity but the quality of the soul, 824\n involves an enlightenment of the understanding and a rectification of\n the volitions, 825\n an origination of holy tendencies, 826\n an instantaneous change in soul, below consciousness and known only in\n results, 826\u2010829\n is an instantaneous change, 826, 827\n should not be confounded with preparatory stages, 827\n taken place in region of the soul below consciousness, 828\n is recognized indirectly in its results, 828, 829\n the growth that follows, is sanctification, 829\n\n_Regna, glori\u00e6, grati\u00e6_ (_et natur\u00e6_), 775\n\nReign of sin, what?, 553, 554\n\nReligion and theology, how related, 19\n derivation of word, 19, 20\n false conceptions of it advocated by Hegel, Schleiermacher, and Kant,\n 20, 21\n its essential idea, 21, 22\n there is but one, 22, 23\n its content greater than that of theology, 23\n distinguished from formal worship, 23, 24\n conspectus of the systems of, in world, 179\u2010186\n\nRemorse, perhaps an element in Christ\u2019s suffering, 769\n\nReparative goodness of God in nature, 113\n\nRepentance, more for sin than sins, 555\n the gift of God, 782\n described, 832\n contains an intellectual element, 832\n contains an emotional element, 832, 833\n contains a voluntary element, 833, 834\n implies free\u2010will, 834\n Romish view, 834\n wholly an inward act, 834\n manifested by fruits of repentance, 835\n a negative and not a positive means of salvation, 835\n if true, is in conjunction with faith, 836\n accompanies true faith, 836\n\nReprobation, 355\n\n_Rerum natura Dei voluntas est_, 119\n\n_Respice_, _aspice_, _prospice_ of Bernard applied to prophet\u2019s function,\n 710\n\nResponsibility for whatever springs from will, 509\n for inherited moral evil, its ground, 509\n is special help of Spirit essential to? 603, 604\n for a sinful nature which one did not personally originate, a fact, 629\n none for immediate heredities, 630\n for belief, authors on, 841\n\nRestoration of all human beings, 1039\u20101044\n\nResurrection, an event not within the realm of nature, 118\n of Christ, the central and sufficient evidence of Christianity, 138\n of Christ, dilemma for those who deny, 130\n of Christ, Strauss fails to explain belief in, 157\n of Christ, attested by epistles regarded as genuine by Baur, 160\n of Christ, Renan\u2019s view of, 160, 161\n Christ\u2019s argument for, Matt. 22:32, 232, 996, 1018\n attributed to Christ, 310\n attributed to Holy Spirit, 316\n of Christ, angel present at, 483\n of Christ, gave proof that penalty of sin was exhausted, 657\n a stage in Christ\u2019s exaltation, 707\n proclaimed Christ as perfected and glorified man, 708\n of Christ, the time of his justification, 762\n secured to believer by union with Christ, 805, 806, 867\n relation to regeneration, 824\n sanctification completed at the, 874\n of Christ and of the believer, Baptism a symbol of, 940\u2010945\n implied in symbolism of Lord\u2019s Supper, 963, 964\n Christ\u2019s body, an object that may be worshiped, 968\n an event preparing for the kingdom of God, 981\n allusions to, in O. T., 995\n of Christ, the only certain proof of immortality, 997\n perfect joy or misery subsequent to, 1002\n Scriptures describing a spiritual, 1015\n Scriptures describing a physical, 1015\n art and post\u2010resurrection possibilities, 1016\n personality in, being indestructible, takes to itself a body, 1016\n Christ\u2019s body in, an open question, 1016\n an exegetical objection to, 1016\n \u201cof the body,\u201d the phrase not in N. T., 1016\n receive a \u201cspiritual body\u201d in, 1016, 1017\n the indwelling of the Holy Spirit secures preservation of body in, 1017\n the believer\u2019s, as literal and physical as Christ\u2019s, 1018\n literal, to be suitable to events which accompany, 1018\n the physical connection between old and new body in, not unscientific,\n 1019\n the oneness of the body in, and our present body, rests on two things,\n 1020\n the body in, though not absolutely the same, will be identical with the\n present, 1020, 1021\n the spiritual body in, will complete rather than confine, the activities\n of spirit, 1021, 1022\n four principles should influence our thinking about, 1022, 1023\n authors on the subject in departments and entirety, 1023\n\nRevelation, of such a nature as to make scientific theology possible,\n 11\u201015\n\nRevelation in nature requires supplementing, 26, 27\n God submits to limitations of, which are largely those of theology,\n 34\u201036\n how regarded in \u201cperiod of criticism and speculation,\u201d, 46\n the Scriptures a, from God, 111\u2010242\n reasons for expecting from God a, 111\u2010114\n psychology shows that the intellectual and moral nature of man needs a,\n 111, 112\n history shows that man needs a, 112\n what we know of God\u2019s nature leads to hope of a, 112, 113\n _a priori_ reasons for expecting, 113, 114\n marks of the expected, 114\u2010117\n its substance, 114\n its method, 114\u2010116\n will have due attestation, 116, 117\n attended by miracles, 117\u2010134\n attested by prophecy, 134\u2010141\n principles of historical evidence entering into proof of, 141\u2010144\nScripture, 175\n its connection with inspiration and illumination, 196, 197\n\nRevenge, what?, 569\n\n\u201cReversion to type\u201d never occurs in man, 411\n\nRewards, earthly, appealed to in O. T., 230\n proceed from goodness of God, 290, 293\n not bestowed by justice or righteousness, 293\n goodness to creatures, righteousness to Christ, 293\n are motives, not sanctions, 535\n\nRight, abstract, not ground of moral obligations, 299\n God is self\u2010willing, 338\n based on arbitrary will is not right, 338\n based on passive nature, is not right, 338\n as being is Father, 338\n as willing is Son, 338\n\nRighteousness of God, what?, 290\n holiness in its mandatory aspect, 291\n its meaning in 2 Cor. 5:21, 760\n demands punishment of sin, 764\n is justification and sanctification, 873\n\nRomanism, and Scripture, 33, 34\n a mystical element in, 33\n it places church before the Bible, 33\n would keep men in perpetual childhood, 33, 34\n\nSabbath commemorates God\u2019s act of creation, 408\n made at creation applies to man always and everywhere, 408\n recognized in Assyria and Babylonia, as far back as Accadian times\n before Abraham, 408\n was not abrogated by our Lord or his apostles, 409\n upon, 409\n\nSabbath, Christ\u2019s example and apostolic sanction have transferred it from\n seventh to first day of week, 409\n Justin Martyr on, 410\n authors on, 410\n\nSabellianism, 327, 328\n\nSacrifice, 722\u2010728\n what it is not, 722, 723\n its true import, 723, 724\n pagan and Semitic, its implications, 723, 724\n in the legend of \u00c6schylus, 723\n of the Passover, H. C. Trumbull\u2019s views of, 723\n its theocratical and spiritual offices, 724\n of O. T., when rightly offered, what implied in, 725, 726\n cannot present a formal divine institution, 726\n how Abel\u2019s differed from Cain\u2019s, 727\n the terminology of O. T. regarding, needful to correct interpretation of\n N. T. usage regarding atonement of Christ, 727\n differing views as to significance of, 728\n\nSacrifices, Jewish, a tentative scheme of, 725, 726\n\nSaints, prayer to, 775\n how intercessors?, 775\n as applied to believers, 880\n\nSanctification, related to regeneration and justification, 862, 863\n definition of, 869\n what implied in definition of, 869, 870\n explanations and Scripture proof of, 870\u2010875\n a work of God, 870\n a continuous process, 871\n distinguished from regeneration, 871\n shown in intelligent and voluntary activity of believer, 871, 872\n the agency employed in, the indwelling Spirit of Christ, 872\n its mediate or instrumental cause is faith, 872\n the object of this instrumental faith is Christ himself, 873\n measured by strength of faith, 873\n influenced by lack of persistency in using means of growth, 874\n completed in life to come, 874\n erroneous views of, 875\u2010881\n the Antinomian view, 875\u2010877\n the Perfectionist view, 877\u2010881\n\nSanctify, its twofold meaning, 880\n\nSatan, his personality, 447\n not a collective term for all evil beings, 447\n various literary conceptions of, 447\n meaning of term, 454\n opposed by Holy Spirit, 454\n his temptations, 455\n has access to human mind, 455\n may influence through physical organism, 455\n \u201cdelivering to,\u201d 457\n was specially active during earthly ministry of Christ, 458\n his power limited, 458\n the idea of his fall not self\u2010contradictory, 460\n not irrational to suppose that by a single act he could change his\n nature, 460\n present passion may lead a wise being to enter on a foolish course, 460\n that God should create and uphold evil spirits no more inconsistent with\n benevolence than similar action towards evil men, 461\n a ganglionic centre of an evil system, 461\n the doctrine of, if given up, leads to laxity in administration of\n justice, 462\n as tool and slave of, humanity is indeed degraded, but was not always,\n nor needs to be, 462\n the fall of, uncaused from without, 585\n like Adam, sins under the best circumstances, 588\n permitted to divide the guilt with man that man might not despair, 588\n grows in cunning and daring, 1037\n\nSatisfaction to an immanent demand of divine holiness rendered by Christ\u2019s\n obedience and suffering, 713, 723\n by substitution founded on incorporation, 723\n and forgiveness not mutually exclusive because the judge makes\n satisfaction to his own violated holiness, 767\n penal and pecuniary, 767\n sinner\u2019s own act, according to Romish view, 834\n\nScholasticism and Scholastics, 44, 45, 265, 268, 443\n\nScience, defined, 2\n its aim, 2\n on what its possibility is grounded, 2\n requires a knowledge of more than phenomena, 6\n existence of a personal God, its necessary datum, 60\n\n_Scientia media, simplicis intelligenti\u00e6, visionis_, 358\n\nScientific unity, desire for, its influence, 90\n\n_Scio_ and _conscio_, 500\n\nScripture and nature, 26\n and rationalism, 29\u201031\n contains nothing repugnant to a properly conditioned and enlightened\n reason, 29\n and mysticism, 31, 32\n and Romanism, 33, 34\n knowledge of, incomplete, 35\n topics on which silent, 72\n supernatural character of its teaching, 175\n its moral and religious ideas uncontradicted and unsuperseded, 175\n its supernaturally secured unity, 176\n Christ testifies to its supernatural character, 189\n result of its propagation, 191\n how interpreted?, 217\n authors differ, divine mind one, 217\n the Christian rule of faith and practice, 218\n contains no scientific untruth, 224\n not a code of practical action, but an enunciation of principles, 545\n\nScriptures, the, a revelation from God, 111\u2010242\n work of one God, and so organically articulated (Scripture), 217\n why so many interpretations of?, 223, 224\n a rule in their interpretation, 1011\n\n\u201cSealing,\u201d, 831, 872\n\nSeals, in Revelation, 1010\n\nSelection, natural, without teleological factors, its inadequacy, 391\n is it in any sense the _cause_ of the origin of species?, 391\n it has probably increased the rapidity of development, 391, 392\n or \u201csurvival of the fittest,\u201d how suggested?, 403\n defined, 470\n is partially true, 470\n it gives no account of the origin of substance or variations, 470\n not the savior of the fittest, but the destroyer of the failures, 470\n facts that it cannot explain, 470, 471\n nor artificial has produced a new species, 471\n\nSelf\u2010limitation, divine, 9, 126, 255\n\nSelfishness, the essence of sin, 567\n cannot be resolved into simpler elements, 568\n forms in which it manifests itself, 568, 569\n of unregenerate, the substitution of a lower for a higher end, 570\n\nSentimentality, 979\n\n\u201cSignality,\u201d in miracle, 118\n\nSin, God the author of free beings who are the authors of, 365\n the decree to permit not efficient, 365\n its permission a difficulty of all theistic systems, 366\n its permission, how not to be explained, 366\n its permission, how it may be partially explained, 366\n the problem of, one of four at present not to be completely solved, 366,\n 367\n observations from many sources aiming to throw light on the existence of\n moral evil, 367, 368\n man\u2019s, as suggested from without, perhaps the mitigating circumstance\n that allows of his redemption, 462\n in what sense a nature?, 518\n effect of first, not a weakening but a perversion of human nature, 521\n the first did more than despoil man of a special gift of grace, 521\n or man\u2019s state of apostasy, 533\u2010664\n its nature, 549\u2010573\n defined, 549\n Old and New School views regarding, their difference and approximation,\n 549, 550\n as a state, some psychological notes explanatory of, 550, 551\n as a state is counteracted by an immanent divine power which leads\n towards salvation, 551\n \u201ctotal depravity\u201d as descriptive of, an out\u2010grown phrase, 552\n as act of transgression and disposition or state, proved from Scripture,\n 552\u2010554\n the words which describe, applicable to dispositions and states, 552\n N. T. descriptions of, give prominence to states and dispositions, 552,\n 553\n and moral evil in the thoughts, affections, and heart, 553\n is name given to a state which originated wrong desires, 553\n is represented as existing in soul prior to consciousness of it, 553\n a permanent power or reigning principle, 553\n Mosaic sacrifices for sins other than mere act, 554\n universally attributed to disposition or state, 554\n attributed to outward act only when such act is symptomatic of inward\n state, 554\n if it tend from act to a state, regarded as correspondingly blameworthy,\n 554\n in an individual condemned though it cannot be traced back to a\n conscious originating act, 554, 555\n when it becomes fixed and dominant moral corruption, meets special\n disapprobation, 555\n regarded by the Christian as a manifestation of subconscious depravity\n of nature, 555\n repented of, principally as depravity of nature, 555\n rather than \u201csins\u201d repented of by Christians advanced in spiritual\n culture; a conspectus of quotations to prove this, 555\u2010557\n its definition as \u2019the voluntary transgression of known law\u2019 discussed,\n 557\u2010559\n is not always a distinct and conscious volition, 557\n intention aggravates, but is not essential to, 558\n knowledge aggravates, but is not essential to, 558\n ability to fulfil the law, not essential to, 558\n definition of, 558, 559\n its essential principle, 559\u2010573\n is not sensuousness, 559\u2010563\n is not finiteness, 563\u2010566\n is selfishness, 567\u2010573\n is universal, 573\u2010582\n committed by every human being, arrived at maturity, 573\n its universality set forth in Scripture, 573, 574\n its universality proved from history, 574\n its universality proved from Christian experience, 576\n the outcome of a corrupt nature possessed by every human being, 577\n is act or disposition referred to a corrupt nature, 577\n rests on men who are called in Scripture \u2019children of wrath,\u2019, 578\n its penalty, death, visits those who have never exercised personal or\n conscious choice, 579\n its universality proved from reason, 579, 580\n testimony of great thinkers regarding, 580\u2010582\n its origin in the personal act of Adam, 582\u2010593\n the origin of the sinful nature whence it comes is beyond the\n investigations of reason, 582\n Scriptural account of its origin, 582\u2010585\n Adam\u2019s, its essential nature, 587\n of Adam in resisting inworking God, 587\n an immanent preference of the world, 587\n not to be accounted for psychologically, 587\n the external temptation to first sin a benevolent permission, 588\n self\u2010originated, Satanic, 588\n the first temptation to, had no tendency to lead astray, 588\n the first, though in itself small, a revelation of will thoroughly\n alienated from God, 590\n consequences of original, as respects Adam, 590\u2010593\n physical death, a consequence of his first, 590, 591\n spiritual death, a consequence of his first, 591, 592\n exclusion from God\u2019s presence, a consequence of his first, 592\n banishment from the Garden, a consequence of man\u2019s first, 593\n the, of our first parents constituted their posterity sinners, 593\n two insistent questions regarding the first, and the Scriptural answer,\n 593\n imputation of, its true meaning, 594\n original, its meaning, 594\n man\u2019s relations to moral law extend beyond conscious and actual, 595\n God\u2019s moral government recognizes race\u2010sin, 595\n actual, more guilty than original, 596\n no man condemned for original, alone, 596, 664\n the only ground of responsibility for race\u2010sin, 596\n original, its correlate, 596\n imputation of Adam\u2019s, 597\u2010637\n see Imputation.\n Pelagian theory of the imputation of, 597\u2010601\n Arminian theory of the imputation of, 601\u2010606\n New School theory of the imputation of, 606\u2010612\n Federal theory of the imputation of, 612\u2010616\n Mediate theory of the imputation of, 616\u2010619\n Augustinian theory of the imputation of, 619\u2010637\n table of theories of imputation of, 628\n apart from, and prior to, consciousness, 629\n conscience and Scripture attest that we are responsible for our unborn\n tendency to, 629\n as our nature, rightly punishable with resulting sin, 632\n reproductive, each reproduction increasing guilt and punishment, 633\n each man guilty of personal, which expresses more than original\n depravity of nature, 633\n is self\u2010perpetuating, 633\n is self\u2010isolating, 634\n the nature, and sins its expression, 635\n as Adam\u2019s, ruins, so Christ\u2019s obedience saves, 635\n consequences of, to Adam\u2019s posterity, 637\u2010664\n depravity a consequence of Adam\u2019s, 637\u2010640\n in nature, as \u201ctotal depravity,\u201d considered, 637\u2010640\n total inability a consequence of Adam\u2019s, 640\u2010644\n guilt a consequence of Adam\u2019s, 644\u2010652\n penalty, a consequence of Adam\u2019s, 652\u2010660\n infants in a state of, 661\n venial and mortal, 648\n of nature and personal transgression, 648, 649\n of ignorance and of knowledge, 649\n of infirmity and of presumption, 649, 650\n of incomplete and final obduracy, 650\u2010652\n unto death, considered, 650\u2010652\n against Holy Spirit, why unpardonable, 651, 652\n penalty of, considered, 652\u2010660\n infants in a state of, 661\n Christ free from hereditary and actual, 676\u2010678\n Christ responsible for human, 759\n Christ responsible for Adam\u2019s, 759\n Christ as great Penitent confesses race\u2010sin, 760\n Christ, how made to be, 760\u2010763\n a pretermission of, justified in cross, 772\n does not condemn, but the failure to ask pardon for it, 856\n judged and condemned on Calvary, 860\n future, the virtual pardon of, 867\n \u201cdwelling,\u201d and \u201creigning,\u201d, 869, 870\n expelled by bringing in Christ, 873\n does not most sympathize with sin, 1028\n hinders intercourse with other worlds, 1033\n \u201ceternal,\u201d, 1033\n made the means of displaying God\u2019s glory, 1038\n chosen in spite of infinite motives to the contrary, 1040\n\nSinner, the incorrigible, glorifies God in his destruction, 442\n negatively described, 637, 638\n positively described, 639\n what he can do, 640\n what he cannot do, 640\n under conviction, more of a sinner than before, 827\n has no right to do anything before accepting Christ, 868\n\n\u201cSix hundred sixty\u2010six,\u201d, 570\n\n\u201cSlope, the,\u201d, 580\n\nSociety, atomistic theory of, 623\n\nSociety, _bellum omnium contra omnes_ (Hobbes), 461\n\nSocinianism, 47, 328, 329, 524, 558, 597, 728\u2010733\n\nSolidarity, 624\n\n_Sola fides justificat, sed fides non est sola_, 758\n\n\u201cSon,\u201d its import in Trinity, 334\n\nSon, the, a perfect object of will, knowledge and love to God, 275, 388\n his eternal generation, 341\n uncreate, 341\n his essence not derived from essence of the Father, 341\n his existence eternal, 341\n exists by internal necessity of Divine nature, 342\n eternal generation of, a life movement of the Divine nature, 342\n in person subordinate to person of Father, 342\n in essence equal with Father, 342\n\nSon of man, cannotes, among other things, a veritable humanity, 673\n\nSong of Solomon, 233, 238\n\nSonship of Christ, eternal, 340\n metaphysical, 340\n authors on, 343\n\nSorrow for sin, 832, 833\n\nSoteriology, 665\u2010894\n\nSoul, what?, 92\n dichotomous view of, 483\n trichotomous view of, 484\n distinguished from spirit, 484\n its origin, 488\n its pre\u2010existence, according to poets, 489\n creatian theory of, 491\n not something added from without, 492\n introduced into body, _sicut vinum in vase acetoso_, 493\n metaphysical generation of, 493\n traducian theory of, 494\u2010497\n history of theory, 493, 494\n observations favorable to, 494\u2010497\n image of God, _proprie_, 528\n always active, though not always conscious, 550\n may influence another soul apart from physical intermediaries, 820\n not inaccessible to God\u2019s direct operation, 820\n as uncompounded cannot die, 984\n see Immortality.\n\n\u201cSovereign, the,\u201d a title of Messiah, 321\n\nSpace, 278, 279\n\nSpace and time, 85, 275\n\nSpace \u201cin God,\u201d, 279\n\nSpecies, 392, 480\u2010482, 494\n\nSpirit, the Holy, his teaching, a necessity, 27\n hides himself, 213\n recognized as God, 315\n divine characteristics and prerogatives ascribed to, 316\n associated with God, 316\n his deity supported by Christian experience, 316\n his deity, a doctrine of the church, 316\n the Holy, his deity not disproved by O. T. limitations, 317\n his deity, authors on, 317\n is a person, 323\n designations of personality given to him, 323\n \u201cthe mother\u2010principle\u201d in the Godhead, 323\n so mentioned with other persons as to imply personality, 323, 324\n performs acts of personality, 324\n affected by acts of others, 324\n possesses an emotional nature, 325\n visibly appears as distinct from, yet connected with Father and Son, 325\n ascription to him, of personal subsistence, 325\n import of his presence in Trinity, 334\n the centripetal movement of Deity, 336\n and Christ, differences in their work, 338\u2010340\n his nature and work, authors on, 340\n his eternal procession, 340\u2010343\n if not God, God could not be appropriated, 349\n a work of completing belongs to, 313\n applies Scriptural truth to present circumstances, 440\n directs the God\u2010man in his humiliation, 696\n his intercession, 774, 775\n his intermediacy, 793\n witness of, what?, 844, 845\n doctrine of \u201csealing\u201d distinguished from mysticism, 845\n in believer, substitutes old excitements, 872\n\n\u201cSpirit\u201d and \u201csoul,\u201d, 843\n\nSpirit, how applied to Christ, 333\n\nSpirits, evil, tempt, 455\n control natural phenomena, 455\n execute God\u2019s plans, 457\n not independent of human will, 457, 458\n restrained by permissive will of God, 458\n exist and act on sufferance, 459\n their existence not inconsistent with benevolence of God, 461\n are organized, 461\n the doctrine of, not immoral, 461, 462\n doctrine of, not degrading, 462\n their nature and actions illustrate the evil of sin, 463\n knowledge of their existence inspires a salutary fear, 463\n sense of their power drives to Christ, 463\n contrasting their unsaved state with our spiritual advantages causes us\n to magnify grace of God, 463\n\n\u201cSpirits in prison,\u201d, 707, 708\n\nSpiritual body, 1016, 1017\n\nSpiritualism, 32, 132\n\nSpontaneous generation, 389\n\nStoicism, 184\n\nStyle, 223\n\nSublapsarianism, 777\n\nSubordinationism, 342\n\nSubstance, known, 5\n its characteristics, 6\n a direct knowledge of it as underlying phenomena, 97\n\nSubstances, the theory of two eternal, 378\u2010383\n See Dualism.\n\n_Substantia una et unica_, 86\n\nSuffering, in itself not reformatory, 104\n\nSuggestion, 453, 454\n\n\u201cSunday,\u201d used by Justin Martyr, 148\n\nSupererogation, works of, 522\n\nSupper, the Lord\u2019s, a historical monument, 157\n its ritual and import, 959\n instituted by Christ, 959, 960\n its mode of administration, 960\u2010962\n its elements, 960\n its communion of both kinds, 960\n is of a festal nature, 960, 961\n commemorative, 961\n celebrated by assembled church, 961\n responsibility of its proper observance rests with pastor as\n representative of church, 962\n its frequency discretional, 962\n it symbolizes personal appropriation of the benefits of Christ\u2019s death,\n 963\n it symbolizes union with Christ, 963\n it symbolizes dependence on Christ, 963\n it symbolizes a reproduction of death and resurrection in believer, 963\n it symbolizes union in Christ, 963\n it symbolizes the coming joy and perfection of the kingdom of God, 963\n its connection with baptism, 964\n is to be often repeated, 964\n implies a previous state of grace, 964\n the blessing conveyed in communion depends on communicant, 964\n expresses fellowship of believer, 964\n the Romanist view of, 965\u2010968\n the Lutheran and High Church view of, 968, 969\n there are prerequisites, 969, 970\n prerequisites laid down by Christ, 970\n regeneration, a prerequisite to, 971\n baptism, a prerequisite to, 971\u2010973\n church membership, a prerequisite to, 973\n an orderly walk, a prerequisite to, 973\u2010975\n the local church the judge as to the fulfilment of these prerequisites,\n 975\u2010977\n special objections to open communion presented, 977\u2010980\n\nSupralapsarianism, 777\n\nSymbol, derivation and meaning, 42\n less than thing symbolized, 1035\n\nSymbolism, period of, 45\n\n_Symbolum Quicumque_, 329\n\nSynagogue, 902\n\nSynergism, 816\n\nSynoptic gospels, date, 150\n\n\u201cSynthetic idealization of our existence,\u201d, 568\n\nSynthetic method in theology, 50\n\nSystem of theology, a dissected map, some parts of which already put\n together, 15\n\nSystematic theologian, the first, 44\n\nSystematic truth influences character, 16\n\n_Tabula rasa_ theory, of Locke, 35\n\nTalmud shows what the unaided genius for religion could produce, 115\n\n_Tapeinoticon genus_, 686\n\n\u201cTeaching, the, of the Twelve Apostles,\u201d, 159, 937, 953\n\nTeleological argument for the existence of God, 75\u201080\n statement of argument, 75\n called also \u201cphysico\u2010theological,\u201d, 75\n divided by some into eutaxiology and teleology proper, 75\n the major premise is a primitive and immovable conviction, 75\n the minor premise, a working principle of science, 77\n it does not prove a personal God, 78, 79\n it does not prove unity, eternity, or infinity of God, 79, 80\n adds intelligence and volition to the causative power already proved to\n exist, 80\n\nTelepathy, 1021\n\nTemptation, prevented by God\u2019s providence, 423\n does not pervert, but confirms, the holy soul, 588, 589\n Adam\u2019s, Scriptural account of, 582, 583\n Adam\u2019s, its course and result, 584, 585\n Adam\u2019s, contrasted with Christ\u2019s, 677, 678\n Christ\u2019s, as possible as that of Adam, 677\n aided by limitations of his human intelligence, 677\n aided by his susceptibility to all forms of innocent gratification, 677\n in wilderness, addressed to desire, 677\n in Gethsemane, to fear, 677\n _Ueberglaube_, _Aberglaube_, _Unglaube_, appealed to, 677\n is always \u201cwithout sin,\u201d, 677\n authors upon, 678\n by Satan, negative and positive, 455\n\nTempter\u2019s promise, the, 572\n\nTendency\u2010theory of Baur, 157\u2010160\n\nTendency, undeveloped, 847\n\nTerminology, a, needed in progress of a science, 35\n\nTestament New, genuineness of, 146\u2010165\n rationalistic theories to explain origin of its gospels, 155\u2010165\n its moral system, 177\u2010186\n its morality contrasted with that of heathenism, 179\u2010186\n\nTestament, Old, in what sense its works are genuine, 162\n how proved, 165\u2010175\n alleged errors in quoting or interpreting, 234, 235\n\nTestimony, science assumes faith in, 3\n amount of, necessary to prove miracle, 127, 128\n in general, 142\u2010144\n statements in, may conflict without being false, 227\n\nTests, does God submit to?, 437\n\nTheologian, characteristics of, 38\u201041\n\nTheological Encyclop\u00e6dia, 42\n\nTheology, its definition, 1, 2\n its aim, 2\n its possibility, 2\u201015\n its necessity, 15\u201019\n its relation to religion, 19\u201024\n rests on God\u2019s self\u2010revelation, 25\n rests on his revelation in nature, 26\n natural and Scriptural, how related, 26\u201029\n rests on Scripture and reason, 29\n rationalism hurtful to, 30\u201031\n rests on Scripture and a true mysticism, 31\n avoids a false mysticism, 32\n accepts history of doctrine as ancillary, 33\n declines the combination, Scripture and Romanism, 33, 34\n its limitations, 34\u201036\n a perfect system of, impossible, 36, 37\n is progressive, 37\n its method, 38\u201051\n requisites to its study, 38\u201041\n see Theologian.\n divisions of, 41\u201044\n Biblical, 41\n historical, 41\n systematic, 41, 42\n practical, 42\u201044\n\nTheology, Systematic, its history, 44\n in Eastern church, 44\n in Western Church, 44\u201046\n its period of scholasticism, 44, 45\n its period of symbolism, 45, 46\n its period of criticism and speculation, 46\n a list of authorities in, differing from Protestantism, 47\n British theology, 47, 48\n Baptist theologians, 47\n Puritan theologians, 47, 48\n Scotch Presbyterian theologians, 48\n Methodist theologians, 48\n Quaker theologians, 48\n English Church theologians, 48\n American theology, 48, 49\n the Reformed system, 48, 49\n the older Calvinism, 49\n order in which its subjects may be treated, 49, 50\n analytic method in, 49, 50\n synthetic method in, 50\n text\u2010books in, 50, 51\n\nTheonomy, 83\n\nTheophany, Christ not a mere, 686\n\n\u201cThings,\u201d, 95, 96, 254\n\nThought, does not go on in the brain, 93\n possible without language, 216\n intermittent or continuous?, 1002\n\nThree thousand baptized in one day in time of Chrysostom, 934\n\nThucydides never mentions Socrates, 144\n\nTime, its definition, 276\n God not under law of, 276\n has objective reality to God, 276\n his \u201cone eternal now,\u201d how to be understood, 277\n can the human spirit escape the conditions of, 278\n authors on \u201ctime\u201d and \u201ceternity,\u201d, 278\n\nTorments of wicked, outward, subordinate results and accompaniments of\n state of soul, 1034\n\nTradition, and idea of God, 63\n cannot long be trusted to give correct evidence, 142\n of a \u201cgolden age\u201d and matters cognate, 480, 526\n\nTraducianism, its advocates and teaching, 493, 494\n best accords with Scripture, 494, 495\n favored by analogy of vegetable and animal life, 496\n heredities, mental, spiritual, and moral, prove men\u2019s souls of human\n ancestry, 496\n does not exclude divine concurrence in the development of the human\n species, 496\n Fathers, who held, 620\n\nTrafalgar, omitted in Napoleon\u2019s dispatches, 143\n\nTranscendence, divine, denied by pantheism, 100\n taught in Scripture, 102\n deism, an exaggeration of, 414\n\nTransgression, a stab at heart of God, 541\n not proper translation of 1 John 3:4, 452\n its universality directly taught in Scripture, 573\n its universality proved in universal need of atonement, regeneration,\n and repentance, 573\n its universality shown in condemnation that rests on all who do not\n accept Christ, 574\n its universality, consistent with passages which ascribe a sort of\n goodness to some men, 574\n its universality proved by history, and individual experience and\n observation, 574, 575\n proved from Christian experience, 576\n uniformity of actual transgression, a proof that will is impotent, 611\n all moral consequences flowing from, are sanctions of law, 637\n\nTransubstantiation, what?, 965\n rests on a false interpretation of Scripture, 965\n contradicts the senses, 966\n denies completeness of sacrifice of Calvary, 967\n externalizes and destroys Christianity, 967, 968\n\nTrees of \u201clife\u201d and \u201cknowledge,\u201d, 526, 527, 583\n\nTrichotomous theory of man\u2019s nature, 484\u2010487\n\n_Trimurti_, Brahman Trinity, 351\n\n_Trinitas dualitatem ad unitatem reducit_, 338\n\n_Trinitatem, I ad Jordanem et videbis_, 325\n\nTrinities, heathen, 351\n\nTrinity, renders possible an eternal divine self\u2010contemplation, 262\n the immanent love of God understood only in light of, 265\n the immanent holiness of God rendered intelligible by doctrine of, 274\n has close relations to doctrine of immanent attributes, 275, 336\n doctrine of the, 304\u2010352\n a truth of revelation only, 304\n intimated in O. T., made known in N. T., 304\n six main statements concerning, 304\n the term ascribed to Tertullian, 304\n a designation of four facts, 304\n held implicitly, or in solution, by the apostles, 304\n took shape in the Athanasian Creed (8th or 9th century), 305\n usually connected with \u201csemi\u2010trinitarian\u201d Nicene Creed (325 A. D.), 305\n references on doctrine of, 305\n implies the recognition in Scripture of three as God, 305\u2010322\n presents proofs from N. T., 305\u2010317\n presents Father as recognized as God, 305\n presents Jesus Christ as recognized as God, 305\u2010315\n appeals to Christian experience as confirming the deity of Christ, 313,\n 314\n explains certain passages apparently inconsistent with Christ\u2019s deity,\n 314, 315\n allows an order of office and operation consistent with essential\n oneness and equality, 314, 342\n doctrine of, how its construction started, 314\n presents the Holy Spirit recognized as God, 315\u2010317\n intimations of, in the O. T., 317\u2010322\n seemingly alluded to in passages which teach a plurality of some sort in\n the Godhead, 317\u2010319\n seemingly alluded to in passages relating to the Angel of Jehovah, 319\n seemingly alluded to in descriptions of Divine Wisdom and Word, 320, 321\n owes nothing to foreign sources, 320\n seemingly alluded to in descriptions of the Messiah, 321\u2010322\n O. T. contains germ of doctrine of, 322\n its clear revelation, why delayed?, 322\n insists that the three recognized as God are presented in Scripture as\n distinct persons, 322\u2010326\n asserts that this tripersonality of the divine nature is immanent and\n eternal, 326\n it alleges Scriptural proof that the distinctions of personality are\n eternal, 326\n the Sabellian heresy regarding, 327\u2010328\n the Arian heresy regarding, 328\u2010330\n teaches a tripersonality which is not tritheism, for while the persons\n are three, the essence is one, 330\n how the term \u201cperson\u201d is used in, 330, 331\n the oneness of essence explained, 331\u2010334\n teaches an association which is more than partnership, 331\n presents itself as the organism of the deity, 331\n permits intercommunion and mutual immanency of persons, 332, 333\n teaches equality of the three persons, 334\u2010343\n teaches that the titles belong to the persons, 334, 335\n employs the personal titles in a qualified sense, 335\u2010340\n presents to us life\u2010movement in the Godhead, 336\u2010338\n teaches a \u201cgeneration\u201d that is consistent with equality, 340\n teaches a \u201cprocession\u201d that is consistent with equality, 340\n is inscrutable, 344\n all analogies inadequate to represent it, 344\n illustrations of, their only use, 345\n not self\u2010contradictory, 345\n presents faculty and function at highest differentiation, 346\n its relations to other doctrines, 347\n its acceptance essential to any proper theism, 347\n its denial leads to pantheism, 347\n essential to any proper revelation, 349\n evidence of, in prayer, 349\n essential to any proper redemption, 350\n effects of its denial on religious life, 350, 351\n essential to any proper model for human life, 351\n sets law of love before us as eternal, 351\n shows divine pattern of receptive life, 351\n authors on the doctrine, 351\n\nTrisagion, the, 318\n\nTritheism, inconsistent with idea of God, 330\n\nTrivialities in Scripture, their use, 217\n\nTruth, God\u2019s, what?, 260\n immanent, 260\n a matter of being, 261\n foundation of truth among men, 261\n the principle and guarantee of all revelation, 262\n not of God\u2019s will, but of his being, 262\n God\u2019s transitive, 288\u2010290\n see Veracity and Faithfulness.\n attributed to Christ, 309\n attributed to the Holy Spirit, 316\n as the efficient cause of regeneration, 817\u2010820\n hated by sinner, 817\n neither known nor obeyed without a change of the affections, 818\n even God cannot make it more true, 819\n without God, an abstraction, not a power, 819\n\n_Ubi caritas_, _ibi claritas_, 520\n\n_Ubi Spiritus, ibi Christus_, 333\n\n_Ubi tres medici, ibi duo athei_, 39\n\nUbiquity of Christ\u2019s human body, 709\n relation to Lord\u2019s Supper, 968\n relation to views of heaven, 1032\n\n_Ueberglaube_, _Aberglaube_, _Unglaube_, the chief avenues of temptation,\n 677\n\nUhlhorn, on the \u201cif\u2019s\u201d of Tacitus, 989\n\nUllmann, on the derivation of _sapientia_, 4\n\n_Una navis est jam bonorum omnium_, 881\n\nUncaused cause, the idea of, not from logical inference, but intuitive\n belief, 74\n\nUnconditioned being, the presupposition of our knowing, 58\n\nUnconscious mental action, 551, 555\n\nUnconscious substance cannot produce self\u2010conscious and free beings, 102\n\nUnderstanding, the servant of the will, 460\n\n_Unicus_, as applied to the divine nature, 259\n\nUniformity of nature, a presumption against miracles, 124\n not absolute and universal, 124\n could only be asserted on the ground of absolute and universal\n knowledge, 124\n disproved by geology, 124\n breaks in, illustrated, 125\n final cause is beneath, 125\n of volitional action rests on character, 509\n of evil choice, implies tendency or determination, 611\n of transgression, a demonstration of impotence of will, 611\n\n_Unio personalis_, 689, 690\n\nUnion of the two natures in the one person of Christ, 683\u2010700\n moral, between different souls, 799\n with Christ, believer\u2019s, and man\u2019s with Adam, compared, 627\n with Christ, believer\u2019s, wholly due to God, 781\n its relation to regeneration and conversion, 793\n doctrine of, 795\u2010808\n reasons for its neglect, 795\n Scripture representations of, 795\u2010798\n represented by building and foundation, 795\n represented by marriage union, 795, 796\n represented by vine and branch, 796\n consistent with individuality, 796\n represented by head and members, 796\n represented by union of race with Adam, 797\n believer is in Christ, 797\n Christ is in believer, 797\n Father and Son dwell in believer, 797\n believer has life by Christ as Christ has life by union with the Father,\n 797\n believers are one through, 797\n believers made partakers of divine nature through, 798\n by it believer made one spirit with the Lord, 798\n nature of, 798\u2010802\n not a merely natural union, 799\n not a merely moral union, 799\n not a union of essence, 799, 800\n in it believer most conscious of his personality and power, 800\n not mediated by sacraments, 800\n an organic union, 800\n a vital union, 801\n a spiritual union, 801\n originated and sustained by Holy Spirit, 801\n by virtue of omnipresence the whole Christ with each believer, 281, 704,\n 801\n inscrutable, 801\n in what sense mystical, 801\n authors on, 802\n consequences of, to believer, 802\u2010809\n removes the internal obstacle to man\u2019s return to God, in the case of his\n people, 802\n involves change in the dominant affection of the soul (Regeneration),\n 804\n is the true \u201ctransfusion of blood,\u201d, 804\n involves a new exercise of soul\u2019s powers in Repentance and Faith\n (Conversion), 804\n this phase of, illustrated by the depuration of Chicago River, 804, 805\n with Christ gives to believer legal standing and rights of Christ\n (Justification), 805\n secures to the believer the transforming, assimilating power of Christ\u2019s\n life, for soul and body (Sanctification and Perseverance),\n 805\n does it secure physical miracles in deliverance from fleshly besetments\n of those who experience it?, 806\n brings about a fellowship with Christ, and thus a fellowship of\n believers with one another here and hereafter (Ecclesiology\n and Eschatology), 806\n secures among Christians the unity not of external organization, but of\n a common life, 807\n gives assurance of salvation, 808\n excerpts upon, from noted names in theology, 808\n references upon, 808, 809\n\nUnique, the, 244\n\nUnitarianism, derivation of term, 330\n its founders, 47\n their relation to Arianism, 329\n tends to pantheism, 347\n fosters lax views of sin, 350\n holds to Pelagian views of sin, 597\n holds to Socinian views of atonement, 728, 729\n\nUnity of Scripture, 175\n\nUnity of God, 259, 304\n consistent with a trinity, 259\n\nUnity of human race, taught in Scripture, 476\n lies at foundation of Pauline doctrine of sin and salvation, 476\n ground of obligation of brotherhood among men, 476\n various arguments for, 477\u2010483\n opposed by theorists who propound different centres of creation, 481\n opposed on the ground that the physical diversities in the race are\n inconsistent with a common origin, 481, 482\n\n_Universalia, ante_ and _post rem_, and _in re_, 621\n\nUniversalism, its error, 1047\n\nUniversality of transgression, 573\u2010577\n\nUniversals, 621\n\nUniverse, regarded as thought, must have had an absolute thinker, 60\n its substance cannot be shown to have had a beginning, 73\n has its phenomena had a cause within itself (pantheism)?, 73\n mind in it, leads us to infer mind in maker, 73\n if eternal, yet, as contingent and relative, it only requires an eternal\n creator, 74\n since its infinity cannot be proved, why infer from its perhaps limited\n existence an infinite creator?, 74\n its order and useful collocation may be due to an impersonal\n intelligence (pantheism), 77\n its present harmony proves a will and intelligence equal to its\n contrivance, 80\n facts of, erroneous explanations of, 90\u2010105\n not necessary to divine blessedness, 265\n \u201cGod\u2019s ceaseless conversation with his creatures,\u201d, 436\n exists for moral and spiritual ends, 436\n a harp in which one string, our world, is out of tune, 451, 1033\n\n_Unus_, as applied to divine nature, 259\n\nUtopia, More\u2019s, an adumbration of St. John\u2019s City of God, 1031\n\nVacuum, 279\n\nVanity, what?, 569\n\nVariation, law of, 470, 491, 492\n\nVariations, are in the divine operation, not in the divine plan, 258\n\nVedas, 56, 203, 222, 225\n\nVeracity and faithfulness of God, the, his transitive truth, 288, 289\n by virtue of, his revelations consist with his being and with each\n other, 288\n by virtue of, he fulfils all his promises expressed or implied, 289\n\n_Vi\u00e6_, employed in determining the divine attributes, 247\n\nVice, can it be created?, 520\n\nVirgin\u2010birth of Christ, 675\u2010678\n\nVirgin, the Immaculate Conception of, its absurdity, 677\n\nVirtue, 298\u2010303\n see Moral obligation.\n\nVishnu, incarnations of, 351\n\nVolition, the shadow of the affections, 815\n executive, 504\n a subordinate, not always determined by fundamental choice, 510, 870\n\n\u201cVoluntary\u201d and \u201cvolitional\u201d contrasted, 557\n\n\u201c_Voluntas_\u201d and \u201c_arbitrium_\u201d distinguished, 557\n\n_Vorsehung_, an aspect of providence, 419\n\nVulgate, 226, 799\n\n\u201cWaters,\u201d the best term in Hebrew to express \u201cfluid mass,\u201d, 395\n\n_Weltgeschichte, die, ist das Weltgericht_, 1024\n\nWicked, in the intermediate state, 999, 1000\n in intermediate state, under constraint and guard, 999\n in intermediate state, in conscious suffering, 999\n in intermediate state, under punishment, 1000\n in intermediate state, their souls do not sleep, 1000\n in the final state, 1033\u20101056\n their final state, in Scriptural figures, 1033\n their final state, a summing up statement, 1034\n their final state is not annihilation, 1035, 1036\n their final state has in it no element of new probation or final\n restoration, 1039\u20101043\n their final state, one of everlasting punishment, 1044\u20101046\n their final state, a revelation of God\u2019s justice, 1046\u20101051\n their final state, a revelation of a benevolence which permits the self\u2010\n chosen ruin of a few to work for the salvation of the many,\n 1051\u20101054\n their final state, should be preached with sympathy and solemnity,\n 1054\u20101056\n\nWill, free, not under law of physical causation, 26\n human, acts on nature without suspending its laws, 121\n human, acts initially without means, 122\n its power over body, 122\n has not the freedom of indifference, 363\n an act of pure, unknown to human consciousness, 363, 507\n and sensibility, two distinct powers, 363\n Christianity gives us more, 440\n Holy Spirit emancipates the, 440\n defined, 504\n determinism of, rejected, 504\n and other faculties, 505\n element in every act of soul, 505\n man is chiefly, 504\n the verb has no imperative, 505\n and permanent state, 505, 506\n slight decisions of, lead to fixation of character, 506\n and motives, 506, 507\n permanent states influence, 506\n not compelled, but persuaded by motive, 506\n in choosing between motives, chooses with a motive, namely the motive\n chosen, 507\n and contrary choice, 507, 508\n we know causality only as we know, 508\n a power of originating action, limited by subjective and social\n conditions, 508\n will, free, chooses between impulses, 508\n and responsibility, 509, 510\n naturally exercised with a bias, 509\n free, gives existence to duty and morality, 510\n is defeated in immorality, 511\n deterministic theory of, objections to, 511\n will does not create force, but directs it, 512\n will as great a mystery as the Trinity, 512\n references on, 513\n evil, the man himself, 555\n more than faculty of volitions, 600\n its impotence proved by uniformity of transgression, 611\n such a decision of, as will justify God in condemning men, when found,\n 612\n a determination of the, prior to individual consciousness\u2014a difficult\n but fruitful hypothesis, 624\n the cause of sin in holy beings, 629\n not absolutely as a man\u2019s character, 633\n character its surest but not its infallible index, 633\n man\u2019s, does more than express, it may curb, his nature, 633\n has permanent states, as well as transient acts, 764\n God\u2019s action, in conversion, 792, 793\n the depraved, has inconceivable power to resist God, 1048\n God\u2019s, not sole force in universe, 411\n God\u2019s \u201crevealed\u201d and \u201csecret,\u201d 791\n\n\u201cWill,\u201d and \u201cshall,\u201d as to man\u2019s actions, distinguished, 354\n\n_Wille_ and _Wilk\u00fcr_, 557\n\nWisdom, divine, its nature, 286\n in O. T., 320\n in Apocrypha, 320\n\nWitness of Spirit, 844, 845\n\nWord, divine, the medium and test of spiritual communications, 32\n divine, in O. T., 320\n Christ, the, 335\n\nWorks of God, 371\u2010464\n\nWorld, final conflagration and rehabilitation, 1015\n may be part of the heaven of the saints, 1032, 1033\n\nWorship, defined, 23\n its relation to religion, 23\n depends on God\u2019s glory, 255\n final state of righteous one of, 1029, 1030\n\nWrong, must be punished whether good comes of it or not, 655\n\n\u201cYea, the\u201d (2 Cor. 1:20) = objective certainty, 14\n\n\u201cZechariah,\u201d proper reading for \u201cJeremiah,\u201d in Mat. 27:9, 226\n\nZoroastrianism, Parseeism, 185, 190, 382\n\n\n\n\nIndex Of Authors.\n\n\nAbbot, Ezra, 148, 152, 159, 165, 180, 307\n\nAbbott, A. E., 155\n\nAbbott, F. E., 621\n\nAbbott, Lyman, 128, 201, 208, 379, 524, 589, 599, 694, 700, 720, 722, 732,\n 739, 768, 800, 896, 1005.\n\nAbbott, T. K., 933\n\nAbelard, Peter, 1, 34, 44, 734\n\nAckermann, C., 666\n\nAdams, J. C., 1041\n\nAdams, John, 228\n\nAdams, John Quincy, 899\n\nAdams, Nehemiah, 369\n\nAdams, Thomas, 48\n\nAdamson, Thomas, 133, 190, 314, 315, 439, 675, 681.\n\nAddison, Joseph, 649, 988\n\nAdeney, W. F., 985, 1020\n\nAdkins, F., 822, 948\n\n\u00c6lfric, 505\n\n\u00c6schylus, 111, 543, 723, 989\n\n\u00c6sop, 369\n\nAgassiz, Louis, 396, 481, 984\n\nAhrens, Henri, 536\n\n\u201cAids to Faith,\u201d, 139, 405\n\n\u201cAids to Study of German Theology,\u201d, 74\n\nAlbertus Magnus, 524\n\nAlcuin, Flaccus, 744\n\nAlden, Joseph, 6, 11, 100\n\nAldrich, Anne Reeve, 155, 794\n\nAlexander, Archibald, 51, 58, 101, 191, 301, 364, 488, 553, 557, 620, 644,\n 780, 912.\n\nAlexander, J. A., 654, 907, 1005\n\nAlexander, J. W., 795, 845, 846\n\nAlexander, W. L., 117, 131, 135, 151, 155, 157, 177, 189.\n\nAlford, Henry, 68, 150, 306, 377, 452, 1005\n\nAlger, William R., 281, 493, 991\n\nAllen, A. V. G., 32, 36, 44, 147, 208, 341, 343, 361, 399, 620, 636, 748,\n 800, 846.\n\nAllen, Grant, 57\n\nAllison, W. H., 929\n\nAmbrose, 25, 48, 297, 619, 620\n\nAmerican Theological Review, 2, 15\n\nAmiel, Henri F., 277, 280, 441, 599\n\nAmmon, Christoph F., 46\n\nAmos, Sheldon, 534, 547\n\nAmyraldus, Moses, 46\n\nAnderson, F. L., 840, 939\n\nAnderson, Galusha, 896\n\nAnderson, Martin B., 11, 987\n\nAndover Review, 122, 133, 643\n\nAndrews, E. A., 20\n\nAndrews, E. B., 182, 694, 892\n\nAndrews, J. N., 410\n\nAndrews, J. R., 840\n\nAndrews, Lancelot, 340\n\nAndrews, S. J., 229\n\nAngelus Silesius, 101, 800\n\nAngus, Joseph, 1045, 1056\n\nAnnotated Paragraph Bible, 141, 226, 232, 307, 423, 457, 574, 578, 650,\n 699, 761, 878, 934, 1025.\n\nAnselm, 34, 44, 86, 87, 89, 105, 279, 447, 487, 613, 630, 631, 675, 704,\n 748, 834, 849.\n\nApollinaris, 671\n\nApollos, 152\n\nAppleton, Jesse, 426\n\nAquinas, Thomas, 45, 443, 569, 613, 630, 631, 747, 750.\n\nAratus, 526\n\nArgyll, Duke of, 92, 99, 225, 389, 412, 435, 469, 474, 483, 528, 530, 536.\n\nAristotle, 2, 33, 38, 40, 43, 44, 45, 58, 97, 120, 181, 184, 244, 252,\n 259, 262, 284, 378, 491, 516, 568, 579, 580, 581, 799, 814,\n 989, 1045.\n\nArius, 328\n\nArminius, J., 47, 602\n\nArmitage, Thomas, 908, 973\n\nArmour, J. M., 120\n\nArmstrong, \u2014\u2014, 283\n\nArnold, Albert N., 954, 959, 971, 972, 973, 974, 975, 979.\n\nArnold, Edwin, 182\n\nArnold, Matthew, 21, 23, 102, 118, 139, 155, 188, 191, 192, 207, 252, 253,\n 526, 575, 989, 1056.\n\nArnold, Thomas, 139, 156, 207, 237, 294, 557, 841.\n\nArnot, William, 659\n\nArthur, William, 350\n\nAscham, Roger, 576\n\nAshmore, William, 292, 459, 636, 663, 759, 773, 936, 941, 945.\n\nAskwith, E. H., 568\n\nAsmus, P., 56\n\nAthanasius, 44, 388, 620, 748, 997\n\nAthenagoras, 998\n\nAtwater, Lyman H., 97, 368, 637\n\nAuber, H., 398, 598\n\nAuberlen, C. A., 14, 131, 160\n\nAuerbach, Berthold, 871\n\nAugustine, 33, 44, 65, 83, 105, 119, 159, 227, 234, 276, 317, 344, 395,\n 413, 428, 488, 493, 518, 520, 521, 523, 537, 545, 557, 569,\n 570, 585, 586, 598, 599, 612, 613, 619, 620, 630, 631, 633,\n 707, 708, 784, 786, 788, 819, 887, 998, 1001, 1035.\n\nAustin, John, 293, 533, 535\n\nBaader, Franz von, 25\n\nBabbage, Charles, 117\n\nBabcock, Maltbie D., 208\n\nBacon, B. W., 147, 148, 149, 167\n\nBacon, Francis, 36, 40, 43, 71, 138, 262, 298, 514, 536, 541, 547, 583,\n 656, 722, 822, 982\n\nBacon, L. W., and G. B., 410\n\nBacon, Leonard, 330, 899, 918\n\nB\u00e4hr, K. C. W. F., 722\n\nBaer, K. E. von, 482\n\nBagehot, Walter, 224, 658\n\nBailey, G. E., 249\n\nBain, Alexander, 94, 96, 98\n\nBaird, Samuel J., 49, 51, 404, 418, 494, 544, 555, 571, 576, 585, 589,\n 606, 607, 610, 611, 612, 615, 616, 619, 622, 630, 637, 640,\n 644, 647, 660, 680, 705, 754, 771, 802, 808.\n\nBaldwin, C. J., 109, 332, 488, 511, 592, 743\n\nBaldwin, J. Mark, 43\n\nBalfour, A. J., 3, 17, 18, 25, 43, 59, 100, 122, 125, 215, 292, 512, 568,\n 771, 834, 982, 987, 997.\n\nBalfour, R. G., 739\n\nBancroft, Bishop, 896\n\nBancroft, George, 899\n\nBaptist Magazine, 396\n\nBaptist Quarterly, 658, 918, 948\n\nBaptist Quarterly Review, 410\n\nBaptist Review, 207, 575, 998\n\nBarclay, Robert, 48\n\nBardesanes, 383\n\nBarlow, J. L., 1038\n\nBarlow, J. W., 405\n\nBarnabas, 147, 159, 235, 319\n\nBarnes, Albert, 741, 907, 914\n\nBarnes, Stephen G., 272\n\nBarrett, Elizabeth, 571\n\nBarrows, C. M., 69\n\nBarrows, E. P., 700\n\nBarrows, J. H., 27\n\nBarrows, William, 1001\n\nBarry, Alfred, 187\n\nBartlet, Vernon, 905\n\nBartlett, S. C., 172, 201, 227, 532, 660, 708, 989, 994.\n\nBascom, John, 53, 55, 632\n\nBasilides, 151, 160, 378, 670\n\nBastian, H. C., 389\n\nBaudissin, Count W. W., 275\n\nBaumgarten, M., 907\n\nBaur, F. C., 145, 155, 157, 158, 160, 328, 382, 750.\n\nBawden, H. H., 28, 346, 525, 616, 983, 992.\n\nBaxter, Richard, 47, 48, 205, 218, 294, 872, 1056.\n\nBayle, Pierre, 47\n\nBayne, Peter, 100, 157\n\nBeal, Samuel, 183\n\nBeale, Lionel, 389\n\nBeard, Charles, 209\n\nBeard, G. H., 405\n\nBeck, \u2014\u2014., 40\n\nBeddoes, T. L., 380\n\nBeebe, Alexander M., 957\n\nBeecher, Edward, 488\n\nBeecher, H. W., 42, 76, 128, 147, 269, 369, 406, 423, 790, 1047, 1052.\n\nBeecher, Lyman, 406\n\nBeecher, Thomas K., 464\n\nBeecher, Willis J., 141\n\nBeet, J. A., 218\n\nBehrends, A. J. F., 25, 39, 42, 102, 367, 697, 755, 779.\n\nBelcher, Joseph, 908\n\nBellamy, Joseph, 48\n\nBellarmine, R. P., 47, 522, 1001\n\nBenedict, Wayland R., 80\n\nBengel, J. A., 132, 222, 661, 683, 762, 782, 960, 1009.\n\nBennett, W. H., 321\n\nBentham, Jeremy, 55, 439\n\nBerdoe, Edward, 162, 765\n\nBerkeley, George, 95, 96, 436\n\nBernard, St., 58, 710\n\nBernard, J. H., 120, 128, 129, 157\n\nBernard, T. D., 177, 221, 236\n\nBernhardt, Sarah, 544\n\nBersier, Eugene, 622, 821\n\nBertrand, H. G., Count de, 682\n\nBeryl, 327\n\nBesant, Walter, 576, 737\n\nBeyschlag, Willibald, 213, 221, 310, 622, 668.\n\nBeza, Theodore, 46, 777\n\nBible Commentary, 238, 374, 375, 376, 394, 396, 474, 583, 726.\n\nBible Dictionary, Hastings\u2019, 118, 119, 141, 148, 153, 165, 167, 479, 514,\n 933.\n\nBible Dictionary, Smith\u2019s, 118, 139, 147, 153, 166, 167, 447, 449, 456,\n 479, 728.\n\nBibliotheca Fratrum Polonorum, 47, 729\n\nBibliotheca Sacra, 6, 11, 12, 14, 20, 21, 29, 42, 53, 56, 62, 103, 127,\n 160, 162, 201, 238, 528, 656, 790, 1046.\n\nBickersteth, Edward, 437\n\nBiedermann, A. Em., 68, 105, 119, 250\n\nBinet, Alfred, 454\n\nBingham, Joseph, 938\n\nBirch, Samuel, 995\n\nBirks, T. R., 174, 387, 488, 588, 615, 648\n\nBismarck, Otto von, 194, 401\n\nBissell, Edwin C., 166, 167, 170, 172, 309\n\nBittinger, J. B., 650\n\nBixby, J. T., 65, 292, 300, 499, 530, 538, 985\n\nBlack, William, 913, 1052\n\nBlackie, John Stuart, 17\n\nBlackstone, William, 656\n\nBledsoe, Albert T., 367, 520\n\nBleek, Friedrich, 149\n\nBlount, Charles, 414\n\nBlunt, John H., 2, 86, 146, 153, 330, 383, 414, 937.\n\nBlunt, John James, 151\n\nBoardman, George Dana, 19, 851, 942, 997.\n\nBoardman, H. A., 881\n\nBoardman, W. E., 344\n\nBodemeyer, J., 706\n\nB\u00f6hl, Edward, 762\n\nBoehme, Jacob, 255, 264, 524\n\nBoerne, Ludwig, 561\n\nBoethius, 253, 695\n\nBoissier, M. L. Gaston, 989\n\nBolingbroke, Viscount, 414\n\nBonar, Horatius, 650, 889\n\nBonnet, Charles, 118\n\n\u201cBook of the Dead,\u201d, 989\n\nBooth, Ballington, 904\n\nBooth, William, 750\n\nBose, see Dubose, W. P.\n\nBossuet, J. B., 47, 567, 821\n\nBoston, Thomas, 48, 50, 802, 1018\n\nBowden, John, 48\n\nBowen, Francis, 11, 29, 63, 68, 98, 99, 113, 121, 405, 412, 991.\n\nBowne, Borden P., 6, 8, 10, 11, 43, 52, 54, 56, 60, 61, 64, 68, 71, 72,\n 73, 74, 76, 78, 96, 97, 99, 103, 108, 110, 125, 219, 244, 257,\n 261, 267, 273, 279, 280, 282, 285, 286, 294, 300, 381, 402,\n 405, 413, 416, 428, 493, 499, 507, 508, 536, 539, 559, 625,\n 655, 678, 722, 756, 794, 985, 987.\n\nBoys, Thomas, 133\n\nBrace, C. L., 193\n\nBradford, A. H., 33, 60, 106, 406, 475, 516, 548, 594, 632, 635, 656, 677,\n 816, 818, 819, 1001, 1053.\n\nBradley, F. H., 103, 276, 406, 505\n\nBramhall, John, 775\n\nBrandi, S. M., 910\n\nBreckenridge, Robert J., 49\n\n\u201cBremen Lectures,\u201d, 111\n\nBrereton, C. H. S., 116\n\nBretschneider, K. G., 46, 523\n\nBrewer, Prof., 281\n\nBridgman, Laura, 113\n\nBriggs, C. A., 140, 141, 489\n\nBrinton, D. G., 476\n\nBritish and Foreign Evangelical Review, 231, 347, 835, 845, 875.\n\nBritish Quarterly, 104, 116, 125, 152, 172, 300, 896.\n\nBritish Weekly, 738\n\nBroadus, John A., 117, 138, 216, 227, 364, 452, 780, 888, 892, 931, 933,\n 934, 937, 948, 951, 954, 1008.\n\nBronson, J. M., 466\n\nBrooke, Stopford A., 988\n\nBrooks, Kendall, 434, 950\n\nBrooks, Phillips, 42, 122, 348, 436, 694, 700, 735, 812, 830, 909, 913.\n\nBrooks, Thomas, 463\n\nBrooks, W. K., 64, 124, 497, 536, 673\n\nBrougham, Henry, 140\n\nBrown, David, 105, 744, 1014\n\nBrown, J. Baldwin, 131\n\nBrown, John, 368\n\nBrown, T. B., 410\n\nBrown, William Adams, 321, 348, 596, 612, 638.\n\nBrown, W. R., 83, 221\n\nBrowne, Sir Thomas, 143\n\nBrowning, Elizabeth Barrett, 18, 59, 107, 441, 544, 571, 1023.\n\nBrowning, Robert, 5, 38, 59, 62, 64, 107, 183, 193, 214, 218, 224, 252,\n 253, 262, 266, 273, 283, 298, 299, 312, 345, 366, 367, 369,\n 386, 398, 400, 403, 406, 420, 429, 439, 487, 489, 492, 496,\n 501, 506, 520, 544, 546, 549, 570, 581, 589, 642, 649, 651,\n 659, 692, 693, 703, 814, 987, 996, 1002, 1023, 1039.\n\nBrownson, Orestes, 37, 118\n\nBruce, A. Balmain, 105, 131, 133, 139, 145, 156, 157, 160, 186, 187, 217,\n 237, 238, 274, 341, 414, 465, 666, 676, 745, 786, 905.\n\nBruch, J. F., 249, 293, 489, 491\n\nBryennios, Philotheos, 953\n\nBuchanan, James, 95, 853\n\nBuchanan, Robert, 1051\n\nBuckle, H. T., 438\n\nBuckley, J. M., 133\n\nBuckner, E. D., 985\n\nB\u00fcchner, Louis, 91\n\nB\u00fcckmann, R., 128\n\nBuddeus, J. F., 46, 270\n\nBull, Bishop George, 217\n\nBulwer, Edward, Lord Lytton, 645\n\nBunsen, J. C. C., 447, 956, 995\n\nBunyan, John, 40, 47, 221, 330, 462, 483, 544, 743, 827, 845, 888.\n\nBurbank, Luther, 632\n\nBurgess, Ezenezer, 157, 477\n\nBurgesse, Anthony, 630, 631\n\nBurke, Edmund, 135\n\nBurnet, Gilbert, 48\n\nBurnet, Thomas, 1023\n\nBurnham, Sylvester, 582\n\nBurns, Robert, 525, 560, 575\n\nBurrage, Henry S., 938\n\nBurroughs, John, 469\n\nBurton, E. D., 158, 376, 571, 941\n\nBurton, N. S., 549, 941\n\nBushnell, Horace, 15, 26, 48, 103, 118, 133, 187, 245, 271, 294, 327, 335,\n 340, 369, 403, 433, 447, 502, 530, 541, 660, 668, 679, 728,\n 733, 734, 735, 736, 737, 738, 739, 813, 814, 956, 1036, 1041.\n\nButcher, S. H., 38, 115, 406\n\nButler, Joseph, 30, 51, 71, 82, 114, 124, 232, 296, 300, 368, 417, 427,\n 668, 727, 771, 984.\n\nButler, William Archer, 317\n\nButterworth, H., 437\n\nButtmann, Philip, 717\n\nByrom, John, 553\n\nByron, George Gordon, Lord, 369, 387, 404, 578.\n\nC. H. M., see MacIntosh, C. H.\n\nC\u00e6sar, Julius, 151, 1032\n\nCaillard, Emma Marie, 108, 470, 561, 679, 983.\n\nCaine, T. H. Hall, 495, 899\n\nCaird, Edward, 6, 43, 58, 110\n\nCaird, John, 6, 21, 22, 29, 101, 103, 255, 258, 261, 277, 346, 352, 361,\n 386, 400, 415, 514, 542, 567, 571, 572, 577, 623, 638, 641,\n 647, 685, 691, 694, 702, 756, 798, 806, 988, 1043.\n\nCairns, John, 141\n\nCalderwood, Henry, 5, 9, 10, 29, 34, 51, 58, 66, 67, 68, 74, 79, 85, 86,\n 87, 89, 93, 95, 101, 279, 302, 362, 437, 468, 500, 696, 985.\n\nCalixtus, Georgius, 45, 49, 50\n\nCalkins, P. W., 149\n\nCalkins, Walcott, 979\n\nCalovius, Abraham, 45, 52\n\nCalthrop, Dr., 348\n\nCalvin, John, 28, 38, 45, 51, 53, 107, 140, 227, 234, 334, 344, 409, 419,\n 420, 514, 558, 569, 612, 613, 621, 644, 663, 664, 749, 772,\n 777, 781, 783, 788, 794, 808, 881, 942, 960, 969, 1008, 1034,\n 1048.\n\n\u201cCambridge Platform,\u201d, 904, 919\n\nCampbell, Alexander, 821, 947\n\nCampbell, George, 128\n\nCampbell, James M., 798\n\nCampbell, John M., 537, 548, 734, 737, 760.\n\nCanaletto, 148\n\nCandlish, James S., 45, 340, 713\n\nCandlish, Robert S., 476, 664, 726, 773\n\nCanning, George, 135\n\nCanus, Melchior, 47\n\nCapes, J. M., 185\n\nCarey, H. C., 536\n\nCarlisle, Bishop of, 1\n\nCarlyle, Jane, 745\n\nCarlyle, Thomas, 8, 40, 251, 277, 299, 309, 329, 406, 414, 469, 575.\n\nCarman, A. S., 358, 410, 416\n\nCaro, E. M., 101\n\nCarpenter, W. B., 11, 156, 277\n\nCarson, Alexander, 938\n\nCarson, J. C. L., 896\n\nCarson, R. H., 896\n\nCarter, Franklin, 638\n\nCarus, Paul, 349\n\nCary, Ph\u0153be, 987\n\nCase, Mary E., 102, 276, 279, 530\n\nCatechism, Larger, 956\n Racovian, 47, 524\n Roman, 522\n Shorter, 846, 956\n Westminster, 52, 664, 957\n\nCatholic Review, 957\n\nCattell, J. M., 43\n\nCatullus, 989\n\nCave, A. B., 775\n\nCave, Arthur, 205\n\nCelsus, 192, 274\n\nChadbourne, P. A., 469\n\nChadwick, J. W., 8, 126, 188, 198, 237, 304, 330, 473, 958, 990, 1051.\n\nChalmers, Thomas, 48, 50, 124, 128, 141, 302, 394, 404, 415, 435, 616,\n 640, 820, 873, 1033.\n\nChamberlain, Jacob, 431, 575\n\nChamberlin, T. C., 254, 510\n\nChambers, Arthur, 1044\n\nChambers, T. W., 17, 726, 941\n\nChamier, Daniel, 46\n\nChandler, Arthur, 582, 590\n\nChanning, William E., 12, 125, 694\n\nChapman, James, 330, 474\n\nCharles, Elizabeth, 1026\n\nCharles, R. H., 165\n\nCharnock, Stephen, 244, 249, 259, 282, 283, 288, 362, 754, 826.\n\nCharteris, A. H., 200\n\nChase, D. P., 580\n\nChase, F. H., 154\n\nChatham, Lord, 190\n\nChaucer, Geoffrey, 549\n\nChemnitz, Martin, 45\n\nCheyne, T. K., 137, 250, 697, 933\n\nChiba, Yugoro, 180\n\nChillingworth, W., 20\n\nChitty, Joseph, 38\n\nChristian Review, 747, 954, 1003\n\nChristian Union, 1046\n\nChristlieb, Theodor, 5, 53, 95, 105, 117, 131, 132, 157, 160, 162, 351,\n 414.\n\nChrysostom, John, 39, 148, 796, 934\n\nChurch Quarterly Review, 704\n\nCicero, IV., 40, 53, 300, 425, 429, 516, 575, 589, 598, 647, 814, 887,\n 989.\n\nClark, G. W., 951\n\nClarke, Dorus, 16\n\nClarke, J. C. C., 246, 286, 755\n\nClarke, J. Freeman, 58, 179, 186, 205, 329, 376, 394, 664, 729.\n\nClarke, Samuel, 73, 85, 86, 279, 301, 330\n\nClarke, W. N., 4, 22, 43, 63, 68, 76, 88, 116, 145, 205, 210, 221, 255,\n 264, 269, 271, 280, 284, 286, 295, 387, 721, 855.\n\nClay, Henry, 815\n\nClement of Alexandria, 44, 154, 167, 235, 998, 1041.\n\nClement of Rome, 149, 152, 153, 159, 312, 910, 928.\n\nClifford, W. K., 399, 511\n\nClough, A. H., 259, 819\n\nCoats, A. S., 769\n\nCobbe, Frances Power, 216, 404, 918, 981, 990, 991.\n\nCocceius, Johannes, 46, 50, 612, 613\n\nCocker, B. F., 63, 414\n\nCoe, E. B., 275\n\nCoe, G. A., 599, 812\n\nColby, H. F., 978\n\nColegrove, F. W., 488, 489\n\nColeman, Lyman, 908, 911, 914, 937, 954\n\nColeridge, Hartley, 437, 495\n\nColeridge, Lord, 345\n\nColeridge, Samuel T., 4, 18, 24, 30, 54, 72, 124, 203, 205, 252, 424, 488,\n 562, 581, 611, 939.\n\nColestock, H. T., 294, 721\n\nComte, Auguste, 6, 11, 57, 531, 567\n\nConant, T. J., 224, 225, 933, 937, 951\n\nConder, Josiah, 788\n\nCondillac, E. B. de, 91\n\nCone, Orello, 610\n\nCongdon, H. W., 449\n\nConstantine, 898\n\nConstantinople, Council of, 695\n\n\u201cConstitution of the Holy Apostles,\u201d, 978\n\nContemporary Review, 95, 97\n\nConybeare and Howson, 668, 914, 936, 942.\n\nCook, Joseph, 304, 344, 482, 537, 558, 1010.\n\nCooke, J. P., 34, 194, 436, 468, 676\n\nCorelli, Marie, 283, 542\n\nCorreggio, 729\n\nCotterill, Henry, 397\n\nCotton, John, 904\n\nCousin, Victor, 55, 61, 63, 97\n\nCowper, B. H., 159\n\nCox, Samuel, 122, 156, 397, 437, 1023\n\nCraig, Oscar, 8\n\nCramer, H., 748\n\nCranch, C. P., 578\n\nCrane, Frank, 21, 217, 230, 411, 425, 447, 599, 691, 841, 1047, 1050.\n\nCrapsey, A. S., 952\n\nCrawford, Thomas J., 476, 721, 722, 727, 733, 735, 736, 744, 771, 836.\n\nCremer, H., 221, 291, 484, 717, 721, 851, 887, 892, 935.\n\nCrippen, T. G., 748, 750\n\nCrooker, J. H., 217, 315\n\nCrookes, William, 252\n\nCrooks and Hurst, 42\n\nCrosby, Alpheus, 1015, 1023\n\nCrosby, Fannie J., 515\n\nCrosby, Howard, 710\n\nCroskery, Thomas, 896\n\nCrowell, William, 929\n\nCudworth, Ralph, 321, 376, 380, 1025\n\nCulver, S. W., 757\n\nCumming, John, 140\n\nCunningham, John, 935, 952, 980\n\nCunningham, William, 41, 368, 523, 614, 619, 640, 644, 744, 773, 779, 823,\n 912.\n\nCurry, Daniel, 285, 745\n\n\u201cCurrent Discussions in Theology,\u201d, 626, 695, 767.\n\nCurtis, E. L., 167\n\nCurtis, T. F., 89, 157, 179, 723, 892, 900, 906, 940, 952, 956, 959, 972,\n 973, 977, 980\n\nCurtiss, S. I., 538\n\nCurtius, Georg, 20\n\nCuvier, Georges, 77, 444\n\nCyprian, 33, 152, 620, 901, 1001\n\nCyril, 342\n\nCyrus, 989\n\nDabney, R. L., 49, 418, 497, 601, 603, 616, 864.\n\nDagg, J. L., 892, 896, 900, 926, 933, 951, 959.\n\nDaggett, Dr., 518\n\nDale, J. W., 934\n\nDale, R. W., 42, 148, 238, 272, 369, 592, 632, 636, 654, 680, 721, 735,\n 750, 754, 759, 802, 803, 806, 854, 929.\n\nDalgairns, J. B., 8\n\nDalman, G. H., 313, 889\n\nDamien, Peter, 364, 757\n\nDana, James D., 224, 395, 396, 403, 473, 481.\n\nDanforth, G. F., 771\n\nDannhauer, J. C., 45, 50\n\nDante Alighieri, 45, 138, 256, 263, 277, 443, 447, 451, 492, 569, 653,\n 987, 1001, 1009, 1041, 1053.\n\nD\u2019Arcy, C. F., 35, 291, 332\n\nDarwin, Charles, 36, 57, 64, 468, 473, 480, 526, 534.\n\nDarwin, G. H., 477\n\nDaub, Carl, 46\n\nDavids, Rhys, 182\n\nDavidson, A. B., 134, 217, 667\n\nDavidson, Samuel, 897, 929\n\nDavis, J. W., 652\n\nDawkins, W. Boyd, 532\n\nDawson, J. W., 64, 412, 482, 525, 532\n\nDay, H. N., 24, 213, 345, 504\n\nDeclaratory Act, Free Church of Scotland, 641\n\nDeCoverley, Sir Roger, 649\n\nDeems, C. F., 901\n\nDefoe, Daniel, 431\n\nDelb\u0153uf, Joseph, 550\n\nDelitzsch, Franz, 137, 227, 477, 484, 487, 510, 520, 644, 647, 697, 701,\n 850, 998, 1003, 1023, 1039.\n\nDe Marchi, Joseph, 191\n\nDenney, James, 18, 214, 237, 339, 590, 596, 633, 639, 640, 650, 721, 734,\n 738, 774, 781, 843, 853, 940, 1011, 1025, 1040, 1041\n\nDenovan, Joshua, 339, 548, 710, 711, 819, 858, 860.\n\nDe Quincey, Thomas, 128, 1003\n\nDescartes, Ren\u00e9, 55, 262, 279, 299, 1002\n\nDeutsch, Emanuel, 675\n\nDeWette, W. M. L., 15, 41, 46, 153, 517, 614, 661, 781.\n\nDewey, John, 22, 40, 43, 51, 251, 252, 281, 300, 502, 505, 506, 982.\n\nDe Witt, John, 43, 778\n\nDexter, Henry M., 892, 901, 903, 907, 911, 914, 916, 917, 918, 924, 928,\n 929, 937, 952, 1056.\n\nDick, John, 48, 269, 353, 358\n\nDickens, Charles, 223, 492\n\nDickey, F. O., 663\n\nDickson, W. P., 562\n\n_Didache_, 159, 311, 410, 892, 906, 937, 938.\n\nDiestel, Ludwig, 56\n\nDillmann, August, 169, 268, 375, 377\n\nDiman, J. L., 6, 66, 72, 76, 77, 79, 82, 84, 95, 104, 113, 129, 414, 433,\n 435, 438, 532, 535, 801.\n\nDinsmore, C. A., 646\n\nDiognetus, 147, 311\n\nDionysius, 274, 910\n\nDippel, J. K., 744\n\nDisraeli, Benjamin, 135, 447\n\nDix, Morgan, 103\n\nDobney, H. H., 998, 1036\n\nDoddridge, Philip, 453\n\nDodge, Ebenezer, 146, 448, 590\n\nDods, Marcus, 158, 181, 321, 337, 394, 938.\n\nD\u00f6ederlein, L., 46\n\nD\u00f6llinger, J. J. I., 888, 935\n\nDorner, A. J., 523\n\nDorner, I. A., 5, 13, 18, 21, 29, 30, 33, 34, 46, 51, 62, 69, 87, 104,\n 106, 118, 159, 187, 208, 238, 245, 253, 259, 265, 271, 274,\n 275, 278, 282, 296, 305, 309, 320, 324, 328, 331, 333, 337,\n 338, 344, 386, 388, 408, 411, 412, 413, 418, 439, 493, 523,\n 549, 550, 555, 565, 569, 596, 598, 599, 600, 604, 615, 620,\n 621, 631, 651, 654, 656, 669, 670, 671, 672, 673, 676, 677,\n 680, 683, 685, 688, 689, 693, 694, 695, 698, 699, 702, 707,\n 709, 721, 737, 741, 746, 754, 761, 767, 776, 793, 799, 816,\n 830, 842, 864, 866, 893, 911, 947, 964, 967, 981, 991, 1002,\n 1014, 1017, 1021, 1024, 1036, 1039, 1051.\n\nDouglas, Frederick, 439\n\nDove, Patrick E., 2, 3, 29, 39, 66, 71, 85, 86, 87, 103.\n\nDoyle, Father, 958\n\nDrei\u00e4uglein, 253\n\nDriver, S. R., 164, 166, 223\n\nDrummond, Henry, 26, 34, 224, 264, 266, 401, 441, 466, 528, 539, 804, 806,\n 814, 824, 827, 923.\n\nDubois, A. J., 60, 122, 810\n\nDubois, Eugene, 471\n\nDubose, W. P., 18\n\nDudley, H. E., 803\n\nD\u00fcsselfhoff, 338, 828\n\nDuff, Alexander, 900\n\nDuncan, G. M., 66\n\nDuncan, John, 105, 213\n\nDunn, Martha Baker, 364\n\nDuns Scotus, Johannes, 45, 244, 262, 299.\n\nDu Prel, Karl, 550\n\nDuryea, Dr., 364\n\nDwight, Timothy, 48, 300, 323, 573, 593, 608, 820, 826, 936, 977, 1049.\n\nDwinell, J. E., 550\n\nEaches, O. P., 222\n\nEbers, Georg, 995\n\nEbrard, J. H. A., 21, 46, 52, 62, 72, 174, 217, 338, 449, 462, 477, 485,\n 493, 514, 679, 686, 762, 945, 1022.\n\nEccles, Robert Kerr, 37, 84\n\nEddy, Mary Baker G., 573\n\nEdersheim, Alfred, 141, 172, 227, 902\n\nEdison, Thomas A., 206\n\nEdwards, Jonathan, 19, 36, 48, 49, 50, 51, 208, 219, 263, 265, 270, 271,\n 278, 290, 299, 300, 333, 342, 362, 364, 365, 366, 399, 401,\n 402, 416, 417, 442, 461, 494, 504, 507, 518, 554, 555, 556,\n 557, 571, 577, 582, 585, 586, 593, 594, 595, 607, 612, 613,\n 619, 622, 637, 644, 668, 683, 699, 751, 754, 790, 800, 805,\n 808, 818, 820, 826, 840, 843, 845, 862, 864, 867, 868, 886,\n 952, 953, 971, 1008, 1029, 1035, 1056.\n\nEdwards, Jonathan, Jr., 275, 278, 358, 362, 504, 999, 1051.\n\nEichhorn, Carl, 105, 253\n\nElam, Charles, 635\n\nElder, William, 118, 121\n\nEliot, George, 210, 492, 561, 575, 766, 988, 1048.\n\nEllicott, C. J., 35, 307, 318, 341, 450, 782, 856, 1017.\n\nElliott, E. B., 139, 151, 449, 910, 1001, 1009, 1010, 1013, 1015.\n\nEllis, George E., 308, 350, 598, 729\n\nEmerson, G. H., 1040\n\nEmerson, R. W., 4, 39, 97, 107, 119, 139, 151, 175, 203, 207, 256, 287,\n 296, 330, 406, 409, 416, 441, 496, 539, 567, 575, 609, 613,\n 643, 653, 724, 730, 804, 841, 1025, 1041.\n\nEmmons, Nathanael, 48, 359, 415, 416, 585, 606, 607, 608, 613, 823.\n\nEmpedocles, 7\n\nEncyclop\u00e6dia Britannica, 96, 149, 156, 191, 300, 411, 524, 586, 749, 750,\n 893.\n\n\u201cEndless Future, The,\u201d, 1054\n\nEpictetus, 185, 425\n\nEpicurus, 184, 299\n\nEpiphanius, 319, 669\n\nEpiscopius, Simon, 47, 602\n\nErasmus, 36, 39\n\nErdmann, J. E., 101\n\nErnesti, H. F. T. L., 491, 563\n\nErrett, Isaac, 947\n\nErskine, Lord, 986\n\nErskine, Thomas, 351, 787\n\nEstes, H. C., 998\n\nEuripides, 582\n\nEusebius, 410\n\nEvans, Christmas, 245\n\nEvans, L. J., 229, 706, 999\n\nEverett, C. C., 2, 6, 695, 731, 990\n\nEwald, J. L., 318\n\nExpositor, 1025\n\nExpositor\u2019s Greek Testament, 135, 699, 719, 948.\n\nFaber, F. W., 301, 334, 776\n\nFaber, G. S., 1014\n\nFabri, Friedrich, 91\n\nFairbairn, A. M., 20, 59, 62, 63, 125, 159, 186, 335, 354, 366, 403, 507,\n 536, 579, 755, 910, 991.\n\nFairbairn, Patrick, 15, 135, 449, 668, 726, 791, 1015.\n\nFairchild, James H., 300, 504, 559\n\n\u201cFaith and Free Thought,\u201d, 232\n\n\u201cFaiths of the World,\u201d, 179\n\nFarley, Robert G., 773\n\nFarrar, A. S., 53, 132, 135, 158, 403, 420, 427, 433, 459.\n\nFarrar, F. W., 112, 124, 129, 132, 135, 141, 157, 160, 179, 187, 193, 385,\n 428, 451, 456, 479, 585, 666, 679, 989, 1039, 1046.\n\nFarrer, J. A., 180\n\nFaunce, D. W., 501\n\nFaunce, W. H. P., 221\n\nFechner, G. T., 281\n\nFelix of Urgella, 744\n\nFerguson, W. L., 152\n\nFerrier, J. F., 469\n\nFeuerbach, L., 14, 83, 91\n\nFichte, J. G., 3, 40, 97, 407, 467, 510, 616.\n\nFick, August, 20\n\nFinney, C. G., 48, 238, 262, 278, 291, 299, 300, 367, 546, 783, 818, 877.\n\nFirmilianus, 153\n\nFischer, Kuno, 512\n\nFish, E. J., 896, 901, 916, 918, 924\n\nFisher, G. P., 2, 4, 15, 21, 22, 34, 37, 40, 41, 49, 51, 53, 58, 60, 65,\n 70, 71, 72, 79, 87, 102, 115, 117, 121, 130, 131, 132, 150,\n 152, 179, 189, 191, 202, 228, 231, 237, 305, 424, 453, 456,\n 508, 532, 545, 580, 607, 608, 613, 615, 616, 617, 664, 668,\n 936, 969, 1046.\n\nFiske, D. T., 358\n\nFiske, John, 97, 104, 369, 559, 844, 899, 900, 908, 953, 985, 987.\n\nFitch, E. T., 365, 554, 783\n\nFitzgerald, Prof., 416\n\nFleming, William, 6, 33, 53, 539\n\nFlint, Austin, 389\n\nFlint, Robert, 6, 58, 63, 66, 73, 75, 79, 80, 81, 85, 100, 112, 367, 404,\n 929.\n\nFock, Otto, 733\n\nFonsegrive, G. L., 512\n\nForbes, Archibald, 228\n\nForbes, G. M., 12, 43, 102, 291, 360\n\nForbes, John, 360\n\nFord, David B., 934\n\nFormula of Concord, 792\n\nFormula of Consensus, 209\n\nForrest, D. W., 189, 675, 988\n\nForrest, Edwin, 577\n\nForster, W. E., 990\n\nForsyth, P. T., 26, 755\n\nFoster, G. B., 120, 197, 201, 299, 305, 311, 444, 720, 733, 741, 750, 755,\n 765, 798.\n\nFoster, John, 35, 128, 1043\n\nFoster, R. V., 228, 783\n\n\u201cFoundations of our Faith,\u201d, 5, 79, 865\n\nFox, Caroline, 461\n\nFox, George, 48, 1056\n\nFox, L. A., 1029\n\nFox, Norman, 215, 663, 949, 959\n\nFrancis de Sales, 32\n\nFrancis of Assisi, 33, 984\n\nFrank, F. H. R., 4\n\nFrank, Sebastian, 800\n\nFranklin, Benjamin, 363, 431\n\nFraser, A. C, 63, 417\n\nFreer, G., 744\n\nFrench, Clara, 261\n\nFrere, B., 844\n\nFroschammer, J., 491, 493, 494\n\nFrothingham, A. L., 380\n\nFroude, James A., 368, 438, 564\n\nF\u00fcrst, Julius, 669\n\nFuller, Andrew, 15, 47, 50, 51, 52, 368, 773, 793, 808, 826, 829, 1018.\n\nFuller, Margaret, 369\n\nFuller, Thomas, 128, 290, 633\n\nFullerton, G. S., 255, 1021\n\nGalton, Francis, 83, 439, 492, 495, 496, 632.\n\nGambold, John, 888\n\nGannett, W. C., 202, 290\n\nGanse, H. G., 351\n\nGarbett, Edward, 112, 177, 179, 193\n\nGarbett, James, 776\n\nGardiner, F., 137, 139, 227, 322\n\nGardiner, H. N., 104, 137\n\nGaribaldi, Giuseppe, 766\n\nGarrison, W. E., 947\n\nGarvie, A. E., 6, 270\n\nGassendi, Pierre, 298, 373\n\nGates, Errett, 948\n\nGaussen, L., 209\n\nGear, H. L., 344\n\nGeddie, John, 900\n\nGeikie, Archibald, 225\n\nGeikie, Cunningham, 156, 661\n\nGemara, 931\n\nGenung, J. F., 115, 300, 459, 994\n\nGeorge, Henry, 530, 748\n\nGeorge, N. D., 1056\n\nGerhard, John, 4, 45, 244, 261, 969\n\nGerhardt, Paul, 282\n\nGerhart, E. V., 200\n\nGesenius, William, 944\n\nGess, W. F., 102, 686, 687, 688, 704\n\nGeulinx, Arnold, 94\n\nGibbon, Edward, 47, 192, 204, 682, 966\n\nGiesebrecht, Friedrich, 134\n\nGieseler, J. C. L., 382, 914\n\nGifford, Lord, 413\n\nGifford, O. P., 58\n\nGilbert, George H., 321\n\nGilder, R. W., 683\n\nGildersleeve, B. L., 988\n\nGilfillan, George, 410\n\nGill, John, 47, 793\n\nGillespie, William H., 62, 73, 85\n\nGirdlestone, R. B., 850, 864, 892\n\nGladden, Washington, 56, 120, 122, 140, 141, 237, 956.\n\nGladstone, W. E., 44, 122, 223, 314, 396\n\nGlennie, J. S. Stuart\u2010, 527\n\nGloatz, Paul, 122\n\nGodet, F., 21, 131, 150, 152, 158, 258, 261, 309, 335, 337, 448, 487, 584,\n 758, 763.\n\nG\u00f6schel, C. F., 110, 484, 491\n\nGoethe, J. W. von, 3, 20, 21, 24, 39, 40, 60, 101, 117, 120, 188, 224,\n 309, 386, 444, 455, 458, 511, 517, 520, 542, 558, 561, 562,\n 575, 645, 691, 814, 990.\n\nGoodwin, D. R., 483, 485, 1017\n\nGoodwin, Thomas, 576\n\nGoodwin, W. W., 933\n\nGordon, A. J., 128, 133, 138, 140, 216, 234, 274, 281, 285, 333, 359, 475,\n 529, 604, 705, 732, 737, 775, 776, 782, 824, 834, 847, 848,\n 889, 893, 901, 910, 911, 913, 927, 935, 948, 1004, 1013, 1014,\n 1016, 1022.\n\nGordon, George A., 17, 19, 28, 65, 188, 346, 348, 397, 402, 405, 415, 492,\n 502, 542, 732, 751, 790.\n\nGordon, H. A., 283\n\nGore, Charles, 12, 16, 25, 33, 112, 113, 120, 121, 129, 164, 173, 187,\n 198, 214, 218, 229, 240, 305, 321, 329, 333, 340, 351, 389,\n 414, 500, 598, 671, 673, 679, 783, 911, 1001.\n\nGough, John B., 641\n\nGoulbourn, E. M., 1023, 1054\n\nGould, E. P., 720, 1046\n\nGould, S. Baring\u2010, 316, 326, 377, 457, 562, 722, 733, 915, 933, 1004,\n 1007.\n\nGrafton, Bishop, 955\n\nGrant, U. S., 430\n\nGratry, \u2014\u2014, 267\n\nGrau, R. F., 5\n\nGray, Asa, 470, 478\n\n\u201cGreat Religions of the World,\u201d, 186\n\nGreen, J. R., 149, 557\n\nGreen, T. H., 19, 43, 176, 505, 615\n\nGreen, W. H., 167, 172, 225, 231, 375, 477, 994.\n\nGreenleaf, Simon, 141\n\nGreg, W. R., 135, 548, 758\n\nGregorovius, Ferdinand, 631\n\nGregory the Great, 1001\n\nGregory, D. S., 302, 447, 504\n\nGregory Nazianzen, 1, 748, 917\n\nGregory Nyssenus, 44, 493, 620, 747\n\nGretillat, Augustin, 49\n\nGrey, Lady Jane, 33\n\nGriffin, E. P., 733\n\nGrimm, K. L. W., 782\n\nGrimm\u2010Wilke, 717, 935\n\nGrisi, Mme., 650\n\nGr\u00f6bler, Paul, 1023\n\nGrote, George, 156, 214\n\nGrotius, Hugo, 47, 740, 741, 1009\n\nGubelmann, J. S., 317\n\nGuericke, H. E. F., 330, 379, 382, 384, 672, 744, 907.\n\nGuizot, F., 193, 409\n\nGulick, J. T., 530\n\nGulliver, Julia H., 506\n\nGunsaulus, F. W., 4, 122, 350\n\nGuyon, Mme. de la Motte, 32, 782\n\nGuyot, Arnold, 224, 374, 395, 477\n\nGwatkin, Henry, 329\n\nHackett, H. B., 27, 113, 157, 452, 733, 907, 915, 946, 999, 1005.\n\nHadley, James, 585, 586, 991\n\nHadrian, 990\n\nHaeckel, Ernst, 343, 471, 496\n\nHagenbach, K. P., 14, 36, 41, 44, 49, 50, 51, 321, 323, 331, 382, 523,\n 601, 603, 607, 621, 744, 833, 903.\n\nHahn, Aaron, 89\n\nHahn, G. L., 483\n\nHales, William, 224\n\nHaley, John W., 174, 228, 1054\n\nHall, Charles Cuthbert, 770\n\nHall, Edwin, 938\n\nHall, G. Stanley, 812\n\nHall, James, 482\n\nHall, John, 589, 977\n\nHall, Joseph, 836\n\nHall, Robert, 47, 70, 74, 463, 793, 820, 932, 972, 977, 978, 996.\n\nHallam, A. H., 115, 214, 303, 368, 437, 703.\n\nHaller, \u2014\u2014, 229\n\nHamerton, P. G., 20\n\nHamilton, D. H., 121, 437\n\nHamilton, Sir Wm., 3, 7, 8, 9, 10, 34, 39, 40, 66, 74, 96, 98, 121, 153,\n 516, 1002.\n\nHamlin, Cyrus, 350\n\nHammond, W. A., 281, 590\n\nHanna, W. T. C., 153\n\nHanna, William, 699, 1018\n\nHanne, J. W., 105, 415\n\nHare, Julius Charles, 317, 555, 898\n\nHarnack, A., 46, 125, 130, 148, 152, 153, 154, 158, 163, 208, 379, 433,\n 446, 456, 598, 621, 683, 722, 729, 911, 935, 937.\n\nHarnoch, G. A., 382\n\nHarris, \u2014\u2014, 467\n\nHarris, George, 26, 203, 293, 494, 571, 701, 787.\n\nHarris, J. H., 103, 303\n\nHarris, J. Rendel, 151\n\nHarris, Samuel, 11, 51, 52, 60, 64, 65, 67, 69, 72, 92, 100, 133, 180,\n 204, 253, 255, 291, 468, 486, 509, 572, 600, 654, 695, 700,\n 1014, 1023.\n\nHarris, W. T., 43, 62, 86\n\nHarrison, Frederick, 19, 57\n\nHart, A. S., 458\n\nHartmann, E. von, 78, 80, 105, 404\n\nHartmann, Robert, 473\n\nHarvey, H., 42, 897, 917, 929, 934\n\nHarvey, Lord, 229\n\nHase, Karl, 49, 50, 51, 158, 518, 558, 583, 621, 686, 702, 991, 1023.\n\nHastings\u2019 Bible Dictionary, 118, 119, 141, 148, 153, 165, 167, 394, 479,\n 514, 933.\n\nHatch, Edwin, 27, 44, 146, 255, 321, 389, 666, 700, 840, 897, 913.\n\nHaug, Martin, 382\n\nHaven, Joseph, 301, 437, 504\n\nHawthorne, Nathaniel, 363, 400, 405, 496, 578, 645.\n\nHay, John, 587\n\nHazard, R. G., 39, 279, 362, 504, 794, 814\n\nHeagle, David, 982\n\nHeard, J. B., 484\n\nHeber, Reginald, 2\n\nHebert, C., 968\n\nHedge, F. H., 75, 377, 404\n\nHegel, G. W. F., 20, 27, 42, 55, 100, 101, 115, 176, 344, 378, 407, 550,\n 581, 653.\n\nHeine, Heinrich, 23, 104, 345, 562, 567\n\nHelmholtz, H. L. F., 94\n\nHemphill, Samuel, 148, 149, 151\n\nHenderson, E., 128, 198, 199, 200, 204, 210, 216, 322, 614.\n\nHengstenberg, E. W., 319, 659, 668, 1009, 1010, 1014.\n\nHenly, William Ernest, 507\n\nHenry VIII, 20\n\nHenry, Matthew, 525, 743, 772\n\nHenslow, George, 469, 815\n\nHenson, P. S., 122, 920\n\nHeraclitus, 222, 506\n\nHerbert of Cherbury, Lord Edward, 37, 414.\n\nHerbert, George, 15, 34, 37, 355, 414\n\nHerbert, Thomas M., 11, 66, 94\n\nHerder, J. G., 46, 230\n\nHermann, \u2014\u2014, 46, 900\n\nHermas, 159, 312\n\nHerodotus, 181, 250, 934\n\nHerrick, C. L., 252\n\nHerrick, Robert, 362\n\nHerron, G. D., 570\n\nHerschel, J. F. W., 91, 99, 412\n\nHersey, H. E., 194, 436\n\nHershon, P. I., 501\n\nHervey, Arthur C., 229\n\nHerzog, Encyclop\u00e6dia, 21, 33, 91, 158, 187, 368, 377, 382, 404, 444, 617,\n 670, 686, 700, 754, 868, 998, 1003, 1023.\n\nHesiod, 391, 526\n\nHickok, L. P., 10, 43, 53, 301\n\nHicks, L. E., 75, 225, 403\n\nHilary (Hilarius), 619, 620\n\nHildebrand, 905\n\nHilgenfeld, A. B. C. C., 161\n\nHill, D. J., 8, 51, 58, 98, 120, 195, 319, 467, 586.\n\nHill, George, 358, 368\n\nHill, Rowland, 577, 789\n\nHill, Thomas, 92\n\nHillel, 931\n\nHilprecht, H. V., 532\n\nHinton, James, 5, 308\n\nHippolytus, 159\n\nHiscox, Edward T., 929\n\nHitchcock, Edward, 124\n\nHitchcock, R. D., 897, 1017\n\nHobbes, Thomas, 40, 124, 298, 461, 567\n\nHodge, A. A., 49, 50, 121, 198, 323, 353, 362, 435, 486, 557, 586, 644,\n 688, 693, 710, 712, 728, 784, 794, 795, 836, 862, 910, 1014,\n 1029, 1044, 1056.\n\nHodge, Charles, 1, 21, 27, 28, 30, 33, 49, 51, 52, 53, 100, 103, 132, 198,\n 213, 217, 272, 300, 328, 362, 397, 404, 413, 418, 420, 453,\n 480, 491, 514, 557, 559, 582, 587, 602, 612, 614, 616, 619,\n 622, 643, 655, 664, 686, 688, 691, 696, 706, 708, 741, 771,\n 781, 784, 792, 820, 825, 843, 846, 868, 881, 929, 982, 1001,\n 1052.\n\nHodge, C. W., 6\n\nHodgson, S. H., 5, 15, 100, 288, 512\n\nH\u00f6ffding, H., 458, 467\n\nHofmann, J. C. K. von, 41, 68, 320, 519, 686, 722.\n\nHofmann, R. H., 503\n\nHolbach, Baron Paul H. d\u2019, 91\n\nHolland, H. S., 22, 838\n\nHolland, J. G., 91, 246\n\nHollaz, David, 45, 261, 558, 615\n\nHolliman, Ezekiel, 949\n\nHolmes, O. W., 369, 405, 496, 643, 755, 984.\n\nHolzmann, \u2014\u2014, 161\n\nHomer, 161, 404\n\nHood, Thomas, 36\n\nHooker, Richard, 48, 209, 218, 518, 538, 548, 584, 686, 700, 781, 787,\n 808, 896, 897, 929.\n\nHopkins, Mark, 4, 6, 25, 58, 77, 79, 93, 95, 120, 121, 122, 251, 270, 300,\n 301, 374, 380, 404, 405, 406, 416, 434, 435, 438, 450, 469,\n 503, 524, 525, 529, 537, 571, 679, 815, 839, 842.\n\nHopkins, Samuel, 48, 271, 415, 416, 417, 467, 494, 518, 567, 593, 606,\n 607, 608, 613, 643, 754, 771, 772, 820, 842.\n\nHorace, 124, 156, 190, 294, 581\n\nHort, F. J. A., 154, 905\n\nHovey, Alvah, 5, 34, 45, 50, 102, 114, 147, 153, 155, 197, 223, 227, 230,\n 255, 273, 307, 316, 388, 404, 469, 486, 544, 567, 618, 624,\n 629, 636, 662, 681, 688, 696, 697, 700, 702, 708, 721, 735,\n 738, 739, 756, 779, 782, 784, 786, 787, 823, 825, 852, 881,\n 890, 938, 954, 960, 980, 982, 984, 985, 992, 998, 999, 1003,\n 1008, 1012, 1023, 1038, 1039, 1054.\n\nHoward, George E., 530\n\nHowe, John, 47, 48, 52, 333, 334, 516\n\nHowell, R. B. C., 918, 980\n\nHowland, S. W., 526\n\nHowson, J. S., 160\n\nHudson, C. F., 998, 1036\n\nHudson, Thomas J., 465\n\nHudson, Thompson J., 281, 381, 454, 458, 983.\n\nHughes, Archbishop, 959\n\nHughes, Thomas, 570, 679\n\nHugo, Victor, 56, 453, 984\n\nHumboldt, Alexander von, 1, 259, 412, 480.\n\nHume, David, 43, 57, 73, 95, 121, 127, 135, 175, 433, 893, 997, 1001.\n\nHunt, A. E., 529\n\nHunt, John, 100, 896\n\nHuntingdon, Wm., 766, 907\n\nHurter, H., 47\n\nHuther, J. E., 307, 902\n\nHutter, Leonhard, 45\n\nHutton, R. H., 27, 59, 67, 70, 82, 100, 125, 131, 160, 162, 192, 204, 347,\n 351, 408, 440, 511, 561, 564, 565, 571, 646, 667, 777, 982.\n\nHuxley, Thomas, 57, 60, 76, 83, 94, 96, 124, 127, 389, 392, 396, 466, 468,\n 470, 471, 472, 480, 502, 575, 990.\n\nHyde, W. D., 433\n\nHyslop, James H., 654\n\nIamblicus, 111\n\nIgnatius, 44, 149, 159, 311, 312\n\nIllingworth, J. R., 4, 53, 72, 128, 253, 346.\n\nImmer, A., 177\n\nIndependent, 977\n\nInge, W. R., 31, 33, 237, 311, 800, 841\n\nIngelow, Jean, 1042\n\nIngersoll, Robert G., 38, 135, 159, 365, 496, 570, 1050.\n\nIngham, Richard, 934, 951\n\nInterior, 977\n\nIreland, W. W., 207, 281\n\nIren\u00e6us, 147, 152, 319, 620, 910, 998\n\nIrving, Edward, 132, 439, 744, 745, 746, 747, 759.\n\nIsocrates, 180, 222\n\nIssel, Ernst, 274\n\nIverach, James, 11, 79, 97\n\nJackson, A. V. W., 382\n\nJackson, A. W., 103, 407, 501, 649, 1047\n\nJackson, William, 1056\n\nJacob, G. A., 887, 896, 912, 914, 915, 917, 948, 952, 960, 961, 965, 980.\n\nJacobi, F. H., 14, 29, 46, 61, 81, 838, 951\n\nJahn, Johann, 722\n\nJahrbuch f\u00fcr deutsche Theologie, 708, 754, 1018.\n\nJames, William, 4, 33, 42, 55, 94, 96, 98, 111, 122, 182, 274, 276, 281,\n 338, 403, 435, 467, 468, 488, 504, 511, 536, 748, 806, 811,\n 829, 831, 841, 985, 988, 1002.\n\nJanet, Paul, 62, 75, 79, 91, 262, 401, 404, 435, 504.\n\nJan\u00f3sik, \u2014\u2014, 525\n\nJansen, Cornelius, 47\n\nJastrow, Morris, Jr., 408\n\nJefferson, Charles E., 953\n\nJellett, J. H., 232, 437\n\nJenkyn, Thomas W., 773\n\nJensen, \u2014\u2014, 408\n\nJerome, 148, 152, 159, 429, 491, 597, 796, 914, 915.\n\nJerrold, Douglas, 42\n\nJevons, W. S., 66, 124\n\nJohn of Damascus, 44, 344, 487, 671, 673, 695.\n\nJohn the Evangelist, 1\n\nJohns, C. H. W., 169\n\nJohnson, E. H., 201, 281, 293, 297, 339, 340, 347, 357, 376, 377, 383,\n 743, 785, 792, 824, 854, 957, 1017.\n\nJohnson, F. H., 25, 407, 470\n\nJohnson, Franklin, 153, 235, 403\n\nJohnson, Herrick, 779\n\nJohnson, Samuel, 36, 297, 525, 560, 575, 1047.\n\nJohnson\u2019s Cyclop\u00e6dia, 1047\n\nJohnstone, Robert, 708\n\nJones, E. Griffith, 119, 466, 528, 583, 625, 657, 852.\n\nJones, Henry, 101, 103, 108, 266, 291, 406, 540.\n\nJonson, Ben, 461\n\nJosephus, 144, 166, 226, 448, 947, 996\n\nJouffroy, T. S., 301, 1002\n\nJournal of Christian Philosophy, 96\n\nJowett, Benjamin, 728, 781\n\nJudson, Adoniram, 194, 938, 960\n\nJukes, Andrew, 726, 1039\n\nJulian, 598\n\nJustin Martyr, 148, 152, 319, 410, 665, 671, 675, 747, 997.\n\nJuvenal, 156\n\nK\u00e4hler, Martin, 503\n\nKaftan, J. W. M., 5, 14, 21, 25, 45, 46, 207, 274, 520, 568, 569, 574,\n 649, 752, 839, 856.\n\nKahnis, K. F. A., 14, 20, 46, 52, 200, 243, 247, 261, 491, 493, 652, 696,\n 702, 705, 795, 929.\n\nKane, Elisha Kent, 40, 765\n\nKant, Immanuel, 4, 6, 10, 21, 29, 43, 46, 53, 55, 61, 73, 75, 77, 79, 82,\n 85, 86, 87, 95, 401, 427, 488, 489, 498, 502, 504, 510, 536,\n 545, 581, 643, 655, 800, 813, 839, 988, 1002.\n\nKeane, A. H., 471, 477, 530\n\nKeats, John, 120\n\nKeble, John, 139, 526, 583, 675\n\nKedney, J. S., 379\n\nKeen, W. W., 59, 731\n\nKeil, J. K. F., 477, 722\n\nKeim, Theodor, 131\n\nKeller, Helen, 66, 216, 478\n\nKellogg, S. H., 182, 352, 1044\n\nKelly, William, 1009, 1015\n\nKelso, J. A., 169\n\nKempis, Thomas \u00e0, 32, 556\n\nKen, Thomas, 916\n\nKendall, Amos, 893\n\nKendall, Henry, 622\n\nKendrick, A. C., 152, 234, 316, 627, 661, 699, 708, 934, 947, 952, 1004,\n 1014, 1033.\n\nKennard, J. S., 648\n\nKennedy, John, 131\n\nKenyon, F. G., 141, 169\n\nKidd, Benjamin, 17, 194, 426, 567, 813, 981.\n\nKilpatrick, T. B., 164\n\nKing, H. C., 125, 328\n\nKing, H. M., 427, 896\n\nKingsley, Charles, 183, 305, 421, 442, 473\n\nKipling, Rudyard, 420\n\nKirk, Dr., 291\n\nKitto, John, 932\n\nKloppenburg, John, 614\n\nKnapp, Georg Christian, 46\n\nKnight, William A., 43, 53, 59, 73, 104, 105, 327, 387, 434, 754.\n\nKnobel, August, 726\n\nKnox, Alexander, 853\n\nKnox, John, 134\n\nK\u00f6hler, H. O., 621\n\nKoran, 420, 578\n\nKrabbe, Otto, 660\n\nKrauth, C. P., 664\n\nKreibig, G., 298, 403, 569, 633, 659, 750, 754, 765.\n\nKr\u00fcger, Paul, 344\n\nK\u00fclpe, Oswald, 43\n\nKuenen, A., 134, 155, 170, 171, 199\n\nKurtz, J. H., 51, 168, 172, 320, 394, 415, 660, 667, 668, 677.\n\nKuyper, Abraham, 338, 667\n\nLachelier, J. E. N., 62\n\nLacouperie, A. Terrien de, 479\n\nLactantius, 2, 20\n\nLadd, G. T., 4, 10, 43, 55, 56, 61, 66, 70, 91, 106, 110, 121, 198, 205,\n 249, 263, 275, 361, 416, 459, 486, 495, 498, 499, 506, 509,\n 534, 537, 550, 916, 929, 958, 985, 1003, 1023.\n\nLamb, Charles, 312, 644\n\nLang, G. A., 298, 531\n\nLange, F. A., 91\n\nLange, J. L. F., 20, 46, 273\n\nLange, J. P., 51, 333, 382, 661, 722, 761, 781, 853, 951.\n\nLanier, Sidney, 194\n\nLankester, E. Ray, 229, 528\n\nLao\u2010tze, 351\n\nLa Place, P. S. de, 250\n\nLardner, Nathaniel, 150\n\nLasaulx, Ernest von, 727\n\nLasher, G. W., 948\n\nLaurie, S. S., 511\n\nLaw, William, 303, 557\n\nLawrence, E. A.,697, 754, 1042\n\nLawrence, William, 133\n\nLaycock, Thomas, 95\n\nLeathes, Stanley, 140, 168, 177, 221\n\nLeBon, Gustave, 488\n\nLecky, W. E. H., 294\n\nLeConte, Joseph, 77, 110, 225, 250, 395, 396, 469, 474.\n\nLee, G. S., 125, 237, 264, 362\n\nLeFanu, Joseph S., 575\n\nLegge, James, 56, 180, 225, 531\n\nLeibnitz, G. W., 29, 43, 46, 63, 404, 405, 563.\n\nLeighton, Robert, 401, 873\n\nLeitch, William, 450, 1033\n\nLemme, Ludwig, 652\n\nLenormant, F., 224, 225, 377\n\nLeo the Great, 750\n\nLepsius, K. R., 910\n\nLessing, G. E., 30, 173, 510, 520\n\nLetson, see LeBon, Gustave.\n\nLewes, G. H., 64, 194, 251, 380, 533\n\nLewis, Mrs. A. S., 151\n\nLeydecker, Melchior, 46, 49, 50\n\nLias, J. J., 759, 760\n\nLichtenberg, \u2014\u2014, 98\n\nLichtenberger, F., 748\n\nLiddell and Scott, 933\n\nLiddon, Henry P., 21, 51, 58, 190, 307, 309, 311, 314, 315, 321, 437, 491,\n 683.\n\nLidgett, J. S., 295, 528, 726, 732, 750, 754, 756.\n\nLiebner, Th. A., 686, 690, 702\n\nLife, 512\n\nLightfoot, J. B., 24, 35, 151, 160, 187, 311, 335, 341, 379, 379, 452,\n 485, 706, 912, 915, 916, 928, 929, 934, 938, 945, 953.\n\nLightfoot, John, 452\n\nLightwood, J. M., 535\n\nLillie, Arthur, 183\n\nLillie, John, 294, 993, 1005, 1053\n\nLilly, W. S., 112\n\nLimborch, Philipp von, 47, 524, 602\n\nLincoln, Abraham, 231, 272, 516, 517, 596, 847, 900, 939.\n\nLincoln, Heman, 1049\n\nLincoln, William, 800\n\nLindsay, T. M., 897\n\nLindsay, W. L., 469\n\nLindsley, Philip, 39\n\nLipsius, Richard A., 46, 380, 404\n\nLisle, W. M., 17, 486, 561\n\nLitch, Josiah, 1015\n\nLitton, E. A., 48\n\nLivingstone, David, 56, 900\n\nLobstein, Paul, 676\n\nLocke, John, 43, 54, 63, 73, 81, 95, 213, 444, 899, 1002.\n\nLockhart, B. W., 330, 560, 736\n\nLockhart, John G., 449\n\nLockyer, J. N., 229\n\nLodge, Oliver J., 416, 512\n\nLoeb, Jacques, 119, 525, 676, 1003\n\nLoisy, Alfred, 683\n\nLombard, Peter, 44, 613, 704\n\nLombroso, Cesare, 496\n\nLong, J. C, 44, 937\n\nLongfellow, H. W., 224, 400, 984, 985, 987, 1042.\n\nLopp, W. T., 477\n\n\u201cLord\u2019s Supper, The, A Clerical Symposium,\u201d, 964\n\nLorimer, James, 536\n\nLorimer, P., 160\n\nLotz, Gulielmus, 410\n\nLotze, Hermann, 4, 6, 8, 12, 38, 53, 89, 96, 99, 100, 104, 254, 273, 279,\n 282, 285, 332, 385, 388, 416, 418, 495, 512, 513, 695, 820,\n 985, 1002.\n\nLouis XIV., 567\n\nLouis, St., of France, 192\n\nLove, William D., 708\n\nLovelace, Richard, 507\n\nLowde, \u2014\u2014, 800\n\nLowell, James R., 13, 151, 407, 426, 500, 503, 633.\n\nLowndes, R., 52, 67, 97, 279\n\nLowrie, Walter, 159, 261, 310, 719\n\nLoyola, Ignatius, 33, 904\n\nLubbock, John, 527\n\nLucan, 700\n\nLucian, 194, 941\n\nLuckock, H. M., 659, 775, 1000, 1002, 1043.\n\nLucretius, 91, 255, 299, 380\n\nL\u00fcnemann, G., 377, 485\n\nLuthardt, C. E., 2, 14, 22, 30, 44, 46, 51, 68, 84, 112, 222, 245, 249,\n 341, 404, 408, 530, 559, 575, 668, 723, 754, 816, 829, 836,\n 929, 982, 991, 998.\n\nLuther, Martin, 45, 156, 205, 209, 226, 237, 240, 251, 329, 344, 364, 409,\n 437, 441, 458, 487, 494, 556, 562, 569, 650, 654, 692, 747,\n 776, 808, 823, 830, 840, 891, 902, 903, 912, 942, 954, 969,\n 1008.\n\nLutheran Quarterly, 300\n\nLyall, William, 508\n\nLyell, Charles, 65, 374, 532\n\nLynch, Archbishop, 967\n\nLysias, Claudius, 240\n\nLyttelton, Arthur, 647, 722\n\nLytton, Edward Bulwer, 645\n\nM., C. H., see MacIntosh, C. H.\n\nMacan, R. W., 1023\n\nMacaulay, T. B., 40, 47, 406, 659, 872, 898, 913.\n\nMcCabe, L. D., 285, 357, 358, 359\n\nMcCane, John Y., 577\n\nMcCheyne, Robert Murray, 1056\n\nMcClintock and Strong, 51, 603, 644\n\nMcConnell, S. D., 851\n\nMcCosh, James, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 43, 54, 67, 70, 73, 77, 78, 87, 93, 94,\n 95, 102, 339, 403, 427, 437, 839, 1022.\n\nMacDonald, A., 2\n\nMacDonald, G., 491, 569\n\nMacdonnell, J. C., 754\n\nMcDuff, J. R., 808\n\nMcGarvey, J. W., 534, 955\n\nMcGiffert, A. C., 44, 888, 902\n\nMacGregor, James, 894\n\nMcIlvaine, C. P., 146, 150, 191\n\nMcIlvaine, J. H., 193, 231, 394, 474, 583, 644, 744, 750.\n\nMacIntosh, C. H., 234, 410, 454, 548, 583, 584, 727, 773, 796, 797, 856,\n 862, 864, 870, 896, 941.\n\nMcKim, W. D., 656\n\nMackintock, Hugh R., 224\n\nMcLane, W. W., 985\n\nMcLeod, Norman, 459\n\nMacLaren, Alexander, 29, 114, 139, 177, 259, 319, 456, 458, 524, 544, 581,\n 726, 731, 733, 781, 806, 837, 1026.\n\nMaclaren, Ian, see Watson, John.\n\nMacmillan, Hugh, 145\n\nMcPherson, John, 912\n\nMacWhorter, A., 668\n\nMagee, William, 754\n\nMahaffy, J. P., 18\n\nMahan, Asa, 877\n\nMaimonides, Moses, 934\n\nMaine, Henry Sumner, 535\n\nMair, Alexander, 129, 154, 161\n\nMaistre, Joseph de, 576\n\nMaitland, S. R., 1009\n\nMalebranche, Nicolas de, 100, 279\n\nMalm, K. E., 844\n\nMani, 382\n\nManly, Basil, 198, 210\n\nMann, Horace, 810, 1051\n\nManning, H. E., 317\n\nManning, J. M., 100\n\nMansel, Henry L., 7, 8, 9, 52, 54, 58, 70, 121, 253, 254, 278, 379, 384,\n 385, 469, 504, 546, 985.\n\nManton, Thomas, 48, 458\n\nMarchi, Joseph de, 191\n\nMarcion, 147, 383, 385\n\nMarck, Johann, 614\n\nMarcus Aurelius, 185, 989\n\nMargoliouth, Moses, 450\n\nMarheinecke, P. C., 46\n\nMarlowe, Christopher, 449, 560, 1042\n\nMarsh, W. H. H., 128\n\nMartensen, H. L., 34, 49, 50, 245, 266, 274, 285, 289, 349, 380, 381, 386,\n 392, 445, 460, 474, 491, 556, 576, 593, 601, 622, 647, 668,\n 694, 712, 790, 813, 1002, 1003, 1029.\n\nMartin, Hugh, 739\n\nMartin, W. A. P., 531\n\nMartineau, Harriet, 990\n\nMartineau, James, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15, 21, 26, 37, 51, 53, 57, 59,\n 64, 66, 68, 72, 73, 76, 78, 81, 83, 85, 92, 94, 95, 97, 98,\n 99, 100, 102, 105, 107, 112, 114, 125, 141, 152, 159, 202,\n 230, 231, 245, 250, 279, 285, 293, 296, 298, 299, 301, 303,\n 347, 348, 359, 362, 365, 386, 399, 402, 403, 412, 413, 417,\n 426, 430, 437, 469, 485, 504, 512, 532, 534, 535, 536, 538,\n 542, 567, 571, 573, 647, 655, 658, 682, 729, 794, 800, 815,\n 817, 893, 979, 985, 986, 988, 1003, 1036, 1041, 1047, 1048,\n 1049.\n\nMarvell, Andrew, 990\n\nMason, J. M., 776\n\nMason, Otis T., 417, 529\n\nMason, S. R., 48, 259, 277, 316, 328, 337, 338, 348, 403, 406, 445, 446,\n 450, 451, 476, 492, 509, 588, 670, 672, 677, 679, 685, 688,\n 696, 704, 707, 717, 734, 743, 785, 789, 818, 883.\n\nMaspero, G., 377, 995\n\nMasson, David, 385, 447\n\nMather, Cotton, 899\n\nMather, Increase, 953, 958\n\nMatheson, George, 8, 12, 23, 118, 180, 183, 185, 298, 338, 339, 382, 436,\n 452, 543, 584, 682, 752, 793, 1003.\n\nMatteson, W. B., 958\n\nMaudsley, Henry, 416, 511, 554\n\nMaupas, E., 494, 591\n\nMaurice, F. D., 11, 410, 446, 594, 728, 734, 1046.\n\nMaxwell, James Clerk, 77\n\nMazzini, Giuseppe, 890\n\nMead, C. M., 11, 14, 120, 263, 279, 475, 681, 952.\n\nMeehan, Thomas, 480\n\nMelanchthon, Philip, 45, 344, 414, 441, 558, 562, 613, 699, 761, 789, 816,\n 830, 864, 875, 1008.\n\nMelito, 150\n\nMell, P. H., 927\n\nMelvill, Henry, 911\n\nMenken, Gottfried, 744\n\nMenzies, Allan, 20\n\nMercersburgh Review, 957\n\nMeredith, \u2014\u2014, 978\n\nMethodist Quarterly Review, 58, 75, 477, 911, 1003.\n\nMeyer, F. B., 32\n\nMeyer, H. A. W., 15, 51, 68, 138, 199, 210, 242, 306, 309, 335, 337, 340,\n 452, 456, 457, 474, 485, 487, 517, 562, 579, 633, 657, 658,\n 661, 706, 707, 717, 719, 720, 752, 760, 761, 782, 838, 853,\n 902, 906, 907, 910, 915, 934, 935, 948, 951, 960, 973, 994,\n 1010, 1039, 1045.\n\nMeze, S. E., 277\n\nMichael Angelo, 986, 1055\n\nMichaelis, J. D., 46\n\nMiley, J., 818\n\nMill, James, 114, 299\n\nMill, J. S., 11, 78, 80, 83, 85, 96, 127, 130, 131, 179, 188, 190, 299,\n 378, 379, 381, 402, 506, 532, 533, 814, 904, 979, 986.\n\nMiller, Edward, 744\n\nMiller, G. C., 257, 270\n\nMiller, Hugh, 394\n\nMiller, John, 30, 53, 397, 708, 759\n\nMillet, J. F., 256\n\nMilligan, William, 131, 151\n\nMills, B. Fay, 855\n\nMills, L. H., 383\n\nMilton, John, 37, 237, 284, 286, 292, 329, 360, 385, 409, 443, 453, 494,\n 523, 560, 572, 583, 587, 589, 620, 647, 742, 749, 783, 789,\n 873, 1032, 1034.\n\nMind, 468, 509\n\nMinton, H. C., 6, 26, 348\n\nMishna, 931\n\nMitchell, Arthur, 529\n\nMitchell, E. C., 147\n\nMitchell, J. M., 182, 185\n\nMitchell, Seth K., 810\n\nMivart, St. George, 9, 78, 97, 104, 283, 380, 468, 470, 472, 474, 528.\n\nMoberly, R. C., 253, 260, 288, 291, 323, 328, 331, 333, 343, 345, 594,\n 654, 674, 684, 691, 737, 756, 769, 836.\n\nMoehler, J. A., 47, 207, 518, 522, 853, 866, 911.\n\nMoffat, Robert, 56\n\nMolina, Luis, 358\n\nMoltke, Count H. von, 401\n\nMomerie, A. W., 700\n\nMonod, Adolphe, 41, 541, 751\n\nMonrad, D. G., 437\n\nMontesquieu, S., 535\n\nMoody, D. L., 188, 313, 506\n\nMoore, A. L., 416\n\nMoore, Aubrey, 492\n\nMoore, E. M., 481\n\nMoorhouse, James, 679, 1023\n\nMore, Sir Thomas, 654, 1031\n\nMorell, J. D., 4, 12, 20, 33, 88, 93, 202, 510.\n\nMorgan, L. H., 527, 530\n\nMorison, James, 148, 149\n\nMormon, Book of, 141\n\nMorris, E. D., 45, 708, 1044\n\nMorris, George S., 43, 253, 345\n\nMorris, H. W., 483\n\nMorrison, C. R., 131\n\nMorton, S. G., 480\n\nMosheim, J. L. von, 376\n\nMoule, H. C. G., 48, 340, 485, 790, 913\n\nMoulton, Richard G., 651\n\nMoxom, P. S., 273, 302, 349, 495, 637, 750, 776.\n\nMozart, W. A., 276\n\nMozley, J. B., 3, 75, 100, 117, 118, 124, 126, 129, 130, 132, 231, 432,\n 546, 570, 620, 622, 631, 766, 790, 841, 994, 997, 1041.\n\nMozoomdar, 678\n\nM\u00fcller, G. C, 377\n\nM\u00fcller, George, 438, 439\n\nM\u00fcller, Gustav A., 144\n\nM\u00fcller, Julius, 10, 21, 22, 31, 46, 51, 53, 74, 82, 105, 245, 257, 263,\n 278, 285, 341, 388, 418, 488, 489, 490, 507, 519, 544, 552,\n 557, 559, 562, 563, 566, 567, 569, 571, 577, 579, 582, 585,\n 600, 605, 606, 611, 612, 616, 618, 621, 634, 643, 644, 647,\n 651, 654, 657, 660, 661, 676, 677, 706, 775, 777, 847, 983,\n 1003.\n\nM\u00fcller, F. Max, 20, 56, 101, 193, 225, 260, 309, 335, 469, 478, 479, 531,\n 668, 844.\n\nMuir, William, 157, 186\n\nMulford, Elisha, 101\n\nMullins, E. Y., 717, 738, 754, 755\n\nMurphy, J. G., 445\n\nMurphy, J. J., 4, 7, 8, 10, 11, 16, 71, 73, 76, 79, 80, 82, 99, 103, 121,\n 129, 276, 401, 412, 512, 538, 544, 548, 576, 606, 622, 786,\n 824, 846, 955, 1056.\n\nMurray, Andrew, 317\n\nMurray, J. C., 98\n\nMurray, T. C., 172, 479\n\nMurray, W. H. H., 447\n\nMyers, F. W. H., 69, 120, 134, 206, 457, 677.\n\nMyers, Frederic, 205\n\nN\u00e4geli, C. von, 987\n\nN\u00e4gelsbach, C. F., 723\n\nN\u00e4gelsbach, K. W. E., 239\n\nNansen, F., 431\n\nNapoleon, 143, 349, 421, 512, 561, 682\n\nNash, H. S., 150, 157, 691, 763, 841\n\nNation, The, 896\n\nNature, 471\n\nNaville, Ernest, 508, 622, 1023\n\nNeander, J. A. W., 40, 41, 305, 335, 384, 487, 563, 587, 600, 621, 661,\n 670, 749, 852, 870, 878, 896, 897, 902, 907, 936, 951, 952,\n 953, 954, 1003, 1014, 1023, 1029.\n\nNelson, Horatio, 577\n\nNelson, John, 1026\n\nNestorius, 671\n\nNevin, J. W., 969\n\nNevius, J. L., 445, 453, 456, 457, 461\n\nNew Englander, 5, 6, 8, 38, 62, 74, 94, 98, 181, 185, 207, 278, 314, 413,\n 532, 616, 666, 923, 952, 1014, 1038.\n\nNew World, 507\n\nNewman, A. H., 44, 379, 382, 385, 937, 953.\n\nNewman, F. W., 12, 37, 202, 585, 988, 1055\n\nNewman, J. H., 5, 17, 33, 37, 114, 202, 208, 222, 451, 584, 586, 853, 866.\n\nNewton, Sir Isaac, 60, 139, 311, 1009\n\nNewton, John, 576\n\nNewton, Thomas, 135\n\nNicoll, W. R., 130, 155, 161, 313, 659, 708, 746, 1016.\n\nNiese, B., 144\n\nNippold, Friedrich, 740\n\nNitzsch, Carl I., 14, 20, 22, 31, 41, 46, 53, 59, 72, 269, 485, 519, 559,\n 583, 652, 849.\n\nNoel, Baptist W., 938, 972\n\nNoetus, 327\n\nNordau, Max S., 40\n\nNordell, P. A., 290\n\nNorth British Review, 363, 952\n\nNorthrup, G. W., 255, 293, 474, 614, 640, 662, 772, 789.\n\nNorton, Andrews, 150\n\nNorton, C. E., 138\n\nNorton, John, 539\n\nNott, J. C., and G. R. Gliddon, 480\n\nNovalis, 43, 526\n\nNovatian, 937\n\nNoyes, G. R., 548\n\nOccam, William of, 45, 244, 298, 299, 909.\n\n\u0152dipus, 469\n\nOehler, G. F., 137, 375, 376, 585, 725\n\nOetinger, F. C., 216\n\nOldenberg, Hermann, 183\n\nOliphant, Mrs. M. O. W., 744\n\nOlshausen, Hermann, 945\n\nOmar Kh\u00e1yy\u00e1m, 407, 511, 542, 990\n\nOosterzee, J. J. Van, see Van Oosterzee, J. J.\n\nOrigen, 15, 44, 53, 146, 153, 328, 386, 409, 451, 488, 489, 734, 1019,\n 1041.\n\nOrr, James, 6, 30, 141, 172, 298\n\nOsgood, Howard, 18, 172, 226, 995, 1023\n\nOssory, Bishop of, 836, 849, 853, 868\n\nOutlook, The, 305, 350, 650, 718, 744\n\nOvid, 416, 523, 575, 723\n\nOwen, John, 47, 295, 297, 326, 340, 343, 613, 663, 697, 754, 770, 773,\n 802, 820, 826, 868, 876, 886.\n\nOwen, Richard, 77, 98, 389, 396, 480\n\nOwen, Robert Dale, 506\n\nPaine, L. L., 44, 148, 262, 305, 308, 328, 500, 718.\n\nPaine, Thomas, 112, 564\n\nPajon, Claude, 947\n\nPaley, William, 174, 299, 409, 534\n\nPalmer, Frederic, 203, 342, 659, 701\n\nPalmer, G. H., 182\n\nPalmer, T. R., 955\n\nPapias, 148, 149, 159\n\nPark, E. A., 197, 231, 271, 278, 290, 301, 304, 342, 354, 367, 401, 605,\n 608, 609, 637, 675, 727, 740, 743, 827, 911, 913, 928.\n\nParker, Edwin P., 711\n\nParker, Joel, 1052\n\nParker, Joseph, 317\n\nParker, Theodore, 12, 120, 186, 202, 446, 501, 958, 989, 1050, 1055.\n\nParkhurst, Charles H., 22, 242, 486, 584\n\nPascal, Blaise, 4, 21, 38, 40, 47, 62, 120, 129, 205, 403, 469, 516, 581,\n 635, 691, 808, 821, 841, 909.\n\nPaton, John G., 32, 76, 195, 423\n\nPattison, S. R., 225\n\nPattison, T. H., 24, 42, 200\n\nPatton, F. L., 63, 70, 79, 172, 212, 297, 300, 368, 655, 841, 889, 1047.\n\nPatton, W. W., 437, 708\n\nPaulsen, Friedrich, 281\n\nPayne, B. H., 651\n\nPayne, George, 617, 790, 820\n\nPeabody, A. P., 22, 29, 51, 60, 89, 112, 146, 157, 230, 503, 672.\n\nPeabody, Ephraim, 118\n\nPearson, John, 48, 708\n\nPearson, Thomas, 415\n\nPeck, A. C., 790\n\nPeck, George, 877\n\nPeirce, Benjamin, 396\n\nPelagius, 491, 597\n\nPengilly, R., 938\n\nPenn, William, 48\n\nPentecost, G. F., 767, 813\n\nPepper, G. D. B., 102, 124, 286, 353, 357, 425, 537, 629, 933, 955, 980,\n 1014.\n\nPerowne, J. J. S., 172, 231, 403, 412, 451, 812, 833.\n\nPerrone, J., 47, 523\n\nPersius, 380, 647\n\nPeschel, O., 58\n\nPetavius, Dionysius, 47\n\nPeter Lombard, 44, 613, 704, 747\n\nPeter Martyr, 46, 524\n\nPeters, \u2014\u2014, 507\n\nPeyrerius, 476\n\nPezzi, D., 479\n\nPfleiderer, Otto, 5, 8, 10, 12, 21, 54, 59, 60, 61, 63, 74, 87, 104, 111,\n 116, 120, 122, 134, 156, 158, 164, 182, 216, 237, 269, 328,\n 332, 365, 383, 386, 388, 406, 447, 466, 490, 492, 519, 530,\n 559, 571, 585, 586, 603, 608, 681, 700, 717, 718, 719, 721,\n 728, 750, 799, 839, 938, 951, 954.\n\nPhelps, Austin, 437, 496, 820, 1034\n\nPhilippi, F. A., 4, 20, 46, 51, 222, 257, 273, 287, 378, 418, 420, 442,\n 444, 462, 463, 491, 514, 516, 519, 520, 523, 539, 549, 563,\n 566, 571, 579, 585, 592, 606, 612, 622, 671, 673, 688, 690,\n 696, 697, 706, 708, 709, 710, 713, 721, 733, 750, 754, 766,\n 771, 776, 836, 859.\n\nPhillips, Wendell, 907\n\nPhilo, 126, 166, 203, 244, 320, 321, 335, 340, 377, 488, 489, 722, 995.\n\nPickering, Charles, 477, 480\n\nPictet, Benedict, 46\n\nPierce, Nehemiah, 823\n\nPierret, Paul, 377\n\nPillsbury, Parker, 982\n\nPinches, T. G., 531\n\nPlaceus, Joshua, 46, 616, 617\n\nPlato, 16, 25, 29, 33, 67, 68, 111, 112, 143, 183, 203, 261, 262, 302,\n 310, 335, 364, 461, 488, 489, 516, 526, 560, 581, 647, 660,\n 700, 764, 989, 1031.\n\nPliny, 191, 313\n\nPlummer, A., 932\n\nPlumptre, E. H., 153, 158, 700, 708, 821, 909, 915, 935, 993.\n\nPlutarch, 113, 429, 537, 575, 788, 813, 934\n\nPolanus, A., 491\n\nPollok, Robert, 1019\n\nPolycarp, 147, 149, 150\n\nPomeroy, John, 536\n\nPond, Enoch, 207\n\nPope, Alexander, 77, 102, 404, 430, 1020\n\nPope, W. B., 48, 68, 394, 562, 578, 583, 602, 706, 762.\n\nPorter, Frank C., 152, 934\n\nPorter, Noah, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 14, 20, 43, 51, 52, 53, 54, 56, 60, 63,\n 66, 67, 73, 75, 78, 82, 86, 93, 96, 100, 125, 179, 253, 254,\n 257, 275, 278, 279, 280, 412, 417, 469, 486, 508, 516, 524,\n 695, 815, 1019, 1021.\n\nPoteat, E. M., 108\n\nPott, A. F., 478\n\nPotwin, Lemuel S., 735\n\nPowell, Baden, 434, 548\n\nPraxeas, 327\n\nPrayer Book, English, 46, 937, 957, 978\n\nPrentiss, George L., 664\n\nPresbyterian and Reformed Review, 26\n\nPresbyterian Quarterly Review, 5, 96, 132, 133, 182, 477, 614, 913, 915,\n 924, 960, 998, 1005, 1013, 1014.\n\n\u201cPresent Day Tracts,\u201d, 162, 177\n\nPressens\u00e9, E. D. de, 130, 162, 187, 321, 666.\n\nPrestwich, Joseph, 226\n\nPreyer, W. T., 43\n\nPrice, Richard, 301\n\nPrichard, J. C., 480, 483\n\nPriestley, Joseph, 198, 300\n\nPrime, Samuel Iren\u00e6us, 437\n\nPrinceton Essays, 304, 330, 343, 359, 401, 555, 598, 600, 601, 611, 612,\n 613, 619, 644, 707, 733, 744, 881.\n\nPrinceton Review, 5, 11, 78, 216, 469, 481, 622, 640, 708, 747, 896, 911,\n 977, 1014, 1037, 1046.\n\nProudhon, \u2014\u2014, 1\n\nPtah hotep, 169\n\nPusey, E. B., 429, 518, 834, 969\n\nPym, John, 419\n\nPythagoras, 112, 183, 190, 386\n\nQuarles, Francis, 752\n\nQuatrefages, A. de, 474, 477, 480\n\nQuenstedt, J. A., 45, 208, 244, 269, 444, 669, 795, 859, 864.\n\nRacovian Catechism, 47, 524\n\nRainy, Robert, 12, 177, 221, 912\n\nRamabai, Pundita, 161, 905\n\nRanke, Leopold von, 369\n\nRatzel, Friedrich, 530\n\nRauschenbusch, Augustus, 410\n\nRauschenbusch, Walter, 540, 909, 982\n\nRawlinson, George, 56, 191, 225, 229, 351, 482, 483, 529, 531, 532.\n\nRaymond, Miner, 48, 53, 358, 362, 519, 602, 605, 606, 611, 621, 644.\n\nReade, Winwood, 405\n\nRecords of the Past, 377\n\nRedford, R. A., 141\n\nReid, Thomas, 276, 279\n\nReid, William, 896\n\nReinhard, F. V., 46\n\nRenan, Ernest, 57, 115, 131, 160, 161, 162, 174, 188, 666.\n\nRenouf, P. Le Page, 57, 58, 103, 351, 377, 397, 479, 482, 799, 995, 1022,\n 1024.\n\nRenouvier, C. B., 512\n\nReubelt, John A., 686\n\nReusch, F. H., 897\n\nReuss, E., 41, 147, 579, 670\n\nR\u00e9ville, Jean, 177, 821\n\nRevillout, Eug\u00e8ne, 226, 995\n\nRevue Th\u00e9ologique, 1023\n\nReynolds, Edward, 622\n\nRhees, Rush, 144, 190, 315\n\nRibot, Th., 497, 505, 625, 813\n\nRice, W. N., 120\n\nRichards, James, 555, 644, 773, 777\n\nRichardson, J. H., 525\n\nRichelieu, 1048\n\nRichter, Jean Paul, 105, 204, 467, 553, 641\n\nRiddle, M. B., 152, 227\n\nRider, C. E., 173\n\nRiggenbach, C. J., 485\n\nRidgeley, Thomas, 47, 48, 664, 696, 790, 886\n\nRipley, Henry J., 929\n\nRitchie, D. G., 12, 16, 60, 572, 615\n\nRitschl, Albrecht, 5, 6, 11, 14, 21, 41, 46, 120, 245, 264, 291, 579, 622,\n 732, 734, 737, 799, 866, 877, 1008.\n\nRitter, Heinrich, 79\n\nRobbins, R. D. C., 1041\n\nRoberts, B. T., 918\n\nRoberts, W. Page\u2010, 496\n\nRobertson, F. W., 39, 205, 253, 344, 346, 378, 379, 469, 548, 567, 570,\n 654, 656, 679, 682, 695, 734, 855, 860, 948, 1028, 1049.\n\nRobertson, J. D., 814\n\nRobertson, James, 121, 143, 169, 668, 724.\n\nRobie, Edward, 351\n\nRobin, C. P., 281\n\nRobins, H. E., 647, 649, 663, 674, 697, 706, 803, 946.\n\nRobinson, C. S., 345\n\nRobinson, Edward, 227, 892, 906, 918, 934.\n\nRobinson, Ezekiel G., 3, 16, 18, 26, 31, 34, 39, 40, 42, 51, 68, 119, 129,\n 130, 156, 157, 162, 177, 205, 228, 231, 244, 268, 270, 273,\n 278, 287, 297, 299, 301, 302, 304, 314, 316, 319, 322, 326,\n 334, 342, 356, 357, 360, 367, 383, 398, 429, 432, 434, 436,\n 444, 458, 498, 499, 504, 512, 519, 536, 539, 540, 544, 550,\n 572, 586, 589, 594, 615, 638, 644, 662, 666, 667, 701, 709,\n 723, 729, 730, 736, 740, 747, 750, 776, 818, 822, 824, 828,\n 842, 853, 854, 890, 912, 917, 942, 954, 955, 969, 983, 1016,\n 1023, 1048, 1049, 1051.\n\nRobinson, John, 35, 222\n\nRobinson, Willard H., 1038\n\nRogers, Henry, 12, 115, 116, 156, 189, 204, 232, 282, 288.\n\nRogers, J. G., 969\n\nRomaine, W., 437, 849\n\nRomanes, G. J., 22, 69, 94, 250, 346, 466, 469, 470, 478, 510, 631, 676.\n\nRoscelin, Jean, 44\n\nRoss, A. H., 929\n\nRossetti, Dante Gabriel, 489\n\nRossetti, Maria F., 443\n\nRothe, Richard, 50, 216, 244, 249, 285, 287, 416, 493, 559, 689, 740, 893.\n\nRousseau, J. J., 562, 576, 577\n\nRow, C. A., 51, 121, 131, 152, 157, 160, 179, 187, 204, 233, 433.\n\nRowland, H. A., 60\n\nRowlands, H. O., 926\n\nRowley, F. H., 476\n\nRoyce, Josiah, 16, 32, 54, 55, 56, 60, 69, 99, 110, 124, 261, 267, 276,\n 277, 283, 284, 286, 349, 357, 380, 405, 407, 442, 511, 558,\n 594, 615, 758, 785, 987, 1025.\n\nR\u00fcckert, L. J., 517, 781\n\nRuskin, John, 59, 415, 443, 482, 648, 825\n\nRussell, John, 287\n\nRyle, H. E., 168\n\nSaarschmidt, see Schaarschmidt, Karl.\n\nSabatier, L. A., 21, 128, 137, 155, 205, 666, 697, 892.\n\nSabellius, 327\n\nSadler, M. F., 948, 969\n\nSagebeer, J. E., 141, 153, 653, 852\n\nSainte\u2010Beuve, C. A., 561\n\nSaintine, X. B., 145\n\nSaisset, Emil, 86, 101\n\nSaker, Alfred, 843\n\nSakya\u2010Mouni, 161\n\nSale, George, 143\n\nSalisbury, Lord, 834\n\nSalmon, George, 154, 160, 549\n\nSalmond, S. D. F., 708\n\nSalter, W. M., 300, 538, 541\n\nSamson, G. W., 464, 917, 934, 960\n\nSanday, William, 146, 152, 164, 165, 198, 203, 209, 228, 236, 307, 933,\n 945.\n\nSanders, F. W., 427\n\nSanderson, J. S. Burdon\u2010, 251\n\nSantayana, George, 269, 510\n\nSartorius, Ernest, 693, 695, 705\n\nSaturninus, 383\n\nSavage, Eleazer, 926\n\nSavage, M. J., 69, 432, 447, 985, 989, 992, 1017.\n\nSavage, W. R., 1003\n\nSavonarola, Girolamo, 135\n\nSayce, A. H., 57, 376, 408, 478, 479\n\nSchaarschmidt, Karl, 512\n\nSch\u00e4fer, Bernhard, 240\n\nSch\u00e4ffer, C. F., 329\n\nSchaff, Philip, 44, 46, 50, 131, 189, 341, 598, 599, 622, 637, 652, 668,\n 670, 678, 682, 696, 902, 936, 937, 971, 1003.\n\nSchelling, F. W. J. von, 101, 252, 386\n\nSchenkel, Daniel, 503\n\nScherer, E., 460\n\nSchiller, Friedrich, 74, 303, 386, 633, 644, 981.\n\nSchleiermacher, F. E. D., 14, 20, 34, 42, 46, 244, 287, 314, 327, 461,\n 486, 503, 519, 559, 563, 734, 740, 783, 951, 981.\n\nSchliemann, H., 529\n\nSchmid, C. F., 41, 68\n\nSchmid, H., 699\n\nSchmid, Rudolph, 397, 479, 482\n\nSchneckenburger, M., 931\n\nSchodde, George H., 165\n\nSch\u00f6berlein, D. L., 697, 754, 808\n\nScholz, Paul, 56\n\nSchopenhauer, A., 54, 78, 101, 105, 404\n\nSchrader, Eberhard, 408\n\nSch\u00fcrer, Emil, 244\n\nSchurman, J. G., 8, 9, 19, 25, 55, 63, 67, 94, 99, 129, 130, 254, 268,\n 332, 398, 439, 466, 470, 615, 894, 908, 910, 1050.\n\nSchwegler, A., 345, 504\n\nSchweizer, A., 42, 245\n\nSchwenkfeld, Caspar, 800\n\nScott, C. Anderson, 913, 915\n\nScott, C. S., 928\n\nScott, Thomas, 35\n\nScott, Pres. Walter, 444\n\nScott, Sir Walter, 177, 350, 489\n\nScotus Erigena, John, 44, 244, 524\n\nScotus, Novanticus, 511\n\nScribner, G. H., 478\n\nSears, E. H., 227\n\nSecr\u00e9tan, Charles, 74, 621, 666\n\nSeeley, J. R., 295, 576, 819\n\nSeelye, J. H., 528, 1013\n\nSemler, J. S., 46\n\nSeneca, M. Ann\u00e6us, 83, 112, 177, 185, 398, 404, 516, 575, 814, 868, 989.\n\nSennacherib, 143\n\nSeptuagint, 166\n\nSerapion, 150\n\nServetus, Michel, 778\n\nSeth, James, 61, 64, 97, 101, 104, 105, 416, 418, 503, 505, 512, 536, 655,\n 678, 800, 986, 1042.\n\nSewall, C. G., 1042\n\nShaftesbury, Lord, 984\n\nShairp, J. C., 70, 982\n\nShakespeare, William, 17, 19, 23, 120, 170, 288, 289, 369, 426, 439, 442,\n 450, 452, 463, 472, 492, 502, 506, 511, 516, 526, 562, 569,\n 572, 575, 581, 633, 638, 645, 647, 651, 703, 732, 751, 767,\n 814, 815, 833, 835, 841, 939, 948, 984, 988, 990, 1042, 1051,\n 1055.\n\nShaler, N. S., 112, 119, 194, 225, 432, 435, 468, 492, 529, 632.\n\nShammai, 931\n\nShaw, Benjamin, 78\n\nShedd, W. G. T., 5, 10, 16, 21, 26, 41, 49, 51, 56, 57, 58, 69, 87, 95,\n 101, 105, 118, 119, 125, 243, 246, 253, 255, 261, 262, 268,\n 273, 277, 278, 290, 294, 296, 297, 298, 305, 314, 315, 328,\n 332, 333, 334, 338, 341, 343, 345, 348, 356, 367, 368, 373,\n 376, 380, 384, 400, 408, 472, 474, 481, 494, 504, 517, 518,\n 522, 523, 528, 537, 555, 557, 562, 564, 576, 578, 582, 585,\n 586, 588, 592, 601, 602, 607, 619, 621, 622, 625, 627, 630,\n 631, 635, 637, 640, 643, 645, 647, 655, 671, 678, 679, 683,\n 696, 700, 704, 709, 713, 719, 733, 737, 744, 749, 750, 754,\n 762, 768, 767, 770, 773, 780, 786, 816, 820, 822, 823, 827,\n 833, 847, 853, 880, 914, 957, 1041, 1043, 1044, 1046, 1048,\n 1049, 1051, 1052, 1056.\n\nSheldon, D. N., 598, 729\n\nSheldon, H. C., 384, 603, 625\n\nShelley, P. B., 57, 526, 757\n\nShipley, Orby, 572\n\nShort, Augustus, 845\n\nSibbes, Richard, 48\n\nSidgwick, Henry, 64, 510\n\nSiegfried, C., 321\n\nSilvernail, J. P., 674\n\nSimon, D. W., 16, 110, 266, 285, 293, 295, 346, 475, 541, 560, 625, 649,\n 671, 681, 719, 730, 750, 754, 763, 769, 822, 833, 1051.\n\nSmall, A. W., 106\n\nSmalley, John, 49, 608\n\nSmeaton, George, 726\n\nSmith, Adam, 301\n\nSmith, C. E., 340, 872, 935, 951\n\nSmith, Edwin B., 898\n\nSmith, George, 377\n\nSmith, George Adam, 122, 145, 203, 266, 422, 582, 724, 923, 997.\n\nSmith, Goldwin, 303, 422, 429\n\nSmith, H. B., 2, 3, 11, 42, 46, 49, 50, 55, 62, 66, 87, 101, 117, 130,\n 157, 162, 251, 273, 303, 350, 447, 503, 504, 513, 538, 546,\n 556, 570, 578, 579, 581, 583, 587, 595, 604, 607, 609, 612,\n 617, 621, 631, 634, 639, 656, 677, 691, 787, 790, 792, 794,\n 795, 811, 823, 843, 858, 862, 864\n\nSmith, H. P., 116, 172, 209, 228, 238, 240\n\nSmith, J. A., 368\n\nSmith, J. Denham, 808\n\nSmith, J. Pye, 319, 394\n\nSmith, Lucius E., 843\n\nSmith, Philip, 532\n\nSmith, R. B., 427\n\nSmith, R. Payne, 135, 172, 239\n\nSmith, R. T., 98, 113, 502, 503, 509, 642\n\nSmith, T. T., 841\n\nSmith, Thornley, 48\n\nSmith, W. Robertson, 134, 171, 221, 275, 318.\n\nSmith, William, 118, 147\n\nSmyth, Newman, 13, 30, 37, 62, 63, 65, 122, 265, 271, 289, 291, 296, 302,\n 304, 335, 402, 448, 591, 657, 784, 987, 1019, 1022, 1039, 1046\n\nSmyth, Thomas, 477, 479, 480, 483\n\nSnodgrass, W. D., 881\n\nSociety of Biblical Arch\u00e6ology, 408\n\nSocinus, Faustus, 47, 284, 329, 729\n\nSocinus, Laelius, 47, 729\n\nSocrates, 111, 112, 143, 177, 183, 505, 653, 989.\n\n\u201cSolar Hieroglyphics,\u201d, 344\n\nSolly, Thomas, 276, 545\n\nSolon, 57\n\nSophocles, 57, 141, 144, 469, 540\n\nSophocles, E. A., 933\n\nSmith, Robert, 128, 524, 705\n\nSouthall, James C., 529\n\nSouthampton, Bishop of, 119, 130, 432\n\nSouthey, Robert, 32, 996\n\nSpear, Samuel T., 736\n\nSpectator, London, 170, 399\n\nSpencer, Herbert, 7, 8, 9, 10, 22, 29, 43, 57, 63, 73, 74, 94, 96, 98,\n 187, 223, 245, 251, 294, 301, 331, 416, 426, 438, 508, 528,\n 532, 566, 722, 904.\n\nSpencer, John, 722\n\nSpencer, Otto, 251\n\nSpenser, Edmund, 257, 463\n\nSpilsbury, J., 903, 949\n\nSpinoza, Benedict de, 9, 30, 43, 55, 86, 94, 103, 244, 287, 415, 559, 563,\n 682, 834.\n\nSplittgerber, F., 998, 1023\n\nSpurgeon, Charles H., 17, 27, 28, 247, 364, 369, 458, 589, 752, 813, 918,\n 920, 975, 976.\n\nSquier, Miles P., 820, 823\n\nSt\u00e4hlin, Leonhard, 6\n\nSta\u00ebl, Madame de, 23\n\nStahl, F. J., 636, 723\n\nStalker, James, 691\n\nStallo, J. B., 91, 397\n\nStanley, A. P., 35, 193, 227, 230, 239, 242, 427, 691, 888, 910, 936, 940,\n 946, 957, 966\n\nStanley, Henry M., 427, 430\n\nStanley, Hiram M., 278\n\nStapfer, J. F., 20, 619\n\nStarbuck, E. D., 812\n\nStarkie, Thomas, 128, 141, 144, 174\n\nStatement of Doctrine of Presbyterian Church in America, A Short, 790\n\nStaupitz, Johann, 556\n\nStead, Herbert, 889\n\nStearns, L. F., 5, 28, 33, 68, 125, 130, 140, 635, 637, 771.\n\nSteffens, H., 1002\n\nStephen, J. F., 656\n\nStephen, Leslie, 114, 596\n\nSterrett, J. M., 20, 21, 23, 101, 407, 624\n\nSteudel, J. C. F., 41\n\nStevens, G. B., 31, 270, 296, 525, 579, 609, 623, 738, 848, 974, 982,\n 1016.\n\nStevens, W. A., 138, 149, 157, 294, 485, 569, 572, 623, 836, 853, 936,\n 993, 1005, 1008.\n\nStevenson, R. L., 643\n\nStewart, Dugald, 285, 427, 571\n\nStewart, J. W. A., 21, 261, 339, 795, 839, 997.\n\nStirling, J. H., 100, 176, 389\n\nStirling, John, 40\n\nStone, G. M., 940\n\nStorr, G. C., 46\n\nStorrs, Emory, 1055\n\nStorrs, R. S., 19, 889\n\nStory, W. W., 36\n\nStourdza, A. de, 937\n\nStout, G. F., 43, 295, 1003\n\nStowe, Calvin E., 205\n\nStraffen, G. M., 560\n\nStrauss, D. F., 46, 57, 131, 135, 155, 156, 349, 405, 407, 460, 523, 547,\n 708, 990.\n\nStoops, J. D., 571\n\nStrong, Augustus H., 3, 5, 10, 25, 29, 35, 38, 39, 40, 45, 46, 53, 95, 97,\n 106, 110, 117, 118, 123, 138, 140, 163, 164, 176, 193, 220,\n 221, 252, 259, 262, 264, 268, 275, 277, 287, 294, 297, 311,\n 340, 350, 356, 358, 362, 389, 440, 501, 504, 520, 560, 569,\n 572, 596, 634, 644, 646, 651, 674, 681, 683, 692, 693, 716,\n 762, 763, 768, 785, 799, 802, 804, 808, 812, 848, 899, 908,\n 914, 918, 924, 926, 942, 943, 977, 980, 1001, 1006, 1009,\n 1044.\n\nStrong, Charles A., 97, 98, 281\n\nStrong, John H., 472\n\nStroud, William, 675, 731\n\nStuart, Moses, 327, 328, 602, 615, 931, 933, 937, 956, 1003, 1009.\n\nStudien und Kritiken, 75, 747, 792\n\nSully, James, 488\n\nSumner, Charles, 409\n\nSumner, J. B., 783\n\nSunday School Times, 122, 292, 301, 468, 498, 502, 523, 549, 574, 589,\n 650, 782, 852, 1018.\n\n\u201cSupernatural Religion,\u201d 130, 151, 158\n\nSwayne, W. S., 315, 699\n\nSwedenborg, Emmanuel, 32, 207, 251, 383, 386, 1041.\n\nSwift, Jonathan, 405\n\nSymington, William, 761, 773, 775\n\nTacitus, 191, 192, 442, 487, 569, 989\n\nTaine, H. A., 581\n\nTalbot, Samson, 39, 94, 98, 301, 302, 508, 694.\n\nTalleyrand, Prince de, 176\n\nTalmage, T. DeW., 464\n\nTalmud, 282, 902\n\nTatian, 151, 383\n\nTaylor, Bayard, 525\n\nTaylor, D. T., 1015\n\nTaylor, Father Edward T., 453\n\nTaylor, Herbert, 403\n\nTaylor, Isaac, 382, 422, 440, 526\n\nTaylor, Jeremy, 352, 651\n\nTaylor, John, 416, 602\n\nTaylor, John M., 396\n\nTaylor, N. W., 39, 48, 126, 295, 299, 351, 367, 420, 535, 567, 579, 607,\n 608, 783, 817, 853.\n\nTaylor, W. M., 852\n\nTaylor, W. R., 889\n\n\u201cTeaching of the Twelve, The,\u201d, 159, 311, 410, 892, 906, 937, 938.\n\nTemple, Frederick, 11, 59, 77, 115, 118, 474\n\nTen Broeke, James, 45, 184, 414\n\nTennyson, Alfred, 3, 8, 37, 57, 62, 65, 245, 252, 253, 256, 259, 276, 280,\n 284, 294, 301, 383, 400, 413, 424, 443, 444, 467, 489, 509,\n 515, 520, 525, 528, 571, 577, 581, 633, 653, 659, 679, 711,\n 772, 799, 804, 806, 982, 986, 991, 1039, 1051.\n\nTerence, 698\n\nTertullian, 34, 146, 150, 152, 159, 191, 493, 599, 619, 620, 665, 783,\n 894, 936, 937, 953, 998, 1001.\n\nTeulon, J. S., 896\n\nThackeray, W. M., 151, 575\n\nThatcher, O. J., 929\n\nThayer, J. H., 150, 152, 205, 228, 306, 717, 933.\n\n\u201cTheodosia Ernest,\u201d, 980\n\nTheodoret, 319, 796\n\nTheological Eclectic, 160, 739\n\nTheophilus, 147, 319, 998\n\nThirlwall, Connop, 205\n\nTholuck, F. A. G., 33, 46, 56, 68, 132, 205, 260, 275, 307, 379, 440, 485,\n 576, 578, 666.\n\nThomas \u00e0 Kempis, 24, 32, 190, 556\n\nThomas, B. D., 36\n\nThomas, J. B., 653\n\nThomasius, G., 46, 50, 51, 245, 249, 257, 261, 263, 270, 273, 274, 288,\n 297, 315, 328, 338, 342, 349, 487, 514, 527, 556, 579, 622,\n 647, 668, 678, 683, 690, 701, 750, 761, 808, 868.\n\nThompson, Chief Justice (Pennsylvania), 581\n\nThompson, Joseph D., 340, 651\n\nThompson, R. A., 81, 87\n\nThompson, R. E., 237, 473\n\nThomson, J. Radford, 405\n\nThomson, Archbishop William, 66, 744\n\nThomson, William, 771\n\nThomson, William, Lord Kelvin, 36, 473\n\nThoreau, H. D., 982\n\nThornton, W. S., 128, 439, 654\n\nThornwell, James H., 2, 49, 303, 600, 616, 618, 621, 631, 644, 647, 648,\n 834.\n\nThucydides, 144\n\nTiele, C. P., 995\n\nTillotson, John, 808\n\nTindal, Matthew, 414\n\nTischendorf, Constantinus, 142, 915\n\nTitchener, E. B., 43\n\nTitcomb, J. H., 177\n\nTodd, J. H., 1009\n\nT\u00f6llner, J. G., 576\n\nTophel, G., 571\n\nToplady, A. M., 369\n\nTownsend, W. J., 45\n\nToy, C. H., 235, 931\n\nTract No. 357, American Tract Society, 840\n\nTracy, Frederick, 43\n\nTreffrey, R., 343\n\nTregelles, S. P., 147, 915\n\nTrench, R. C., 24, 120, 294, 432, 436, 447, 456, 462, 588, 680, 808, 892,\n 936, 983.\n\nTrendelenburg, F. A., 62\n\nTrent, Canons and Decrees of the Council of, 521, 854\n\nTrumbull, H. Clay, 723\n\nTulloch, John, 6, 53, 77, 96, 379, 384, 405, 546, 563.\n\nTurnbull, Robert, 66\n\nTurner, G. L., 126, 1002\n\nTurner, J. M. W., 143\n\nTurretin, F., 46, 356, 491, 612, 613, 614, 644, 652, 686, 773, 779.\n\nTwesten, A. D. C., 22, 28, 31, 46, 328, 338, 348, 350, 444.\n\nTyerman, L., 972\n\nTyler, Bennet, 358, 359, 360, 364, 367, 567, 579, 608, 644, 783, 796, 814,\n 817, 818.\n\nTyler, C. M., 57\n\nTyler, W. S., 155, 276, 352, 442, 526, 679, 723, 796, 1046.\n\nTylor, E. B., 58, 477, 480, 528, 529, 530\n\nTyndall, John, 14, 60, 83, 94, 96, 252, 311, 433.\n\nTyng, S. H., 744\n\nUeberweg, Friedrich, 36\n\nUhlhorn, Gerhard, 162, 989\n\nUllmann, K., 4, 189, 203, 678, 747\n\nUlpian, 535\n\nUlrici, H., 53, 58, 93, 368\n\n\u201cUnseen Universe, The,\u201d, 374, 379, 1023\n\nUpham, L. C., 32, 439, 808\n\nUpton, C. B., 22, 54, 73, 94, 385, 393, 413, 415, 435, 468, 505, 512, 834,\n 987.\n\nUrban II., 192\n\nUrsinus, Z., 50\n\nUssher, James, 224\n\nValentinus, 151, 160, 378, 670\n\nValerius Maximus, 989\n\nVan Dyke, Henry, 236\n\nVani\u00e7ek, Alois, 20\n\nVan Oosterzee, J. J., 5, 20, 22, 23, 42, 51, 66, 72, 311, 460, 462, 514,\n 523, 555, 556, 581, 593, 608, 651, 668, 696, 706, 709, 710,\n 773, 776, 790, 875, 886.\n\nVatke, J. K. W., 155\n\nVaughan, C. J., 781\n\nVaughan, Henry, 276, 489\n\nVaughan, R. A., 33, 207\n\nVauvenargues, 40\n\nVedas, 56\n\nVedder, H. C., 887, 890, 894, 899, 957, 973.\n\nVeitch, John, 97, 380\n\nVenn, J., 849\n\nVincent, Marvin R., 133\n\nVinci, Leonardo da, 190\n\nVinet, Alexander, 38, 125, 267\n\nVirchow, Rudolph, 471\n\nVirgil, 57, 176, 400, 526, 615, 698, 723\n\nVischer, E., 152\n\nVitringa, Campegius, 1009, 1014\n\nVolkmar, Gustav, 165\n\nVoltaire, 57, 77, 462\n\nVos, Geerhardus, 263\n\nWaffle, A. E., 407, 410, 754\n\nWagner, \u2014\u2014, 480\n\nWagner, Richard, 512\n\nWalch, J. G., 954\n\nWaldegrave, L., 1014\n\nWalden, Treadwell, 833\n\nWalker, G. L., 952\n\nWalker, J. B., 151, 317, 668, 820\n\nWalker, W. L., 316, 349\n\nWall, William, 959, 978\n\nWallace, A. R., 99, 402, 403, 412, 413, 470, 471, 473, 528, 632.\n\nWallace, Henry, 725\n\nWalton, Isaak, 192\n\nWard, James, 110, 124, 534\n\nWard, Clara E., 263\n\nWard, Mrs. Humphrey, 568, 580, 633\n\nWard, Lydia A. Coonley, 596\n\nWard, Wilfrid, 841\n\nWardlaw, Ralph, 1, 135, 269, 374, 741, 773, 784, 790, 820.\n\nWarfield, B. B., 735, 782\n\nWarner, Charles Dudley, 229\n\nWarren, H. W., 796\n\nWarren, I. P., 1005, 1009\n\nWarren, W. F., 532\n\nWatchman, The, 425, 907\n\nWaterland, Daniel, 856\n\nWatkins, H. W., 34, 152\n\nWatson, John, 58\n\nWatson, John (Ian McLaren), 19, 42, 237, 369, 439, 788.\n\nWatson, Richard, 48, 343, 350, 358, 404, 593, 602, 934.\n\nWatson, William, 35, 417, 420\n\nWatts, Isaac, 288, 688, 759\n\nWatts, J. F., 508\n\nWatts, Robert, 170, 172, 216, 218, 229, 352, 735, 765, 776.\n\nWayland, Francis, 301, 504, 533, 892, 897, 903, 905, 917, 924, 929, 938,\n 946, 951, 952, 956.\n\nWebb, C. C. J., 104, 253\n\nWeber, F. A., 294, 726\n\nWebster, Daniel, 815, 1056\n\nWebster, H. E., 262\n\nWebster, W., 761\n\nWedgwood, J., 32\n\nWegscheider, J. A. L., 46\n\nWeigel, Valentine, 800\n\nWeismann, A., 229, 466, 470, 497, 530, 558, 590, 631, 650, 992.\n\nWeiss, Bernhard, 68, 149, 157, 160, 174, 343, 579, 798.\n\nWeiss, \u2014\u2014, 1015\n\nWeisse, C. H., 660\n\nWellhausen, Julius, 171, 526\n\nWelling, J. C., 927\n\nWellington, Duke of, 506\n\nWendelius, 827\n\nWendt, H. H., 223, 262, 321, 379, 446, 448, 475, 517, 546, 661, 721, 729,\n 743, 799, 830, 936, 1006.\n\nWenley, R. M., 38\n\nWessel, John, 752\n\nWesley, Charles, 33, 368, 692\n\nWesley, John, 33, 48, 368, 369, 443, 602, 603, 816, 877, 878, 920, 972,\n 984, 1043.\n\nWest, Nathaniel, 131\n\nWestcott, B. F., 21, 122, 139, 147, 149, 152, 153, 156, 160, 233, 256,\n 306, 311, 312, 320, 336, 341, 342, 424, 495, 678, 680, 709,\n 722, 723, 727, 731, 760, 807, 873, 900, 915, 924, 934, 1012,\n 1046.\n\nWestermarck, E. A., 530\n\nWestervelt, Z. F., 216\n\nWestminster Catechism, 52, 664, 957\n\nWestminster Confession, 145, 599, 613, 643, 779, 790, 887, 937.\n\nWeston, Henry G., 930, 959\n\nWette, De, see De Wette, W. M. L.\n\nWetzer und Welte, 572\n\nWharton, Edith, 905\n\nWharton, Francis, 656\n\nWhately, Richard, 39, 62, 66, 74, 128,143, 174, 444, 528, 783, 913, 1003,\n 1015, 1052.\n\nWhedon, D. D., 48, 262, 273, 286, 354, 362, 520, 559, 602, 603, 604, 606,\n 780, 1041.\n\nWhewell, William, 2, 74, 77, 500\n\nWhitby, Daniel, 602, 1014\n\nWhite, Blanco, 37, 570, 1041\n\nWhite, Edward, 1037\n\nWhitefield, George, 368, 835\n\nWhitehouse, Owen C., 461\n\nWhitman, Walt, 567\n\nWhitney, Adeline D. T., 439\n\nWhitney, William D., 185, 217, 479\n\nWhiton, J. M., 119, 208, 297, 305, 334, 336, 342, 343, 348, 413, 516, 542,\n 633, 680, 684, 699, 743, 772, 850, 1001, 1037, 1046.\n\nWhittier, John G., 369, 678, 765, 984, 996, 1041, 1042.\n\nWicksteed, P. H., 277\n\nWieseler, Karl, 144\n\nWiggers, G. F., 597, 644\n\nWilberforce, R. I., 671, 679, 680, 693, 696, 697, 698, 969.\n\nWilberforce, Samuel, 472, 830\n\nWilder, Burt G., 470\n\nWilkin, G. F., 591, 988\n\nWilkinson, W. C., 40, 182, 197, 294, 398, 641, 957, 980.\n\nWilkinson, W. F., 761\n\nWilkinson, W. F., 95\n\nWillard, Frances E., 918, 978\n\nWilliam III, 512\n\nWilliam of Occam, 45, 244, 298, 299, 909\n\nWilliams, A. P., 980\n\nWilliams, \u2014\u2014, 918\n\nWilliams, Leighton, 208, 890\n\nWilliams, M. Monier, 183, 352, 382\n\nWilliams, N. M., 577\n\nWilliams, Roger, 369, 949\n\nWilliams, Rowland, 100\n\nWilliams, W., 790\n\nWillis, N. P., 570\n\nWillmarth, J. W., 948, 1023\n\nWilson, C. T., 915\n\nWilson, J. M., 719\n\nWilson, Woodrow, 2\n\nWinchell, Alexander, 476\n\nWindelband, Wilhelm, 379\n\nWiner, G. B., 523, 717\n\nWinslow, Edward, 227\n\nWithrow, J. L., 914\n\nWitsius, H., 46, 50\n\nW\u00f6rter, Friedrich, 598\n\nWollaston, William, 361\n\nWood, N. E., 942\n\nWood, N. R., 381\n\nWood, W. C., 410\n\nWoods, F. H., 171\n\nWoods, Leonard, 48, 49, 268, 608, 773, 826, 828, 836, 881, 886, 1015.\n\nWoolman, John, 760\n\nWoolsey, T. D., 229, 741, 943, 1045\n\nWordsworth, C., 68, 441, 458, 622\n\nWordsworth, William, 30, 39, 58, 59, 103, 252, 380, 406, 441, 489, 501,\n 568, 576, 599, 958, 991, 1022.\n\nWortman, J. L., 478\n\nWotton, Henry, 523\n\nWright, Charles H. H., 167, 405, 476\n\nWright, Chauncey, 76, 428\n\nWright, G. F., 130, 154, 224, 225, 357, 432, 469, 471, 478, 708, 1040,\n 1043, 1045.\n\nWright, T. H., 120, 454, 456\n\nWrightnour, J. S., 214, 667, 699, 764\n\nWu Ting Fang, 180\n\nW\u00fcnsche, Aug. de, 726\n\nWundt, Wilhelm, 43, 281, 505\n\nWuttke, Adolph, 62, 179, 182, 184, 185, 302, 516, 539, 581.\n\nWynne, F. H., 154, 159\n\nXenophon, 143, 148, 941\n\nYoung, Edward, 296, 557\n\nYoung, John, 189, 190, 367, 728, 734\n\nZahn, \u2014\u2014, 278\n\nZahn, A., 735\n\nZahn, Th., 707, 735\n\nZeller, Edward, 38, 512\n\nZeno, 184\n\nZinzendorf, Count N. L., 900\n\nZ\u00f6ckler, Otto, 42, 225, 377, 397, 474, 478, 482, 514.\n\nZoroaster, 382\n\nZwingle, Ulrich, 45, 237, 621, 903, 957\n\n\n\n\nIndex Of Scripture Texts.\n\n\nGenesis.\n\n1: \u2014 35.\n\n1:1 \u2014 309, 326, 333.\n\n1:2 \u2014 68, 134, 223, 287, 316, 318, 324, 326, 339, 378, 446.\n\n1:1\u20103 \u2014 286.\n\n1:11 \u2014 418.\n\n1:24 \u2014 465.\n\n1:26, \u2014 318, 524.\n\n1:26, 27 \u2014 514, 991.\n\n1:27 \u2014 465.\n\n1:27, 28 \u2014 476, 494.\n\n1:27\u201031 \u2014 490.\n\n1:31 \u2014 450, 488, 514, 521.\n\n2:2 \u2014 412, 494.\n\n2:3 \u2014 408.\n\n2:4 \u2014 395.\n\n2:7 \u2014 197, 198, 340, 465, 469, 494, 523, 550, 991.\n\n2:7, 22 \u2014 476.\n\n2:8 \u2014 999.\n\n2:9 \u2014 526, 527.\n\n2:16 \u2014 524.\n\n2:17 \u2014 584, 590, 656, 660, 992.\n\n2:19, 20 \u2014 524.\n\n2:23 \u2014 797.\n\n3:1 \u2014 584.\n\n3:1, 4 \u2014 454.\n\n3:1, 5 \u2014 455.\n\n3:1\u20107 \u2014 582.\n\n3:1\u201015 \u2014 448.\n\n3:3 \u2014 584, 590.\n\n3:4 \u2014 461.\n\n3:4, 5, 6 \u2014 584.\n\n3:5 \u2014 572.\n\n3:8 \u2014 523, 524, 992.\n\n3:9 \u2014 592.\n\n3:10 \u2014 224.\n\n3:12 \u2014 566.\n\n3:14 \u2014 450.\n\n3:15 \u2014 175, 667, 676.\n\n3:16\u201019 \u2014 992.\n\n3:17\u201019 \u2014 658.\n\n3:19 \u2014 656.\n\n3:20 \u2014 476, 477.\n\n3:21 \u2014 726.\n\n3:22 \u2014 523, 524, 585.\n\n3:22, 23 \u2014 991.\n\n3:24 \u2014 449.\n\n4:1 \u2014 494, 665.\n\n4:3 \u2014 408.\n\n4:3, 4 \u2014 593, 726.\n\n4:14 \u2014 476.\n\n4:16 \u2014 593.\n\n4:17 \u2014 476.\n\n4:26 \u2014 311.\n\n5:3 \u2014 494, 517.\n\n5:6 \u2014 225.\n\n5:24 \u2014 995.\n\n6:1, 2 \u2014 476.\n\n6:2 \u2014 445.\n\n6:3 \u2014 324, 604, 652.\n\n6:6 \u2014 258, 266.\n\n7:19 \u2014 223.\n\n8:1 \u2014 258.\n\n8:10\u201012 \u2014 408.\n\n8:20, 21 \u2014 725.\n\n9:2, 3 \u2014 524.\n\n9:6 \u2014 515.\n\n9:13 \u2014 396.\n\n9:19 \u2014 476.\n\n9:20\u201027 \u2014 230.\n\n9:25 \u2014 365.\n\n10:6, 13, 15, 16 \u2014 224.\n\n11: \u2014 896.\n\n11:5 \u2014 523.\n\n11:7 \u2014 318.\n\n13:15 \u2014 1044.\n\n15:5 \u2014 888.\n\n15:6 \u2014 850.\n\n15:13 \u2014 227.\n\n15:16 \u2014 638.\n\n16:9\u201013 \u2014 319.\n\n16:13 \u2014 283, 284.\n\n17:1 \u2014 286.\n\n17:8\u201013 \u2014 1044.\n\n18:2 \u2014 451.\n\n18:2, 13 \u2014 319.\n\n18:8 \u2014 443.\n\n18:14 \u2014 287.\n\n18:15 \u2014 523.\n\n18:19 \u2014 780.\n\n18:25 \u2014 290.\n\n19:24 \u2014 318.\n\n19:26 \u2014 432.\n\n19:30\u201038 \u2014 230.\n\n20:6 \u2014 423.\n\n20:7 \u2014 710.\n\n20:12 \u2014 447.\n\n20:13 \u2014 318.\n\n22:8\u201014 \u2014 421.\n\n22:11 \u2014 464.\n\n22:11\u201016 \u2014 319.\n\n22:13 \u2014 725.\n\n22:16 \u2014 266.\n\n24:9 \u2014 51.\n\n25:8, 9 \u2014 994.\n\n27:19\u201024 \u2014 230.\n\n28: \u2014 134.\n\n28:5 \u2014 280.\n\n28:12 \u2014 463.\n\n29:27, 28 \u2014 408.\n\n31:11, 13 \u2014 319.\n\n31:24 \u2014 423.\n\n32:1, 2 \u2014 463.\n\n32:2 \u2014 448.\n\n32:13, 14 \u2014 765.\n\n32:20 \u2014 720.\n\n32:24 \u2014 463.\n\n32:24\u201028 \u2014 258.\n\n35:1, 6, 9 \u2014 259.\n\n35:7 \u2014 318.\n\n35:18 \u2014 483.\n\n35:29 \u2014 994.\n\n39:19 \u2014 318.\n\n40:1 \u2014 318.\n\n41:8 \u2014 483.\n\n41:41\u201044 \u2014 318.\n\n46:26 \u2014 494.\n\n47:9 \u2014 996.\n\n47:31 \u2014 234.\n\n48:15, 16 \u2014 319.\n\n48:16 \u2014 463.\n\n49: \u2014 134.\n\n49:26 \u2014 1044.\n\n50:20 \u2014 355, 365, 424.\n\nExodus.\n\n1:16 \u2014 442.\n\n2:24, 25 \u2014 780.\n\n3:2 \u2014 451.\n\n3:2,4,5 \u2014 319.\n\n3:4 \u2014 209.\n\n3:5 \u2014 319.\n\n3:12 \u2014 713.\n\n3:14 \u2014 253, 257, 275.\n\n4:14\u201016 \u2014 200.\n\n4:16 \u2014 307.\n\n4:21 \u2014 424.\n\n6:3 \u2014 257.\n\n7:1 \u2014 200, 307.\n\n7:12 \u2014 733.\n\n7:13 \u2014 424.\n\n8:8, 15 \u2014 424.\n\n9:27 \u2014 832.\n\n10:28 \u2014 459.\n\n12:36 \u2014 422.\n\n12:40, 41 \u2014 227.\n\n13:2, 13 \u2014 761.\n\n14:14 \u2014 241.\n\n14:23 \u2014 1050.\n\n15:11 \u2014 268.\n\n16:5 \u2014 408.\n\n18:20 \u2014 630, 644.\n\n19:10\u201016 \u2014 268.\n\n20:1\u201017 \u2014 545.\n\n20:3 \u2014 319.\n\n20:8 \u2014 408, 558.\n\n20:12 \u2014 230.\n\n20:22 \u2014 13.\n\n20:23 \u2014 169.\n\n20:24 \u2014 169.\n\n20:25 \u2014 545.\n\n21:6 \u2014 1044.\n\n22:28 \u2014 307.\n\n23:7 \u2014 850.\n\n28:9\u201012 \u2014 775.\n\n28:22 \u2014 653.\n\n31:2, 3 \u2014 197.\n\n32:19 \u2014 540.\n\n32:24 \u2014 418.\n\n32:30, 32 \u2014 725.\n\n33:18 \u2014 256.\n\n33:18, 20 \u2014 150.\n\n33:31, 32 \u2014 837.\n\n34:10 \u2014 337.\n\n35:25 \u2014 4.\n\n36:21, 22 \u2014 367, 397, 653.\n\n39:7 \u2014 397.\n\nLeviticus.\n\n1:3 \u2014 554.\n\n1:4 \u2014 725.\n\n4:14, 20, 31 \u2014 554.\n\n4:20, 31, 35 \u2014 725.\n\n5:5, 6 \u2014 554.\n\n5:10\u201016 \u2014 725.\n\n5:11 \u2014 554.\n\n5:17 \u2014 652, 647, 718.\n\n6:7 \u2014 725.\n\n11:15 \u2014 932.\n\n11:44 \u2014 269.\n\n12:8 \u2014 554.\n\n13:45 \u2014 555.\n\n14:17 \u2014 732.\n\n16:1\u201034 \u2014 725.\n\n16:8 \u2014 448.\n\n16:16, 21 \u2014 552.\n\n16:21 \u2014 765.\n\n16:21, 22 \u2014 720.\n\n17:12 \u2014 725.\n\n20:27 \u2014 996.\n\n20:28 \u2014 995.\n\n22:4\u20106 \u2014 934.\n\nNumbers.\n\n5:1 \u2014 432.\n\n6:24\u201026 \u2014 318.\n\n6:24, 26 \u2014 774.\n\n7:89 \u2014 209.\n\n8:1 \u2014 209.\n\n12:6\u20108 \u2014 203.\n\n14:34 \u2014 718.\n\n16:22 \u2014 465, 484.\n\n15:35 \u2014 907.\n\n16:29 \u2014 656.\n\n16:30 \u2014 377.\n\n19:29, 33 \u2014 994.\n\n23:5 \u2014 197, 207.\n\n23:19 \u2014 258, 288.\n\n23:21 \u2014 454, 856.\n\n25:9 \u2014 227.\n\n25:13 \u2014 719, 1044.\n\n25:28 \u2014 552.\n\n27:3 \u2014 657.\n\n27:16 \u2014 465.\n\n32:23 \u2014 295.\n\n33:2 \u2014 169.\n\nDeuteronomy.\n\n1:6, 7 \u2014 549.\n\n1:39 \u2014 661.\n\n4:19 \u2014 448.\n\n6:4 \u2014 259.\n\n8:2 \u2014 423.\n\n8:3 \u2014 421.\n\n10:6 \u2014 994.\n\n16:2, 6 \u2014 719.\n\n17:3 \u2014 448.\n\n18:10, 11 \u2014 996.\n\n18:15 \u2014 139, 711.\n\n21:1\u20108 \u2014 725.\n\n21:23 \u2014 718.\n\n23:3 \u2014 1044.\n\n25:1 \u2014 850.\n\n29:29 \u2014 36, 364.\n\n32:4 \u2014 260, 290.\n\n32:40 \u2014 275.\n\n33:2 \u2014 447, 452.\n\nJoshua.\n\n2:1\u201024 \u2014 230.\n\n2:18 \u2014 234.\n\n7:20 \u2014 832.\n\n10:12, 13 \u2014 223.\n\n24:2 \u2014 1044.\n\nJudges.\n\n4:17\u201022 \u2014 230.\n\n5:24 \u2014 230.\n\n5:30 \u2014 231.\n\n6:17, 36\u201040 \u2014 116.\n\n9:14, 15 \u2014 241.\n\n13:20\u201022 \u2014 319.\n\n13:24, 25 \u2014 197.\n\n14:12 \u2014 408.\n\n20:18 \u2014 552.\n\n1 Samuel.\n\n1: \u2014 136.\n\n1:11 \u2014 448.\n\n6:19 \u2014 226.\n\n9:27 \u2014 199.\n\n10: \u2014 136.\n\n15:11 \u2014 258.\n\n15:24 \u2014 832.\n\n15:29 \u2014 258.\n\n16:1 \u2014 421.\n\n18:1 \u2014 799.\n\n18:10 \u2014 424.\n\n23:12 \u2014 282.\n\n24:18 \u2014 422.\n\n28:7\u201014 \u2014 995, 996.\n\n28:19 \u2014 994.\n\n29:4 \u2014 719.\n\n2 Samuel.\n\n6:7 \u2014 939.\n\n11:1\u20104 \u2014 230.\n\n12:23 \u2014 662.\n\n14:20 \u2014 445.\n\n16:10 \u2014 423.\n\n18:33 \u2014 769.\n\n23:23 \u2014 206.\n\n24:1 \u2014 423, 424.\n\n1 Kings.\n\n1:27 \u2014 278.\n\n8:27 \u2014 105, 254, 281, 523.\n\n8:46 \u2014 573.\n\n11:9 \u2014 294.\n\n12:15\u201024 \u2014 355.\n\n17:4, 9 \u2014 443.\n\n17:21 \u2014 483.\n\n18:36\u201038 \u2014 116.\n\n18:36\u201038 \u2014 116, 437.\n\n18:42\u201045 \u2014 433.\n\n19:5 \u2014 \u2014 452.\n\n19:15 \u2014 433.\n\n22: \u2014 136.\n\n22:19 \u2014 448.\n\n22:23 \u2014 457.\n\n2 Kings.\n\n2:11 \u2014 995, 996.\n\n4:1\u20107 \u2014 465.\n\n5:14 \u2014 934.\n\n5:26 \u2014 13.\n\n6:17 \u2014 451, 459.\n\n17:6, 24, 26, 28, 33 \u2014 167.\n\n19:35 \u2014 167.\n\n22:8 \u2014 167.\n\n23:2 \u2014 167.\n\n1 Chronicles.\n\n21:1 \u2014 448.\n\n22:14 \u2014 226.\n\n28:16 \u2014 225.\n\n2 Chronicles.\n\n6:2 \u2014 1044.\n\n13:3, 17 \u2014 226.\n\n16:12, 13 \u2014 439.\n\n17:14\u201019 \u2014 226.\n\n18:18 \u2014 448.\n\n29:27 \u2014 765.\n\n32:31 \u2014 423.\n\n34:19 \u2014 543, 836.\n\n36:22 \u2014 197.\n\nEzra.\n\n1:3 \u2014 27.\n\n4: \u2014 167.\n\n8:22 \u2014 899.\n\n9:6 \u2014 634.\n\nNehemiah.\n\n1:6 \u2014 594, 634.\n\n8:12, 18 \u2014 409.\n\n9:6 \u2014 412, 448.\n\nEsther.\n\n6:1 \u2014 429.\n\nJob.\n\n1:5 \u2014 725.\n\n1:6 \u2014 454.\n\n1:6\u201012 \u2014 448.\n\n1:9 \u2014 461.\n\n1:9, 11 \u2014 454.\n\n1:11 \u2014 459.\n\n1:12 \u2014 425.\n\n1:12, 16, 19 \u2014 455.\n\n2:4, 5 \u2014 454.\n\n2:5 \u2014 459.\n\n2:6 \u2014 425.\n\n2:7 \u2014 455.\n\n3:8 \u2014 406.\n\n3:13, 18 \u2014 994.\n\n4:18 \u2014 445.\n\n7:9 \u2014 994.\n\n7:20 \u2014 282, 412.\n\n11:7 \u2014 34.\n\n11:7, 9 \u2014 254.\n\n12:23 \u2014 421.\n\n14:4 \u2014 578, 661.\n\n14:5 \u2014 355.\n\n15:15 \u2014 445.\n\n19:25 \u2014 667.\n\n19:25, 27 \u2014 995, 996.\n\n21:7 \u2014 113.\n\n23:10 \u2014 431.\n\n23:13 \u2014 252, 359.\n\n23:13, 14 \u2014 259.\n\n24:1 \u2014 113.\n\n25:5 \u2014 445.\n\n26:6 \u2014 994.\n\n26:14 \u2014 143, 287.\n\n27:3 \u2014 483.\n\n27:5 \u2014 850.\n\n27:5, 6 \u2014 275.\n\n31:37 \u2014 275.\n\n32:8 \u2014 197, 198, 469, 483.\n\n32:18 \u2014 338.\n\n33:4 \u2014 484.\n\n34:14, 15 \u2014 338.\n\n37:5, 10 \u2014 421.\n\n38:7 \u2014 446, 451, 453.\n\n42:5, 6 \u2014 543, 832.\n\n42:6 \u2014 833.\n\n42:7\u20109 \u2014 725.\n\nPsalms.\n\n1:6 \u2014 780, 781.\n\n2:1\u20104 \u2014 541.\n\n2:6\u20108 \u2014 775.\n\n2:7 \u2014 318, 322, 340.\n\n2:7\u20108 \u2014 356.\n\n4:4 \u2014 234.\n\n4:8 \u2014 421.\n\n5:5 \u2014 290.\n\n5:12 \u2014 421.\n\n7:9\u201012 \u2014 290.\n\n7:11 \u2014 245, 258, 645.\n\n7:12, 13 \u2014 421.\n\n8: \u2014 706.\n\n8:3, 4 \u2014 249.\n\n8:4\u20108 \u2014 678.\n\n8:5 \u2014 515.\n\n8:5\u20106 \u2014 697.\n\n8:5\u20108 \u2014 524.\n\n8:6 \u2014 775.\n\n9:7 \u2014 1023.\n\n10:3 \u2014 817.\n\n11:6 \u2014 421.\n\n11:10 \u2014 63.\n\n14:1 \u2014 217.\n\n16: \u2014 675.\n\n16:7 \u2014 32.\n\n16:9\u201011 \u2014 995, 996.\n\n17: \u2014 113.\n\n17:13, 14 \u2014 423.\n\n18:24\u201026 \u2014 290.\n\n18:30 \u2014 260.\n\n19: \u2014 26.\n\n19:1 \u2014 27, 256.\n\n19:1\u20106 \u2014 26.\n\n19:7 \u2014 538.\n\n19:12 \u2014 553, 558, 578, 647.\n\n19:12,13 \u2014 650.\n\n19:13 \u2014 423.\n\n22:20 \u2014 458.\n\n22:26 \u2014 996.\n\n22:28 \u2014 421.\n\n23:2 \u2014 364.\n\n24:7, 8 \u2014 1044.\n\n25:11 \u2014 314, 401.\n\n25:14 \u2014 40.\n\n26:9 \u2014 1023.\n\n29:1, 2 \u2014 451.\n\n29:3 \u2014 424.\n\n31:5 \u2014 746.\n\n32: \u2014 431.\n\n32:1 \u2014 552.\n\n32:1, 2 \u2014 851.\n\n32:6 \u2014 700.\n\n32:8 \u2014 440.\n\n33:6 \u2014 318, 326, 448.\n\n33:9 \u2014 377.\n\n33:13\u201015 \u2014 282.\n\n33:14, 15 \u2014 422.\n\n34:7 \u2014 463.\n\n34:8 \u2014 4, 825.\n\n36:1 \u2014 40.\n\n36:6 \u2014 412.\n\n36:9 \u2014 350.\n\n37: \u2014 113.\n\n37:7 \u2014 439.\n\n40:5 \u2014 283.\n\n40:6\u20108 \u2014 234.\n\n42:6 \u2014 483.\n\n42:7 \u2014 694, 942.\n\n44:3 \u2014 369, 786.\n\n45:2 \u2014 678.\n\n45:6 \u2014 318.\n\n45:6, 7 \u2014 322.\n\n49: \u2014 113.\n\n49:15 \u2014 994.\n\n49:20 \u2014 642.\n\n50:5 \u2014 719.\n\n51: \u2014 833.\n\n51:1, 2, 10, 14 \u2014 832.\n\n51:2 \u2014 552.\n\n51:3, 7, 11 \u2014 832.\n\n51:4 \u2014 573, 646, 757.\n\n51:4\u20106 \u2014 645.\n\n51:5 \u2014 578, 661, 1043.\n\n51:6 \u2014 555, 558, 578, 647.\n\n51:6, 7 \u2014 578.\n\n51:10 \u2014 519, 782, 810, 829, 833.\n\n51:11 \u2014 317.\n\n51:17 \u2014 792.\n\n56:8 \u2014 282.\n\n58:3 \u2014 578.\n\n59:10 \u2014 364, 819.\n\n63:8 \u2014 421.\n\n66:7 \u2014 421.\n\n68:10 \u2014 421.\n\n68:17 \u2014 447, 1052.\n\n68:18 \u2014 309, 758.\n\n69:2 \u2014 942.\n\n69:9 \u2014 724.\n\n71:15 \u2014 256.\n\n72:6 \u2014 518.\n\n72:15 \u2014 314.\n\n72:18 \u2014 445.\n\n73: \u2014 113.\n\n74:5 \u2014 155.\n\n75:6, 7 \u2014 421.\n\n76:10 \u2014 424.\n\n77:19, 20 \u2014 119.\n\n78:25 \u2014 443, 445.\n\n78:41 \u2014 256.\n\n78:49 \u2014 457.\n\n81:12, 13 \u2014 423.\n\n82:1 \u2014 307.\n\n82:6 \u2014 380, 515.\n\n82:6, 7 \u2014 307.\n\n82:7 \u2014 614.\n\n84:11 \u2014 289, 336.\n\n85:4 \u2014 829.\n\n85:8 \u2014 850.\n\n85:9 \u2014 687.\n\n85:10 \u2014 298, 754.\n\n85:10, 11 \u2014 245.\n\n86:11 \u2014 346.\n\n87:4 \u2014 812.\n\n88:35 \u2014 399.\n\n89:3 \u2014 256.\n\n89:7 \u2014 450.\n\n90:2 \u2014 275, 377.\n\n90:7, 8 \u2014 658.\n\n90:7\u20109 \u2014 657.\n\n90:8 \u2014 577.\n\n90:16, 17 \u2014 819.\n\n91:11 \u2014 452.\n\n93:1 \u2014 223.\n\n94:9, 10 \u2014 68.\n\n94:10 \u2014 666.\n\n96:10 \u2014 403.\n\n97:2 \u2014 272, 292, 296.\n\n97:7 \u2014 306.\n\n97:10 \u2014 294, 646, 743.\n\n97:11 \u2014 667.\n\n99:4, 5, 9 \u2014 296.\n\n101:4 \u2014 780.\n\n101:5, 6 \u2014 294.\n\n102:13, 14 \u2014 275.\n\n102:27 \u2014 257, 275.\n\n103:19 \u2014 421.\n\n103:20 \u2014 445, 451.\n\n104: \u2014 412.\n\n104:4 \u2014 451.\n\n104:14 \u2014 421.\n\n104:16 \u2014 421.\n\n104:21, 28 \u2014 421.\n\n104:24 \u2014 282.\n\n104:26 \u2014 412.\n\n104:29, 30 \u2014 412.\n\n105:15 \u2014 710, 856.\n\n106:12, 13 \u2014 837.\n\n106:13 \u2014 440.\n\n106:30 \u2014 737.\n\n107:20 \u2014 320.\n\n107:23, 28 \u2014 431.\n\n110:3 \u2014 784, 792, 830.\n\n113:4\u20106 \u2014 256.\n\n113:5 \u2014 105, 280.\n\n113:5, 6 \u2014 249, 255, 288.\n\n114:1 \u2014 401, 788.\n\n115:3 \u2014 122, 287.\n\n116:1\u20108 \u2014 437.\n\n116:15 \u2014 983.\n\n118: \u2014 675.\n\n118:22 \u2014 795.\n\n118:22, 23 \u2014 138.\n\n119:18 \u2014 35.\n\n119:36 \u2014 519, 819, 825.\n\n119:89 \u2014 298, 320.\n\n119:89\u201091 \u2014 355.\n\n119:96 \u2014 542.\n\n121:3 \u2014 421.\n\n123:1 \u2014 280.\n\n124:2 \u2014 425.\n\n124:4, 5 \u2014 942.\n\n130:4 \u2014 855.\n\n132:1 \u2014 1043.\n\n135:6, 7 \u2014 421.\n\n138:2 \u2014 288.\n\n139:2 \u2014 282.\n\n139:6 \u2014 282.\n\n139:7 \u2014 105, 280, 316.\n\n139:12 \u2014 283.\n\n139:13, 14 \u2014 491.\n\n139:15, 16 \u2014 495.\n\n139:16 \u2014 421.\n\n139:17, 18 \u2014 284.\n\n140:5 \u2014 377.\n\n143:2 \u2014 573, 850.\n\n143:11 \u2014 397.\n\n144:12 \u2014 898.\n\n145:3 \u2014 254.\n\n145:5 \u2014 292.\n\n146:4 \u2014 994.\n\n147:4 \u2014 282.\n\n147:15\u201018 \u2014 320.\n\n147:20 \u2014 779.\n\n148:2\u20105 \u2014 444.\n\n149:6 \u2014 646.\n\nProverbs.\n\n1:23 \u2014 829.\n\n3:6 \u2014 440.\n\n3:19 \u2014 320.\n\n4:18 \u2014 827.\n\n5:22 \u2014 633, 652.\n\n8:1 \u2014 320.\n\n8:22, 30, 31 \u2014 320.\n\n8:22\u201031 \u2014 341.\n\n8:23 \u2014 309, 378.\n\n8:36 \u2014 786.\n\n14:9 \u2014 649.\n\n14:13 \u2014 294.\n\n16:1 \u2014 422.\n\n16:4 \u2014 397.\n\n16:14 \u2014 720.\n\n16:32 \u2014 288.\n\n16:33 \u2014 421.\n\n17:15 \u2014 850.\n\n19:21 \u2014 423.\n\n20:9 \u2014 573.\n\n20:24 \u2014 423.\n\n20:27 \u2014 22, 486.\n\n21:1 \u2014 423, 784.\n\n30:4 \u2014 318, 341.\n\n31:4 \u2014 231.\n\n31:6\u20107 \u2014 231.\n\nEcclesiastes.\n\n2:11 \u2014 404.\n\n3:21 \u2014 485.\n\n7:20 \u2014 573.\n\n7:29 \u2014 517.\n\n9:10 \u2014 994.\n\n11:3 \u2014 1001.\n\n12:7 \u2014 469, 483, 490, 991, 1000.\n\nSong Of Solomon.\n\n1:4 \u2014 829.\n\nIsaiah.\n\n1:1 \u2014 239.\n\n1:5 \u2014 553.\n\n4:5 \u2014 377.\n\n4:11 \u2014 661.\n\n5:4 \u2014 404, 792.\n\n5:13 \u2014 135.\n\n5:16 \u2014 269.\n\n5:18 \u2014 650.\n\n5:23 \u2014 850.\n\n6:1 \u2014 309.\n\n6:3 \u2014 256, 268, 296, 318.\n\n6:5 \u2014 555, 634.\n\n6:5, 7 \u2014 268.\n\n6:8 \u2014 318.\n\n7: \u2014 136.\n\n7:9 \u2014 850.\n\n7:10\u201013 \u2014 437.\n\n7:14\u201016 \u2014 138, 1007.\n\n8: \u2014 136.\n\n8:20 \u2014 114, 440.\n\n9:6 \u2014 322, 680, 697, 797, 811.\n\n9:6, 7 \u2014 138, 310.\n\n10:5 \u2014 424.\n\n10:5, 7 \u2014 442.\n\n13:16 \u2014 136.\n\n14:7 \u2014 221.\n\n14:12 \u2014 518.\n\n14:26, 27 \u2014 355.\n\n17:1 \u2014 136.\n\n24:22 \u2014 139.\n\n25:4 \u2014 669.\n\n25:7 \u2014 666.\n\n26:19 \u2014 995, 996.\n\n28:16 \u2014 795, 850.\n\n28:21 \u2014 126, 1053.\n\n31:6 \u2014 829.\n\n37:34\u201037 \u2014 136.\n\n38:17, 18 \u2014 657.\n\n40:3 \u2014 309, 506.\n\n40:18 \u2014 119, 288.\n\n40:15, 16 \u2014 399.\n\n40:66 \u2014 239.\n\n41:4 \u2014 275.\n\n41:8 \u2014 136.\n\n41:20 \u2014 377.\n\n41:21, 22 \u2014 285.\n\n41:23 \u2014 135.\n\n42:1 \u2014 138, 485.\n\n42:1\u20107 \u2014 137, 697.\n\n42:9 \u2014 135.\n\n42:16 \u2014 426, 441.\n\n42:19 \u2014 649.\n\n42:21 \u2014 740, 749.\n\n43:7 \u2014 397.\n\n44:6 \u2014 259.\n\n44:24 \u2014 286.\n\n44:28 \u2014 136, 197, 282, 355.\n\n45:5 \u2014 197, 421.\n\n45:7, 8 \u2014 377.\n\n45:22 \u2014 791.\n\n46:9, 10 \u2014 282.\n\n46:10, 11 \u2014 355.\n\n48:11 \u2014 397.\n\n48:16 \u2014 318.\n\n48:18 \u2014 284.\n\n49:1\u201012 \u2014 696, 697.\n\n49:50, 61 \u2014 675.\n\n50:2 \u2014 850.\n\n52:2 \u2014 678.\n\n52:10 \u2014 256.\n\n53: \u2014 137, 138.\n\n53:1\u201012 \u2014 725.\n\n53:4, 10 \u2014 423.\n\n53:5 \u2014 732.\n\n53:5, 6 \u2014 720.\n\n53:6 \u2014 265.\n\n53:6\u201012 \u2014 719.\n\n53:10 \u2014 680, 797.\n\n53:10, 11 \u2014 697.\n\n53:11 \u2014 850.\n\n53:12 \u2014 774.\n\n54:5 \u2014 796.\n\n55:6 \u2014 791.\n\n57:2 \u2014 439.\n\n57:15 \u2014 105, 280.\n\n57:16 \u2014 491.\n\n57:19 \u2014 377.\n\n59:2 \u2014 198, 983.\n\n59:20 \u2014 829.\n\n60:21 \u2014 397.\n\n61:1 \u2014 137.\n\n61:3 \u2014 397.\n\n63:7, 10 \u2014 318.\n\n63:9 \u2014 266.\n\n63:10 \u2014 324.\n\n64:4 \u2014 421.\n\n65:12 \u2014 791.\n\n65:17 \u2014 377.\n\n65:22 \u2014 888.\n\n65:24 \u2014 364.\n\n66:1 \u2014 254.\n\n66:11 \u2014 523.\n\n66:13 \u2014 323.\n\nJeremiah.\n\n1:4 \u2014 27.\n\n1:5 \u2014 421.\n\n3:15 \u2014 16.\n\n3:20 \u2014 796.\n\n3:25 \u2014 394.\n\n9:9 \u2014 485.\n\n9:23, 24 \u2014 245.\n\n9:24 \u2014 3.\n\n10:10 \u2014 245, 251.\n\n10:23 \u2014 423.\n\n10:24 \u2014 272, 653.\n\n13:21 \u2014 578.\n\n13:23 \u2014 810.\n\n14:20 \u2014 594.\n\n17:9 \u2014 553, 578.\n\n18:8 \u2014 136.\n\n20:7 \u2014 240.\n\n23:6 \u2014 943.\n\n23:23, 24 \u2014 105, 280.\n\n23:29 \u2014 811\n\n24:7 \u2014 4, 825.\n\n25:5 \u2014 833.\n\n26:13, 19 \u2014 136.\n\n31:3 \u2014 788, 1044.\n\n31:18 \u2014 829.\n\n31:22 \u2014 377.\n\n31:33 \u2014 810.\n\n32:18 \u2014 634.\n\n36:23 \u2014 540.\n\n44:4 \u2014 295, 418, 652.\n\n45:5 \u2014 410.\n\n55:34, 44 \u2014 241.\n\nLamentations.\n\n1:12 \u2014 757.\n\n3:39\u201045 \u2014 634.\n\n5:7 \u2014 718.\n\n5:21 \u2014 829.\n\nEzekiel.\n\n1: \u2014 449.\n\n1:5, 12 \u2014 449.\n\n2:7 \u2014 789.\n\n10: \u2014 449.\n\n11:19 \u2014 810, 829.\n\n14:6 \u2014 829.\n\n18:4 \u2014 633.\n\n18:31 \u2014 829.\n\n18:32 \u2014 829.\n\n20:5 \u2014 630.\n\n26:7\u201014 \u2014 136.\n\n28:14\u201019 \u2014 450.\n\n28:22 \u2014 272.\n\n29:17\u201020 \u2014 136.\n\n32:21 \u2014 994.\n\n33:9, 11 \u2014 829.\n\n33:11 \u2014 791.\n\n36:21, 22 \u2014 272.\n\n36:26 \u2014 829.\n\n37:1\u201014 \u2014 995, 996.\n\n37:6 \u2014 449.\n\n37:9\u201014 \u2014 339.\n\nDaniel.\n\n2:28, 36 \u2014 711.\n\n2:45 \u2014 141.\n\n3:18 \u2014 426.\n\n3:25, 28 \u2014 319.\n\n4:31 \u2014 209.\n\n4:35 \u2014 355, 431.\n\n6:22 \u2014 452.\n\n7:10 \u2014 449.\n\n7:13 \u2014 141, 678, 682.\n\n9:27 \u2014 141.\n\n10:14 \u2014 139.\n\n10:19 \u2014 445.\n\n11:31 \u2014 141.\n\n11:36 \u2014 138, 454.\n\n12:1 \u2014 141.\n\n12:2 \u2014 1000, 1018.\n\n12:2, 3, 13 \u2014 995, 996.\n\n12:3 \u2014 850.\n\n12:8, 9 \u2014 139.\n\nHosea.\n\n1:7 \u2014 318.\n\n2:2\u20105 \u2014 796.\n\n2:6 \u2014 423.\n\n4:17 \u2014 424, 652, 790.\n\n4:18 \u2014 792.\n\n6:7 \u2014 614.\n\n8:1, 2 \u2014 614.\n\n11:1 \u2014 138, 235.\n\n11:8 \u2014 790, 1053.\n\n12:3, 4 \u2014 463.\n\n13:5 \u2014 780.\n\n13:9 \u2014 1050.\n\nJoel.\n\n2:12\u201014 \u2014 829.\n\n2:28 \u2014 587.\n\nAmos.\n\n1: \u2014 136.\n\n1:2 \u2014 135.\n\n2: \u2014 136.\n\n3:2 \u2014 780, 781.\n\n6:8 \u2014 485.\n\n9:9 136.\n\n9:14 136.\n\nJonah.\n\n2:9 137.\n\n3:3 241.\n\n3:4 136.\n\n3:4, 10 \u2014 258.\n\n3:10 136.\n\n4:11 661.\n\nMicah.\n\n3:12 138.\n\n5:2 322.\n\n6:8 299.\n\n7:3 650.\n\n7:18 855.\n\nNahum.\n\n1:7 \u2014 780.\n\nHabakkuk.\n\n1:13 \u2014 418.\n\n2:4 \u2014 850.\n\n3:4 \u2014 143.\n\n3:20 \u2014 713.\n\nHaggai.\n\n1:13 \u2014 319.\n\nZechariah.\n\n3:1 \u2014 454.\n\n3:1\u20103 \u2014 448.\n\n3:2 \u2014 454, 458, 856.\n\n4:2, 3 \u2014 888.\n\n5:1 \u2014 355.\n\n6:8 \u2014 753.\n\n9:1\u20104 \u2014 239.\n\n12:1 \u2014 469, 483, 491, 991.\n\n12:10 \u2014 717.\n\nMalachi.\n\n1:6 \u2014 638, 639.\n\n2:10 \u2014 474.\n\n2:15 \u2014 256.\n\n3:1 \u2014 322.\n\n3:6 \u2014 257, 259.\n\n3:10 \u2014 287, 438.\n\n3:16 \u2014 282.\n\n4:4 \u2014 114.\n\nMatthew.\n\n1:1 \u2014 225.\n\n1:1\u201016 \u2014 687.\n\n1:1\u201017 \u2014 673.\n\n1:12 \u2014 826.\n\n1:20 319, \u2014 686.\n\n1:22, 23 \u2014 138.\n\n2:15 138, \u2014 235.\n\n2:22 \u2014 717.\n\n3:1\u201012 \u2014 836.\n\n3:2, 3, 6 \u2014 945.\n\n3:3 \u2014 309.\n\n3:6 \u2014 934.\n\n3:6\u201011 \u2014 934.\n\n3:7 \u2014 981\n\n3:8 \u2014 835.\n\n3:9 \u2014 287.\n\n3:11 \u2014 287, 935.\n\n3:13 \u2014 940.\n\n3:13, 17 \u2014 932.\n\n3:14 \u2014 674.\n\n3:15 \u2014 717, 761, 853, 943.\n\n3:16 \u2014 696.\n\n3:16, 17 \u2014 325.\n\n3:17 \u2014 148, 209, 216, 341, 762.\n\n4:1\u201011 \u2014 677.\n\n4:2 \u2014 674.\n\n4:3 \u2014 461.\n\n4:3, 6, 9 \u2014 455.\n\n4:4 \u2014 16, 412.\n\n4:4, 6, 7 \u2014 199.\n\n4:6, 7 \u2014 217.\n\n4:10 \u2014 677.\n\n4:11 \u2014 452, 453.\n\n5:1 \u2014 227.\n\n5:1\u201012 \u2014 554.\n\n5:3 \u2014 669.\n\n5:7 \u2014 37.\n\n5\u20108: \u2014 545.\n\n5:8 \u2014 4, 67, 246, 524, 825.\n\n5:10 \u2014 230.\n\n5\u20107: \u2014 711.\n\n5:17 \u2014 718.\n\n5:17, 18 \u2014 545.\n\n5:18 \u2014 199, 288.\n\n5:19 \u2014 939.\n\n5:21, 22 \u2014 545, 645.\n\n5:22 \u2014 553.\n\n5:27, 28 \u2014 545.\n\n5:23, 24 \u2014 719, 924.\n\n5:22, 28 \u2014 545.\n\n5:28 \u2014 553.\n\n5:32 \u2014 242.\n\n5:33, 34 \u2014 545.\n\n5:34 \u2014 306.\n\n5:38, 39 \u2014 545.\n\n5:39\u201042 \u2014 546.\n\n5:44 \u2014 264.\n\n5:44, 45 \u2014 289, 475.\n\n5:45 \u2014 421.\n\n5:48 \u2014 260, 290, 302, 543, 545.\n\n6:8 \u2014 282, 421.\n\n6:9, 10 \u2014 272.\n\n6:10 \u2014 368, 434, 450, 792.\n\n6:12 \u2014 645, 835.\n\n6:12\u201014 \u2014 573.\n\n6:13 \u2014 256, 450.\n\n6:16 \u2014 288.\n\n6:20 \u2014 981.\n\n6:22, 23 \u2014 486, 501.\n\n6:24 \u2014 811.\n\n6:26 \u2014 421, 440.\n\n6:30 \u2014 421.\n\n6:32, 33 \u2014 421.\n\n6:33 \u2014 289, 401, 810.\n\n7:11 \u2014 578.\n\n7:22 \u2014 117, 780.\n\n7:23 \u2014 780.\n\n8:11 \u2014 772.\n\n8:11, 12 \u2014 842, 843.\n\n8:22 \u2014 659, 902, 992.\n\n8:24 \u2014 674.\n\n8:28 \u2014 227, 446.\n\n8:29 \u2014 457, 1002\n\n8:31 \u2014 445.\n\n9:2 \u2014 826.\n\n9:4 \u2014 310.\n\n9:5 \u2014 128.\n\n9:6 \u2014 682.\n\n9:12 \u2014 192.\n\n9:12, 13 \u2014 574.\n\n9:24 \u2014 1000.\n\n9:36 \u2014 674.\n\n9:56 \u2014 129.\n\n10:1 \u2014 201.\n\n10:15 \u2014 649, 1045.\n\n10:17, 19, 20 \u2014 207.\n\n10:20 \u2014 206.\n\n10:26 \u2014 283.\n\n10:28 \u2014 459, 483, 660, 991, 1055.\n\n10:29 \u2014 282, 421, 851, 991.\n\n10:30 \u2014 282, 420, 421.\n\n10:32 \u2014 645, 889.\n\n10:38 \u2014 718, 762.\n\n10:40 \u2014 516.\n\n10:41 \u2014 951.\n\n10:42 \u2014 948.\n\n11:3, 4, 5 \u2014 156.\n\n11:9 \u2014 710.\n\n11:10 \u2014 199.\n\n11:12 \u2014 830.\n\n11:19 \u2014 320.\n\n11:21 \u2014 780.\n\n11:23 \u2014 282.\n\n11:24 \u2014 638.\n\n11:25, 26 \u2014 789.\n\n11:27 \u2014 163, 246, 334, 681, 691.\n\n11:28 \u2014 611, 683, 744, 791.\n\n11:28, 29 \u2014 838.\n\n11:29 \u2014 189.\n\n12:10\u201013 \u2014 541.\n\n12:28 \u2014 129, 316.\n\n12:31 \u2014 324.\n\n12:31, 32 \u2014 464, 650, 1046.\n\n12:32 \u2014 652.\n\n12:33 \u2014 507, 826.\n\n12:33\u201035 \u2014 810.\n\n12:34 \u2014 578.\n\n12:34, 35 \u2014 889.\n\n12:36 \u2014 554.\n\n12:37 \u2014 851.\n\n12:39 \u2014 126, 137, 438.\n\n12:41 \u2014 948.\n\n12:43 \u2014 445.\n\n12:43, 45 \u2014 458.\n\n12:45 \u2014 806.\n\n13:5, 6 \u2014 589.\n\n13:19 \u2014 27, 450, 506.\n\n13:20 \u2014 281.\n\n13:20, 21 \u2014 837.\n\n13:23 \u2014 462.\n\n13:24 \u2014 310.\n\n13:24\u201030 \u2014 354.\n\n13:28 \u2014 588.\n\n13:30 \u2014 234.\n\n13:30, 38 \u2014 1008.\n\n13:31, 32 \u2014 1008.\n\n13:33 \u2014 234.\n\n13:38 \u2014 592, 887.\n\n13:39 \u2014 454, 1044.\n\n13:52 \u2014 19, 41.\n\n13:57 \u2014 711.\n\n14:19 \u2014 465.\n\n14:23 \u2014 674.\n\n15:2 \u2014 934.\n\n15:13, 14 \u2014 42.\n\n15:18 \u2014 506.\n\n15:19 \u2014 553, 810.\n\n16:15 \u2014 851.\n\n16:18 \u2014 887.\n\n16:18, 19 \u2014 909.\n\n16:25 \u2014 642.\n\n16:26 \u2014 717.\n\n16:27 \u2014 1011.\n\n16:27, 28 \u2014 1023.\n\n16:28 \u2014 1003.\n\n17:1\u20108 \u2014 678.\n\n17:2 \u2014 696.\n\n17:5 \u2014 210.\n\n17:8 \u2014 234.\n\n17:15, 18 \u2014 456.\n\n17:17 \u2014 126.\n\n17:20 \u2014 900.\n\n17:34 \u2014 1021.\n\n18:5, 6, 10, 14 \u2014 661.\n\n18:10 \u2014 450, 451, 452, 954.\n\n18:14 \u2014 662, 851.\n\n18:15\u201017 \u2014 924.\n\n18:17 \u2014 890, 892, 907.\n\n18:18 \u2014 925.\n\n18:19 \u2014 927.\n\n18:19, 20 \u2014 774.\n\n18:20 \u2014 951.\n\n18:24, 25 \u2014 749.\n\n19:3\u201010 \u2014 242.\n\n19:8 \u2014 545.\n\n19:14 \u2014 648, 661, 951.\n\n19:17 \u2014 894.\n\n19:19 \u2014 264.\n\n19:26 \u2014 287.\n\n19:29 \u2014 1045.\n\n20:3 \u2014 489.\n\n20:12\u201015 \u2014 779.\n\n20:13, 15 \u2014 786.\n\n20:17\u201023 \u2014 932.\n\n20:22 \u2014 743.\n\n20:28 \u2014 483, 673, 697, 717, 750.\n\n20:30 \u2014 210, 227.\n\n21:2 \u2014 681.\n\n21:21 \u2014 437.\n\n21:25 \u2014 931.\n\n21:42 \u2014 138.\n\n22:3 \u2014 791.\n\n22:21 \u2014 898.\n\n22:23 \u2014 131.\n\n22:30 \u2014 445, 447.\n\n22:31, 32 \u2014 995, 996.\n\n22:32 \u2014 999, 1017.\n\n22:37 \u2014 302.\n\n22:37\u201039 \u2014 572.\n\n22:37\u201040 \u2014 545.\n\n22:42 \u2014 669.\n\n22:43 \u2014 314.\n\n23:8, 10 \u2014 898.\n\n23:23 \u2014 638.\n\n23:32 \u2014 648.\n\n23:33 \u2014 1055.\n\n23:35 \u2014 315.\n\n23:37 \u2014 1005.\n\n23:37, 38 \u2014 1053.\n\n24: \u2014 138.\n\n24:2 \u2014 681.\n\n24:5, 11, 12, 24 \u2014 1008.\n\n24:14 \u2014 1008.\n\n24:15 \u2014 141.\n\n24:23 \u2014 1003.\n\n24:29, 30 \u2014 1009.\n\n24:30 \u2014 1003.\n\n24:34 \u2014 138.\n\n24:35 \u2014 350.\n\n24:36 \u2014 445, 1006.\n\n25: \u2014 138.\n\n25:1\u201013 \u2014 234.\n\n25:10 \u2014 1001, 1046.\n\n25:19 \u2014 1006.\n\n25:24 \u2014 293.\n\n25:27 \u2014 540.\n\n25:29 \u2014 986.\n\n25:31 \u2014 138, 315, 453, 1004.\n\n25:31, 32 \u2014 310, 683, 775.\n\n25:31\u201039 \u2014 1011.\n\n25:31, 46 \u2014 1023.\n\n25:32 \u2014 163.\n\n25:34 \u2014 790.\n\n25:41 \u2014 448, 455, 457, 464, 660, 790.\n\n25:41\u201046 \u2014 992.\n\n25:45 \u2014 648.\n\n25:45, 46 \u2014 662.\n\n25:46 \u2014 293, 1044, 1045, 1055.\n\n26:24 \u2014 365, 1043.\n\n26:26, 28 \u2014 674.\n\n26:26, 29 \u2014 901.\n\n26:27 \u2014 960.\n\n26:28 \u2014 210, 719.\n\n26:29 \u2014 959, 960.\n\n26:34 \u2014 681.\n\n26:37 \u2014 325.\n\n26:38 \u2014 674.\n\n26:39 \u2014 298, 438, 698, 718, 762.\n\n26:39, 53 \u2014 677.\n\n26:53 \u2014 448, 703.\n\n26:53, 54 \u2014 755.\n\n26:60\u201075 \u2014 230.\n\n26:63\u201064 \u2014 313.\n\n26:64 \u2014 141.\n\n27:3, 4 \u2014 832.\n\n27:9 \u2014 226.\n\n27:18 \u2014 310.\n\n27:37 \u2014 228.\n\n27:42 \u2014 677, 762.\n\n27:46 \u2014 742, 743, 762.\n\n27:50 \u2014 483.\n\n28:1 \u2014 410.\n\n28:2 \u2014 453.\n\n28:4 \u2014 445.\n\n28:18 \u2014 163, 775.\n\n28:18\u201020 \u2014 708.\n\n28:19 \u2014 219, 316, 895, 899, 931, 942, 945, 948, 951, 952.\n\n28:19, 20 \u2014 905, 916, 932.\n\n28:20 \u2014 163, 242, 310, 460, 685, 697, 699, 801, 846, 998.\n\n28:29 \u2014 324.\n\n28:4\u20106 \u2014 1003.\n\nMark.\n\n1:5, 8 \u2014 935.\n\n1:5, 9 \u2014 934.\n\n1:9, 10 \u2014 935.\n\n1:41 \u2014 118.\n\n2:7 \u2014 682.\n\n2:27 \u2014 409, 546.\n\n3:5 \u2014 674, 677.\n\n3:11, 12 \u2014 456.\n\n3:17 \u2014 152.\n\n3:29 \u2014 463, 650, 1041, 1046, 1048, 1055.\n\n4:15 \u2014 455.\n\n4:39 \u2014 682.\n\n5:2, 4 \u2014 456.\n\n5:9 \u2014 455.\n\n5:19 \u2014 190.\n\n5:39, 40 \u2014 659.\n\n5:41 \u2014 696.\n\n7:4 \u2014 934.\n\n7:13 \u2014 199.\n\n7:14 \u2014 738.\n\n7:15 \u2014 546.\n\n7:34 \u2014 126.\n\n8:4 \u2014 190.\n\n8:27, 29 \u2014 175.\n\n8:36, 37 \u2014 485.\n\n8:38 \u2014 450.\n\n9:24 \u2014 848.\n\n9:25 \u2014 456.\n\n9:29 \u2014 458.\n\n9:43, 48 \u2014 1046.\n\n10:2 \u2014 546.\n\n10:5 \u2014 545.\n\n10:11 \u2014 242.\n\n10:18 \u2014 302.\n\n10:21 \u2014 638, 674.\n\n10:21, 22 \u2014 571.\n\n10:23 \u2014 269.\n\n10:32 \u2014 678, 760.\n\n10:38 \u2014 940, 942.\n\n10:39 \u2014 936.\n\n10:45 \u2014 717.\n\n11:24 \u2014 433.\n\n12:29, 30 \u2014 543.\n\n12:30 \u2014 485.\n\n12:30, 31 \u2014 543.\n\n13:19 \u2014 378.\n\n13:27 \u2014 780.\n\n13:32 \u2014 314, 446, 677, 695, 1006.\n\n14:15 \u2014 681.\n\n14:23 \u2014 960.\n\n14:24 \u2014 210, 959.\n\n14:25 \u2014 959.\n\n14:27 \u2014 199.\n\n15:23 \u2014 742.\n\n15:26 \u2014 228.\n\n15:45 \u2014 131.\n\n16:9\u201020 \u2014 239, 573, 931.\n\n16:15 \u2014 604, 791.\n\n16:16 \u2014 573, 662, 931.\n\n16:19 \u2014 708.\n\nLuke.\n\n1:1\u20104 \u2014 238.\n\n1:6 \u2014 852.\n\n1:34, 35 \u2014 675.\n\n1:35 \u2014 309, 325, 339, 677, 686, 689.\n\n1:37 \u2014 854.\n\n1:38 \u2014 934.\n\n1:46 \u2014 485.\n\n1:52 \u2014 421.\n\n2:11 \u2014 776.\n\n2:13 \u2014 448, 453.\n\n2:14 \u2014 397.\n\n2:21 \u2014 943.\n\n2:21, 22, 23, 24 \u2014 761.\n\n2:24 \u2014 554, 943.\n\n2:25 \u2014 1007.\n\n2:34 \u2014 789.\n\n2:40, 46, 49, 52 \u2014 675.\n\n3:18 \u2014 836.\n\n3:21, 22 \u2014 325.\n\n3:22 \u2014 216.\n\n3:23\u201038 \u2014 673.\n\n3:38 \u2014 474, 475.\n\n4:4\u201012 \u2014 199.\n\n4:13 \u2014 677.\n\n4:14 \u2014 325.\n\n4:22 \u2014 678.\n\n4:25\u201027 \u2014 786.\n\n4:34 \u2014 445.\n\n5:1 \u2014 27.\n\n5:6\u20109 \u2014 681.\n\n5:8 \u2014 296, 555.\n\n5:20, 21 \u2014 696.\n\n6:17 \u2014 227.\n\n6:19 \u2014 696.\n\n6:43\u201045 \u2014 578.\n\n7:13 \u2014 130.\n\n7:29 \u2014 851.\n\n7:35 \u2014 320.\n\n8:30, 31 \u2014 456.\n\n9:22\u201024 \u2014 716.\n\n9:24 \u2014 943.\n\n10:17, 18 \u2014 456.\n\n10:27 \u2014 346.\n\n10:30\u201037 \u2014 574.\n\n10:31 \u2014 428.\n\n11:11 \u2014 717.\n\n11:13 \u2014 573, 895.\n\n11:20 \u2014 118.\n\n11:27 \u2014 448.\n\n11:27, 28 \u2014 208.\n\n11:29 \u2014 131.\n\n11:49 \u2014 320.\n\n12:4, 5 \u2014 1055.\n\n12:12 \u2014 324, 805.\n\n12:14 \u2014 241.\n\n12:47, 48 \u2014 648, 649, 1050.\n\n12:48 \u2014 558.\n\n12:49 \u2014 936.\n\n12:50 \u2014 645, 718, 762, 932, 936, 940, 942.\n\n12:56 \u2014 760.\n\n13:2, 3 \u2014 630.\n\n13:4 \u2014 645.\n\n13:11, 16 \u2014 455.\n\n13:17 \u2014 1046.\n\n13:23, 24 \u2014 35.\n\n13:33 \u2014 711.\n\n14:23 \u2014 234, 791.\n\n15: \u2014 516, 784.\n\n15:8 \u2014 515.\n\n15:10, 24 \u2014 836.\n\n15:11\u201032 \u2014 241, 474.\n\n15:12, 13 \u2014 572.\n\n15:17 \u2014 338, 558.\n\n15:18 \u2014 833.\n\n15:23, 24 \u2014 856.\n\n15:32 \u2014 659, 992.\n\n16:1\u20108 \u2014 241.\n\n16:18 \u2014 242.\n\n16:22 \u2014 452, 999.\n\n16:23 \u2014 994, 999.\n\n16:23 \u2014 994, 999.\n\n16:26 \u2014 1001, 1042, 1046.\n\n16:32 \u2014 446.\n\n17:3 \u2014 835.\n\n17:5 \u2014 804, 848.\n\n17:7\u201010 \u2014 293.\n\n17:20 \u2014 892.\n\n18:7 \u2014 780.\n\n18:13 \u2014 556, 720, 741, 834.\n\n18:23 \u2014 832.\n\n18:35 \u2014 210, 227.\n\n19:8 \u2014 835.\n\n19:8, 9 \u2014 836.\n\n19:23 \u2014 541.\n\n19:38 \u2014 776.\n\n20:13 \u2014 681.\n\n20:36 \u2014 445, 447.\n\n21:8\u201028 \u2014 1009.\n\n21:12 \u2014 1008.\n\n21:19 \u2014 959.\n\n22:19 \u2014 960.\n\n22:20 \u2014 210.\n\n22:22 \u2014 355.\n\n22:31 \u2014 457.\n\n22:31, 32 \u2014 774, 831.\n\n22:31, 40 \u2014 458.\n\n22:37 \u2014 720.\n\n22:42 \u2014 695, 936.\n\n22:43 \u2014 445, 453.\n\n22:44 \u2014 675.\n\n23:15 \u2014 760.\n\n23:34 \u2014 325, 462, 463, 649, 677, 774.\n\n23:38 \u2014 228.\n\n23:42 \u2014 833.\n\n23:43 \u2014 821, 994, 998.\n\n23:43\u201046 \u2014 998, 999.\n\n23:46 \u2014 311, 746.\n\n24:25 \u2014 4.\n\n24:26 \u2014 646, 764.\n\n24:27 \u2014 114, 137.\n\n24:33 \u2014 905.\n\n24:36 \u2014 1018.\n\n24:39 \u2014 131, 674, 691.\n\nJohn.\n\n1:1 \u2014 2, 151, 305, 309, 335, 336, 337, 378, 388.\n\n1:1, 2 \u2014 326.\n\n1:1\u20104 \u2014 109.\n\n1:1\u201018 \u2014 320.\n\n1:3 \u2014 275, 310, 326.\n\n1:3, 4 \u2014 311\n\n1:4 \u2014 309, 584, 694.\n\n1:4, 9 \u2014 715.\n\n1:5 \u2014 603.\n\n1:9 \u2014 68, 109, 134, 197, 571, 603, 666, 681, 744.\n\n1:12 \u2014 475, 839, 935.\n\n1:12, 13 \u2014 474, 793, 825, 842.\n\n1:13 \u2014 495, 598, 642, 782, 811, 819.\n\n1:14 \u2014 109, 160, 234, 322, 341, 673, 684, 686, 687.\n\n1:15 \u2014 310.\n\n1:16 \u2014 256, 804, 805.\n\n1:17 \u2014 262, 548.\n\n1:18 \u2014 14, 246, 306, 322, 326, 337, 338, 341, 349.\n\n1:19 \u2014 109.\n\n1:23 \u2014 938.\n\n1:25 \u2014 931.\n\n1:26 \u2014 935.\n\n1:29 \u2014 206, 554, 646, 647, 719, 728, 744, 757.\n\n1:31 \u2014 935, 943.\n\n1:33 \u2014 935.\n\n1:41 \u2014 137.\n\n1:42, 43 \u2014 681.\n\n1:47\u201050 \u2014 681.\n\n1:50 \u2014 256.\n\n2:2 \u2014 685, 771.\n\n2:7\u201010 \u2014 465.\n\n2:11, 24, 25 \u2014 696.\n\n2:19 \u2014 131.\n\n2:19, 21 \u2014 234.\n\n2:21 \u2014 131.\n\n2:23, 24 \u2014 837.\n\n2:24 \u2014 838.\n\n2:24, 25 \u2014 310, 682.\n\n3:2 \u2014 837.\n\n3:3 \u2014 36, 810, 818, 887.\n\n3:3\u20105 \u2014 573.\n\n3:5 \u2014 642, 811, 821, 822, 887, 945.\n\n3:5, 6, 10\u201013 \u2014 842.\n\n3:6 \u2014 495, 496, 578, 599, 661, 687.\n\n3:7 \u2014 677, 810, 814.\n\n3:7, 14 \u2014 729.\n\n3:8 \u2014 258, 287, 316, 324, 338, 340, 782, 810, 811.\n\n3:11 \u2014 684.\n\n3:12 \u2014 681.\n\n3:13 \u2014 681, 686.\n\n3:14 \u2014 751, 760.\n\n3:14, 15 \u2014 733.\n\n3:16 \u2014 245, 264, 289, 856, 935.\n\n3:18 \u2014 645.\n\n3:18, 19 \u2014 1023.\n\n3:18\u201020 \u2014 841.\n\n3:18\u201036 \u2014 574, 645.\n\n3:21 \u2014 5.\n\n3:23 \u2014 935.\n\n3:33 \u2014 288.\n\n3:34 \u2014 696.\n\n3:36 \u2014 645, 1046.\n\n4:1 \u2014 32.\n\n4:1, 2 \u2014 932.\n\n4:6 \u2014 314, 674.\n\n4:9 \u2014 167.\n\n4:10 \u2014 289.\n\n4:14 \u2014 839.\n\n4:17\u201019, 39 \u2014 681.\n\n4:21 \u2014 280, 893.\n\n4:24 \u2014 250, 305, 338, 540, 1000.\n\n4:29 \u2014 176.\n\n4:38 \u2014 827.\n\n4:39 \u2014 711.\n\n4:48 \u2014 117.\n\n5:3, 4 \u2014 239.\n\n5:14 \u2014 837.\n\n5:17 \u2014 253, 259, 412, 419, 426.\n\n5:17, 19 \u2014 333.\n\n5:18 \u2014 313.\n\n5:19 \u2014 302.\n\n5:20\u201029 \u2014 1024.\n\n5:21 \u2014 680, 810.\n\n5:22 \u2014 333.\n\n5:23 \u2014 311.\n\n5:24 \u2014 659, 811, 842, 992.\n\n5:26 \u2014 245, 251, 309.\n\n5:27 \u2014 678, 682.\n\n5:27\u201029 \u2014 310.\n\n5:28 \u2014 350.\n\n5:28, 29 \u2014 1005, 1011, 1017.\n\n5:28\u201030 \u2014 998.\n\n5:29 \u2014 1042.\n\n5:30 \u2014 302, 572, 677.\n\n5:32\u201037 \u2014 322.\n\n5:35 \u2014 837.\n\n5:39 \u2014 19.\n\n5:39, 40 \u2014 20.\n\n5:40 \u2014 841.\n\n5:42 \u2014 639.\n\n5:44 \u2014 259.\n\n5:46 \u2014 239, 314.\n\n6:14 \u2014 711.\n\n6:19 \u2014 210.\n\n6:20 \u2014 846.\n\n6:27 \u2014 293, 305.\n\n6:32 \u2014 206.\n\n6:37 \u2014 781, 839.\n\n6:41, 51 \u2014 686.\n\n6:44 \u2014 78, 642.\n\n6:44, 65 \u2014 810.\n\n6:47, 52, 63 \u2014 992.\n\n6:50 \u2014 573.\n\n6:53 \u2014 839.\n\n6:53, 56, 57 \u2014 797.\n\n6:54, 58 \u2014 1045.\n\n6:55 \u2014 297.\n\n6:62 \u2014 310.\n\n6:64 \u2014 315.\n\n6:65 \u2014 782.\n\n6:69 \u2014 309.\n\n7:17 \u2014 4, 20, 584, 825, 841.\n\n7:18 \u2014 552, 572.\n\n7:39 \u2014 317.\n\n7:53 \u2014 638.\n\n8:1\u201011 \u2014 239, 638.\n\n8:7 \u2014 925.\n\n8:9 \u2014 638.\n\n8:12 \u2014 838.\n\n8:29 \u2014 269.\n\n8:30, 31 \u2014 837.\n\n8:31\u201036 \u2014 509.\n\n8:34 \u2014 553, 642.\n\n8:35 \u2014 475.\n\n8:36 \u2014 509, 828.\n\n8:40 \u2014 673.\n\n8:41\u201044 \u2014 475.\n\n8:44 \u2014 450, 583, 657.\n\n8:46 \u2014 677.\n\n8:51 \u2014 659, 992.\n\n8:57 \u2014 348, 678.\n\n8:58 \u2014 163, 310, 326, 681, 695.\n\n9:2, 3 \u2014 630.\n\n9:3 \u2014 645.\n\n9:30 \u2014 1023.\n\n10:3 \u2014 364.\n\n10:7 \u2014 34.\n\n10:7\u20109 \u2014 802.\n\n10:10 \u2014 824.\n\n10:11 \u2014 720.\n\n10:16 \u2014 842, 843, 914.\n\n10:17, 18 \u2014 703.\n\n10:18 \u2014 131.\n\n10:28 \u2014 781, 801.\n\n10:30 \u2014 313, 695.\n\n10:34\u201036 \u2014 307, 515.\n\n10:35 \u2014 199.\n\n10:36 \u2014 234, 322, 669.\n\n10:41 \u2014 131, 156.\n\n11:11 \u2014 1000.\n\n11:11\u201014 \u2014 994.\n\n11:14 \u2014 681.\n\n11:25 \u2014 842.\n\n11:26 \u2014 660, 999.\n\n11:33, 35 \u2014 674.\n\n11:35 \u2014 738.\n\n11:35, 43 \u2014 130.\n\n11:36 \u2014 264.\n\n11:43 \u2014 822.\n\n11:49\u201052 \u2014 207.\n\n11:51, 52 \u2014 843.\n\n12:24 \u2014 680.\n\n12:27 \u2014 483, 731, 762.\n\n12:31 \u2014 1023.\n\n12:32 \u2014 311, 791.\n\n12:32, 33 \u2014 835.\n\n12:33 \u2014 315, 681.\n\n12:41 \u2014 309.\n\n12:44 \u2014 350.\n\n12:47 \u2014 241, 573.\n\n13:1 \u2014 315.\n\n13:7 \u2014 35.\n\n13:8 \u2014 571, 733.\n\n13:10 \u2014 831.\n\n13:21 \u2014 483.\n\n13:27 \u2014 424, 455, 674.\n\n13:29 \u2014 901.\n\n13:33 \u2014 680.\n\n14:1 \u2014 838.\n\n14:1\u20103 \u2014 991.\n\n14:3 \u2014 659, 998.\n\n14:3\u201018 \u2014 1003.\n\n14:6 \u2014 28, 251, 260, 309, 802.\n\n14:9 \u2014 14, 313, 333, 349, 699, 845.\n\n14:9, 10 \u2014 681.\n\n14:10, 23 \u2014 797.\n\n14:11 \u2014 117, 833.\n\n14:12 \u2014 120.\n\n14:14 \u2014 311.\n\n14:16 \u2014 774.\n\n14:16, 17 \u2014 323, 339.\n\n14:16\u201018 \u2014 323.\n\n14:17 \u2014 288, 604, 1045.\n\n14:18 \u2014 323, 333, 680.\n\n14:20 \u2014 759, 797.\n\n14:21 \u2014 256.\n\n14:26 \u2014 207, 323, 744.\n\n14:28 \u2014 314, 342.\n\n14:30 \u2014 448, 677.\n\n15:1 \u2014 516, 680, 796.\n\n15:3 \u2014 811.\n\n15:4, 5 \u2014 642.\n\n15:4\u20106 \u2014 110.\n\n15:5 \u2014 331, 898.\n\n15:6 \u2014 474, 475.\n\n15:7 \u2014 438.\n\n15:9 \u2014 778.\n\n15:10 \u2014 331.\n\n15:15 \u2014 21, 440, 737.\n\n15:16 \u2014 598, 779, 784, 787.\n\n15:26 \u2014 323, 333, 341.\n\n15:26, 27 \u2014 207.\n\n16:2 \u2014 192.\n\n16:7 \u2014 323, 604, 697.\n\n16:8 \u2014 316, 324, 339, 454, 856.\n\n16:8, 9 \u2014 841.\n\n16:8\u201011 \u2014 338.\n\n16:9 \u2014 350.\n\n16:10 \u2014 762.\n\n16:11 \u2014 448.\n\n16:12 \u2014 35.\n\n16:12, 13 \u2014 164.\n\n16:12, 26 \u2014 901.\n\n16:13 \u2014 31, 134, 137, 206, 207.\n\n16:13, 14 \u2014 316.\n\n16:14 \u2014 134, 323, 324, 326.\n\n16:14, 15 \u2014 317.\n\n16:15 \u2014 313, 349.\n\n16:18 \u2014 242.\n\n16:26 \u2014 698.\n\n16:28, 30 \u2014 310.\n\n17:2 \u2014 781.\n\n17:3 \u2014 3, 67, 259, 260, 261, 691.\n\n17:4 \u2014 324, 746.\n\n17:4, 5 \u2014 310.\n\n17:5 \u2014 256, 309, 314, 326, 378, 698, 699, 703.\n\n17:6 \u2014 787.\n\n17:8 \u2014 207.\n\n17:9 \u2014 774, 781.\n\n17:9, 20, 24 \u2014 771.\n\n17:10 \u2014 313.\n\n17:11 \u2014 272, 313.\n\n17:12 \u2014 430, 475.\n\n17:19 \u2014 674, 762.\n\n17:21\u201023 \u2014 798.\n\n17:22 \u2014 313.\n\n17:22, 23 \u2014 301.\n\n17:23 \u2014 245, 684.\n\n17:24 \u2014 263, 310, 326, 776.\n\n17:25 \u2014 274.\n\n18:4 \u2014 682.\n\n18:8, 9 \u2014 430.\n\n18:11 \u2014 743.\n\n18:32 \u2014 681.\n\n18:36 \u2014 889.\n\n18:36, 37 \u2014 776.\n\n18:37 \u2014 262, 633.\n\n18:38 \u2014 156.\n\n19:11 \u2014 648, 649.\n\n19:19 \u2014 228.\n\n19:28 \u2014 674.\n\n19:30 \u2014 733, 762.\n\n19:30, 34 \u2014 675.\n\n19:38 \u2014 959.\n\n20:17 \u2014 680, 681, 707, 998.\n\n20:22 \u2014 709, 935.\n\n20:26 \u2014 410.\n\n20:27 \u2014 691, 1018.\n\n20:28 \u2014 306, 311.\n\n20:31 \u2014 839.\n\n21:6 \u2014 681.\n\n21:17 \u2014 833.\n\n21:19 \u2014 315, 355, 681.\n\nActs.\n\n1:1 \u2014 150, 164.\n\n1:2 \u2014 315, 316, 410, 696, 703.\n\n1:7 \u2014 1006.\n\n1:10 \u2014 453.\n\n1:11 \u2014 1004.\n\n1:15, 23, 26 \u2014 906.\n\n1:23\u201026 \u2014 894.\n\n1:24 \u2014 310.\n\n1:25 \u2014 660, 1049.\n\n2: \u2014 896, 901.\n\n2:2 \u2014 287.\n\n2:4 \u2014 324.\n\n2:22 \u2014 117, 673.\n\n2:23 \u2014 258, 282, 355, 675.\n\n2:24, 31 \u2014 707.\n\n2:31 \u2014 131.\n\n2:33 \u2014 774.\n\n2:37, 38 \u2014 945, 949.\n\n2:38 \u2014 821, 822, 833, 931, 946, 948, 951.\n\n2:41 \u2014 934.\n\n2:42 \u2014 946, 959, 960.\n\n2:46 \u2014 959, 960.\n\n2:47 \u2014 895, 897, 901.\n\n3:13, 26 \u2014 697.\n\n3:18 \u2014 646.\n\n3:22 \u2014 137, 711.\n\n3:26 \u2014 829.\n\n4:12 \u2014 573, 842, 843.\n\n4:27, 28 \u2014 424.\n\n4:27, 30 \u2014 697.\n\n4:31 \u2014 895.\n\n4:32 \u2014 799.\n\n5:3 \u2014 455.\n\n5:3, 4 \u2014 315, 458.\n\n5:3, 4, 9 \u2014 324.\n\n5:4 \u2014 894.\n\n5:6 \u2014 918.\n\n5:7\u201011 \u2014 585.\n\n5:9 \u2014 927.\n\n5:11 \u2014 895.\n\n5:14 \u2014 897, 901.\n\n5:29 \u2014 898.\n\n5:31 \u2014 782, 835.\n\n5:36 \u2014 228.\n\n6:1\u20104 \u2014 918.\n\n6:1\u20106 \u2014 917.\n\n6:2 \u2014 891.\n\n6:3, 5 \u2014 906.\n\n6:5 \u2014 891.\n\n6:5, 6 \u2014 894, 919.\n\n6:8\u201020 \u2014 917.\n\n7:2 \u2014 256.\n\n7:6 \u2014 127.\n\n7:16 \u2014 226.\n\n7:22 \u2014 169, 994, 995.\n\n7:28 \u2014 1004.\n\n7:38 \u2014 891.\n\n7:39, 53 \u2014 448.\n\n7:42 \u2014 448.\n\n7:51 \u2014 32.\n\n7:53 \u2014 452.\n\n7:55 \u2014 708.\n\n7:59 \u2014 311, 991, 1000.\n\n7:60 \u2014 595, 659.\n\n8:4 \u2014 899.\n\n8:12 \u2014 821, 945.\n\n8:13 \u2014 837.\n\n8:16 \u2014 948, 951.\n\n8:25 \u2014 27.\n\n8:26 \u2014 319.\n\n8:29 \u2014 324.\n\n8:38, 39 \u2014 935, 936.\n\n9:5 \u2014 209.\n\n9:15 \u2014 779.\n\n9:15, 16 \u2014 787.\n\n9:31 \u2014 891, 892, 912.\n\n10:19, 20 \u2014 324.\n\n10:31\u201044 \u2014 843.\n\n10:34, 35 \u2014 23.\n\n10:35 \u2014 574, 853.\n\n10:38 \u2014 315, 316, 325, 455, 696, 700, 703.\n\n10:42 \u2014 780.\n\n10:43 \u2014 137.\n\n10:48 \u2014 951.\n\n11:18 \u2014 782, 835.\n\n11:21 \u2014 829.\n\n11:24 \u2014 901.\n\n11:28 \u2014 137.\n\n12:7 \u2014 319.\n\n12:15 \u2014 452.\n\n12:23 \u2014 452.\n\n13:2 \u2014 324, 907.\n\n13:2, 3 \u2014 906, 909, 919.\n\n13:33, 34, 35 \u2014 340, 341.\n\n13:38, 39 \u2014 855.\n\n13:39 \u2014 793, 805.\n\n13:48 \u2014 780.\n\n13:48, 49 \u2014 27.\n\n14: \u2014 22.\n\n14:15 \u2014 23.\n\n14:16 \u2014 424.\n\n14:16, 17 \u2014 666.\n\n14:17 \u2014 26, 32, 113.\n\n14:23 \u2014 890, 906, 919.\n\n14:27 \u2014 891, 906.\n\n15:1\u201035 \u2014 912.\n\n15:2, 4, 22, 30 \u2014 906.\n\n15:6\u201011 \u2014 215.\n\n15:7\u201030 \u2014 909.\n\n15:8 \u2014 282.\n\n15:8, 9 \u2014 782.\n\n15:9 \u2014 770.\n\n15:18 \u2014 282.\n\n15:23 \u2014 906.\n\n15:28 \u2014 324.\n\n16:6, 7 \u2014 324.\n\n16:14 \u2014 810, 819, 825.\n\n16:15 \u2014 951.\n\n16:16 \u2014 456.\n\n16:31 \u2014 843.\n\n16:33 \u2014 934.\n\n16:33, 34, 40 \u2014 951.\n\n17: \u2014 22.\n\n17:3 \u2014 110, 760, 764.\n\n17:4 \u2014 782.\n\n17:18 \u2014 842.\n\n17:21\u201026 \u2014 494.\n\n17:22 \u2014 23.\n\n17:23 \u2014 27.\n\n17:25\u201027 \u2014 113.\n\n17:26 \u2014 115, 355, 421, 476, 691, 692.\n\n17:27 \u2014 68.\n\n17:27, 28 \u2014 105, 280, 571.\n\n17:28 \u2014 254, 412, 474, 503, 715, 798.\n\n17:29 \u2014 759.\n\n17:30 \u2014 573, 649, 652.\n\n17:31 \u2014 333, 405.\n\n18:8 \u2014 945.\n\n18:9, 10 \u2014 782.\n\n18:10 \u2014 789.\n\n18:14 \u2014 152.\n\n18:26 \u2014 547.\n\n18:27 \u2014 895.\n\n19:1\u20105 \u2014 950.\n\n19:4 \u2014 836, 901, 932, 945.\n\n19:5 \u2014 948.\n\n19:10, 20 \u2014 27.\n\n19:21 \u2014 910.\n\n19:32, 39 \u2014 981.\n\n20:7 \u2014 410, 894, 960.\n\n20:17 \u2014 914.\n\n20:20, 21 \u2014 916.\n\n20:21 \u2014 836.\n\n20:28 \u2014 137, 894, 914.\n\n20:28\u201031 \u2014 915.\n\n20:31 \u2014 1056.\n\n20:35 \u2014 265, 916.\n\n21:9 \u2014 547.\n\n21:10 \u2014 137.\n\n21:31\u201033 \u2014 240.\n\n22:16 \u2014 946.\n\n22:26\u201029 \u2014 240.\n\n23:5 \u2014 242.\n\n23:6 \u2014 995, 996.\n\n23:26\u201030 \u2014 240.\n\n24:15 \u2014 998.\n\n24:25 \u2014 988, 1024.\n\n26:6\u20108 \u2014 995.\n\n26:7, 8 \u2014 996.\n\n26:9 \u2014 500.\n\n26:23 \u2014 646.\n\n26:24, 25 \u2014 31.\n\n27:10 \u2014 137.\n\n27:21\u201026 \u2014 137.\n\n27:22\u201024 \u2014 364.\n\n27:24 \u2014 789.\n\nRomans.\n\n1:3 \u2014 684.\n\n1:3, 4 \u2014 340.\n\n1:4 \u2014 129, 676, 762.\n\n1:5 \u2014 847.\n\n1:7 \u2014 791.\n\n1:13 \u2014 495.\n\n1:16 \u2014 746.\n\n1:17 \u2014 847, 849.\n\n1:17\u201020 \u2014 26.\n\n1:18 \u2014 266, 644, 983.\n\n1:19 \u2014 13.\n\n1:19\u201021, 28, 32 \u2014 68.\n\n1:19\u201025 \u2014 319.\n\n1:20 \u2014 26, 32, 68, 69, 1044, 1046.\n\n1:23 \u2014 256.\n\n1:24 \u2014 633.\n\n1:24, 28 \u2014 424.\n\n1:25 \u2014 288.\n\n1:28 \u2014 68.\n\n1:32 \u2014 26, 649, 832.\n\n2:4 \u2014 113, 289, 571, 776, 833.\n\n2:5 \u2014 981.\n\n2:5\u20106 \u2014 662, 1025.\n\n2:6 \u2014 290, 648.\n\n2:6\u201011 \u2014 778.\n\n2:7 \u2014 917.\n\n2:12 \u2014 558, 649.\n\n2:14 \u2014 574, 638.\n\n2:14, 15 \u2014 541.\n\n2:14, 19 \u2014 538.\n\n2:15 \u2014 26, 68.\n\n2:10 \u2014 1023.\n\n2:26 \u2014 617, 852.\n\n3:1, 2 \u2014 779.\n\n3:2 \u2014 838.\n\n3:4 \u2014 288.\n\n3:9 \u2014 574, 639.\n\n3:10\u201012 \u2014 573.\n\n3:11 \u2014 810.\n\n3:12 \u2014 115.\n\n3:15 \u2014 68.\n\n3:19 \u2014 645.\n\n3:19, 20, 23 \u2014 573.\n\n3:20 \u2014 543, 832.\n\n3:22 \u2014 772.\n\n3:23 \u2014 542, 610.\n\n3:24\u201026 \u2014 855.\n\n3:25 \u2014 772.\n\n3:24\u201030 \u2014 849.\n\n3:25 \u2014 112, 405, 423, 714.\n\n3:25, 26 \u2014 718, 719, 753.\n\n3:26 \u2014 298, 846.\n\n3:28 \u2014 847, 1001.\n\n3:31 \u2014 548.\n\n4:4\u201016 \u2014 847.\n\n4:5 \u2014 842, 854.\n\n4:6, 8 \u2014 851.\n\n4:17 \u2014 287, 376, 377.\n\n4:20, 21 \u2014 844.\n\n4:24,25 \u2014 15, 657.\n\n4:25 \u2014 717, 763, 852.\n\n5:1 \u2014 854.\n\n5:1\u20102 \u2014 856.\n\n5:5 \u2014 848.\n\n5:6\u20108 \u2014 720.\n\n5:8 \u2014 290, 726.\n\n5:10 \u2014 544, 719.\n\n5:11 \u2014 856.\n\n5:12 \u2014 39, 210, 490, 495, 593, 604, 609, 610, 613, 614, 620, 658.\n\n5:12\u201014 \u2014 579.\n\n5:12\u201017 \u2014 657.\n\n5:12\u201019 \u2014 15, 476, 477, 603, 625.\n\n5:12\u201021 \u2014 622, 660, 797.\n\n5:13 \u2014 594.\n\n5:14 \u2014 661, 662, 686.\n\n5:14, 18, 21 \u2014 660.\n\n5:15 \u2014 673.\n\n5:16 \u2014 593.\n\n5:16\u201018 \u2014 619, 852.\n\n5:19 \u2014 593, 614, 718.\n\n5:20 \u2014 543.\n\n5:21 \u2014 553, 992.\n\n6:3 \u2014 940, 941, 951.\n\n6:3\u20105 \u2014 931.\n\n6:3\u20106 \u2014 932.\n\n6:4 \u2014 936, 941.\n\n6:5 \u2014 796, 941.\n\n6:6 \u2014 824.\n\n6:7 \u2014 851.\n\n6:7, 8 \u2014 805.\n\n6:7\u201010 \u2014 762.\n\n6:9, 10 \u2014 657.\n\n6:11 \u2014 797, 829.\n\n6:12 \u2014 553.\n\n6:13 \u2014 810, 945.\n\n6:13, 18 \u2014 853.\n\n6:15\u201023 \u2014 509.\n\n6:17 \u2014 31, 810.\n\n6:19 \u2014 633, 1049.\n\n6:23 \u2014 293, 645, 657.\n\n7:4 \u2014 805.\n\n7:7, 8 \u2014 544.\n\n7:8, 9, 10 \u2014 553.\n\n7:10\u201011 \u2014 941.\n\n7:11, 13, 14, 17, 20 \u2014 553.\n\n7:14 \u2014 540.\n\n7:15 \u2014 780.\n\n7:17 \u2014 552.\n\n7:18 \u2014 562, 639, 642, 687.\n\n7:23 \u2014 581, 639, 646.\n\n7:24 \u2014 555, 578, 642, 983.\n\n8:1 \u2014 646, 647, 659.\n\n8:1\u20102 \u2014 983.\n\n8:1\u201017 \u2014 805.\n\n8:2 \u2014 316, 548, 590, 804, 811.\n\n8:3 \u2014 341, 677, 706, 714, 718, 762, 943.\n\n8:3, 10, 11 \u2014 657.\n\n8:4 \u2014 548.\n\n8:7 \u2014 562, 571, 573, 580, 639, 818, 831.\n\n8:7, 8 \u2014 645.\n\n8:9, 10 \u2014 797, 801.\n\n8:10 \u2014 805, 852, 983, 999.\n\n8:11 \u2014 316, 324, 339, 488, 806, 1017.\n\n8:13 \u2014 659, 992.\n\n8:14 \u2014 339, 441, 830.\n\n8:14, 15 \u2014 474.\n\n8:16 \u2014 502, 839, 844.\n\n8:18\u201023 \u2014 1018.\n\n8:19 \u2014 797.\n\n8:20, 21 \u2014 402, 403.\n\n8:20\u201023 \u2014 658.\n\n8:21\u201023 \u2014 1004.\n\n8:23 \u2014 826, 1002, 1017, 1022.\n\n8:24 \u2014 981.\n\n8:26 \u2014 323, 324, 325, 338, 339, 439, 454, 798.\n\n8:26, 27 \u2014 438, 774, 848.\n\n8:27 \u2014 349.\n\n8:27\u201030 \u2014 780.\n\n8:28 \u2014 353, 368, 421, 443.\n\n8:28, 29, 30 \u2014 781.\n\n8:30 \u2014 791.\n\n8:31\u201039 \u2014 788.\n\n8:32 \u2014 265, 266, 289, 341, 405.\n\n8:34 \u2014 544, 774.\n\n8:35\u201039 \u2014 801.\n\n8:38 \u2014 998.\n\n8:39 \u2014 278.\n\n9: \u2014 780.\n\n9:1 \u2014 502.\n\n9:5 \u2014 306.\n\n9:11 \u2014 661.\n\n9:11\u201016 \u2014 780.\n\n9:16 \u2014 784.\n\n9:17 \u2014 397.\n\n9:17, 18 \u2014 424.\n\n9:17, 22, 23 \u2014 397.\n\n9:18 \u2014 296.\n\n9:20 \u2014 786.\n\n9:20, 21 \u2014 779.\n\n9:21 \u2014 784.\n\n9:22, 23 \u2014 790.\n\n9:22\u201025 \u2014 780.\n\n9:23 \u2014 256.\n\n9:23, 24 \u2014 782.\n\n9:28 \u2014 827.\n\n10:3 \u2014 852.\n\n10:4 \u2014 544.\n\n10:6\u20107 \u2014 280.\n\n10:6\u20108 \u2014 282.\n\n10:7 \u2014 707.\n\n10:9 \u2014 309, 839.\n\n10:9, 10 \u2014 889.\n\n10:9, 12 \u2014 311.\n\n10:10 \u2014 810, 948.\n\n11:2 \u2014 780.\n\n11:5\u20107 \u2014 778.\n\n11:8 \u2014 152.\n\n11:13 \u2014 254.\n\n11:16 \u2014 397.\n\n11:18 \u2014 848.\n\n11:25 \u2014 668.\n\n11:25, 26 \u2014 1008.\n\n11:29 \u2014 198, 782, 791.\n\n11:32 \u2014 423.\n\n11:33 \u2014 34, 282.\n\n11:36 \u2014 275, 337.\n\n11:38 \u2014 378.\n\n12:1 \u2014 32, 776.\n\n12:2 \u2014 40, 260.\n\n12:3 \u2014 782.\n\n12:5 \u2014 755.\n\n12:6\u20108 \u2014 902.\n\n12:15 \u2014 615.\n\n12:16 \u2014 904.\n\n12:19 \u2014 776.\n\n13:1 \u2014 117, 780.\n\n13:5 \u2014 780.\n\n13:8\u201010 \u2014 572.\n\n13:10 \u2014 302.\n\n14:4 \u2014 899.\n\n14:7 \u2014 572.\n\n14:8 \u2014 983.\n\n14:14 \u2014 241.\n\n14:17 \u2014 853, 892.\n\n14:23 \u2014 32, 553.\n\n15:2 \u2014 265, 546, 568.\n\n15:3 \u2014 572, 724.\n\n15:19 \u2014 324, 325.\n\n15:20 \u2014 910.\n\n15:26 \u2014 894.\n\n15:30 \u2014 263, 316, 324.\n\n15:31 \u2014 841.\n\n16:1, 2 \u2014 918.\n\n16:5 \u2014 890.\n\n16:7 \u2014 909.\n\n16:22 \u2014 1006.\n\n16:25, 26 \u2014 1044.\n\n16:26 \u2014 1045.\n\n19:23 \u2014 662.\n\n20:4\u201010 \u2014 1011.\n\n1 Corinthians.\n\n1:2 \u2014 201, 890, 892, 897.\n\n1:3 \u2014 774.\n\n1:9 \u2014 288.\n\n1:10 \u2014 904.\n\n1:16 \u2014 210, 951.\n\n1:16, 17 \u2014 916.\n\n1:18 \u2014 27.\n\n1:21 \u2014 4, 1056.\n\n1:23 \u2014 842.\n\n1:23, 24 \u2014 746.\n\n1:23, 24, 26 \u2014 791.\n\n1:24\u201029 \u2014 782.\n\n1:26 \u2014 562.\n\n1:28 \u2014 377.\n\n1:30 \u2014 710, 781, 805, 806, 852.\n\n1:31 \u2014 152.\n\n2:4 \u2014 325.\n\n2:7 \u2014 275, 356.\n\n2:7\u201016 \u2014 250.\n\n2:9 \u2014 36, 289.\n\n2:9\u201013 \u2014 206.\n\n2:10 \u2014 253, 316.\n\n2:10\u201012 \u2014 13, 324.\n\n2:11 \u2014 253, 316, 483.\n\n2:11, 12 \u2014 40.\n\n2:13 \u2014 19, 35.\n\n2:14 \u2014 4, 484, 642.\n\n2:14, 16 \u2014 203.\n\n2:28 \u2014 917.\n\n3:1, 2 \u2014 16.\n\n3:6 \u2014 574.\n\n3:6, 7 \u2014 811.\n\n3:10 \u2014 31, 338.\n\n3:10\u201015 \u2014 16.\n\n3:16 \u2014 315, 316.\n\n3:21 \u2014 40.\n\n3:21, 23 \u2014 805.\n\n3:22 \u2014 983.\n\n4:4 \u2014 851.\n\n4:5 \u2014 310, 894.\n\n4:7 \u2014 604, 786.\n\n4:13 \u2014 894.\n\n4:15 \u2014 418.\n\n4:17 \u2014 890.\n\n5:3 \u2014 483.\n\n5:3\u20105 \u2014 200, 924.\n\n5:4, 5 \u2014 907.\n\n5:5 \u2014 457.\n\n5:9 \u2014 145, 150.\n\n5:13 \u2014 907, 924, 925.\n\n5:21 \u2014 646, 747.\n\n5:37, 38 \u2014 426.\n\n6:3 \u2014 445, 446.\n\n6:11 \u2014 805.\n\n6:13\u201020 \u2014 1017.\n\n6:15, 19 \u2014 796.\n\n6:17 \u2014 798.\n\n6:19 \u2014 315, 488.\n\n6:20 \u2014 717.\n\n7:10, 12 \u2014 242.\n\n7:14 \u2014 597, 609, 661, 951, 952.\n\n7:17 \u2014 201, 806.\n\n7:23 \u2014 717.\n\n7:40 \u2014 242.\n\n8:3 \u2014 520, 780, 781.\n\n8:4 \u2014 259, 446, 457.\n\n8:6 \u2014 15, 310, 378, 419, 700.\n\n8:12 \u2014 501.\n\n9:16 \u2014 919, 1056.\n\n10:1\u20102 \u2014 936.\n\n10:2 \u2014 941.\n\n10:3, 4 \u2014 942.\n\n10:8 \u2014 227.\n\n10:11 \u2014 1006.\n\n10:12 \u2014 948.\n\n10:13 \u2014 425, 458.\n\n10:16, 17 \u2014 797.\n\n10:20 \u2014 457.\n\n10:31 \u2014 401.\n\n10:33 \u2014 892.\n\n11:2 \u2014 906.\n\n11:3 \u2014 342, 515, 680.\n\n11:5 \u2014 547.\n\n11:7 \u2014 515.\n\n11:8 \u2014 494.\n\n11:10 \u2014 452.\n\n11:11, 12 \u2014 525.\n\n11:16 \u2014 895.\n\n11:23 \u2014 200.\n\n11:23, 24 \u2014 906.\n\n11:23\u201025 \u2014 959.\n\n11:23\u201026 \u2014 895.\n\n11:24 \u2014 959.\n\n11:24\u201025 \u2014 311.\n\n11:26 \u2014 546, 933, 959.\n\n11:27 \u2014 960.\n\n11:29 \u2014 952, 960.\n\n11:30 \u2014 1000.\n\n12:3 \u2014 309, 782.\n\n12:4, 6 \u2014 315.\n\n12:4, 8, 11 \u2014 325.\n\n12:6 \u2014 418.\n\n12:8\u201011 \u2014 324.\n\n12:9 \u2014 782.\n\n12:11 \u2014 316.\n\n12:12 \u2014 796, 893.\n\n12:13 \u2014 942.\n\n12:28 \u2014 401, 710, 891, 902, 912, 917.\n\n13: \u2014 35.\n\n13:4 \u2014 325.\n\n13:10 \u2014 981.\n\n13:12 \u2014 8, 35, 143, 219.\n\n13:13 \u2014 848.\n\n14:23 \u2014 895.\n\n14:25 \u2014 546.\n\n14:37 \u2014 901.\n\n14:37, 38 \u2014 200.\n\n14:40 \u2014 895.\n\n15:3, 4 \u2014 15.\n\n15:6 \u2014 906.\n\n15:8 \u2014 131.\n\n15:12 \u2014 942.\n\n15:20, 23 \u2014 680, 998.\n\n15:21 \u2014 673.\n\n15:21, 22 \u2014 476, 657.\n\n15:22 \u2014 495, 593, 603, 622, 942, 998.\n\n15:22, 45 \u2014 686.\n\n15:22, 45, 49 \u2014 797.\n\n15:24 \u2014 893.\n\n15:25 \u2014 356, 776.\n\n15:26 \u2014 590.\n\n15:28 \u2014 314, 397, 698, 699.\n\n15:32 \u2014 989.\n\n15:34 \u2014 68.\n\n15:37, 38 \u2014 1019.\n\n15:38, 40 \u2014 563.\n\n15:40 \u2014 806.\n\n15:40, 45 \u2014 678.\n\n15:41 \u2014 898.\n\n15:42, 50 \u2014 658.\n\n15:44 \u2014 484, 488, 1016.\n\n15:45 \u2014 316, 333, 527, 697, 805.\n\n15:45, 46 \u2014 802, 991.\n\n15:46 \u2014 524.\n\n15:51 \u2014 658, 1005.\n\n15:53, 54 \u2014 1018.\n\n15:54\u201057 \u2014 659.\n\n15:55 \u2014 983.\n\n16:1, 2 \u2014 894.\n\n16:15 \u2014 780, 951.\n\n16:22 \u2014 329, 1006.\n\n2 Corinthians.\n\n1:20 \u2014 288.\n\n1:24 \u2014 205.\n\n2:6, 7 \u2014 907.\n\n2:6\u20108 \u2014 925.\n\n2:11 \u2014 464.\n\n2:14 \u2014 431.\n\n2:14\u201017 \u2014 1056.\n\n2:15, 16 \u2014 789.\n\n2:16 \u2014 1002.\n\n3:1 \u2014 895.\n\n3:5 \u2014 643.\n\n3:6 \u2014 35, 324.\n\n3:15, 16 \u2014 5.\n\n3:17, 18 \u2014 326, 333, 697.\n\n3:18 \u2014 219, 315, 663, 678.\n\n4:2 \u2014 822.\n\n4:4 \u2014 517, 518, 827.\n\n4:6 \u2014 286, 336, 337.\n\n4:7 \u2014 213.\n\n4:17 \u2014 256, 402.\n\n5:1\u20108 \u2014 998.\n\n5:1\u20109 \u2014 659.\n\n5:3, 4 \u2014 1002.\n\n5:4 \u2014 235.\n\n5:8 \u2014 1000.\n\n5:10 \u2014 1011, 1023.\n\n5:11 \u2014 1056.\n\n5:13 \u2014 31.\n\n5:14 \u2014 622, 623, 805, 941.\n\n5:14, 15 \u2014 766.\n\n5:15 \u2014 572, 662, 716.\n\n5:17 \u2014 793, 797, 804, 811.\n\n5:18, 19 \u2014 719.\n\n5:19 \u2014 333, 686, 699, 714, 718, 768.\n\n5:21 \u2014 645, 677, 718, 731, 743, 760.\n\n5:21 \u2014 718, 731, 743, 805, 853, 856, 943.\n\n6:17 \u2014 474.\n\n7:1 \u2014 268, 639, 829.\n\n7:9, 10 \u2014 832.\n\n7:10 \u2014 836.\n\n7:11 \u2014 294, 907.\n\n8:5 \u2014 899.\n\n8:6 \u2014 334.\n\n8:9 \u2014 703.\n\n8:19 \u2014 705, 906.\n\n9:9 \u2014 1045.\n\n9:15 \u2014 754.\n\n10:5 \u2014 543.\n\n10:16 \u2014 910.\n\n11:1 \u2014 210.\n\n11:2 \u2014 796.\n\n11:14 \u2014 450.\n\n12:2 \u2014 991.\n\n12:4 \u2014 35, 999.\n\n12:7 \u2014 438, 455.\n\n12:8, 9 \u2014 848.\n\n12:9 \u2014 687.\n\n12:10 \u2014 10, 317.\n\n13:4 \u2014 708.\n\n13:11 \u2014 904.\n\n13:12 \u2014 201.\n\n13:14 \u2014 306, 324, 774.\n\nGalatians.\n\n1:2 \u2014 200.\n\n1:4 \u2014 716, 718.\n\n1:7 \u2014 475.\n\n1:12 \u2014 200.\n\n1:15, 16 \u2014 421, 782, 804, 811.\n\n1:16 \u2014 12.\n\n1:22 \u2014 892.\n\n2:7 \u2014 838.\n\n2:10 \u2014 715.\n\n2:11 \u2014 215, 909.\n\n2:15 \u2014 578.\n\n2:16\u201020 \u2014 850.\n\n2:19\u201020 \u2014 941.\n\n2:20 \u2014 514, 572, 643, 797, 801, 805.\n\n2:21 \u2014 1000.\n\n3:6 \u2014 856.\n\n3:7 \u2014 836.\n\n3:10 \u2014 152.\n\n3:11 \u2014 849.\n\n3:11\u201013 \u2014 242.\n\n3:13 \u2014 430, 657, 718, 728.\n\n3:17 \u2014 227.\n\n3:19 \u2014 448, 452, 453.\n\n3:22 \u2014 573.\n\n3:24 \u2014 544.\n\n3:26 \u2014 334, 474, 842.\n\n3:26, 27 \u2014 946.\n\n3:27 \u2014 797, 941, 948, 951.\n\n4:1\u20107 \u2014 475.\n\n4:3 \u2014 665.\n\n4:4 \u2014 258, 322, 341, 388, 665.\n\n4:4, 5 \u2014 761.\n\n4:5 \u2014 338, 717.\n\n4:6 \u2014 322, 323, 333, 334, 474.\n\n4:9 \u2014 780, 781.\n\n4:19 \u2014 13.\n\n4:25 \u2014 310.\n\n4:28 \u2014 577.\n\n5:6 \u2014 770, 846, 847.\n\n5:11 \u2014 746.\n\n5:14 \u2014 572.\n\n5:19 \u2014 554.\n\n5:22 \u2014 554, 782, 847.\n\n6:1 \u2014 650.\n\n6:7, 8 \u2014 1049.\n\n6:15 \u2014 810.\n\nEphesians.\n\n1: \u2014 355.\n\n1:2, 3 \u2014 685.\n\n1:3 \u2014 592.\n\n1:23 \u2014 697.\n\n1:4 \u2014 275, 309, 388, 781, 782, 797.\n\n1:4\u20105 \u2014 780.\n\n1:4\u20106 \u2014 778, 805.\n\n1:4, 7 \u2014 771.\n\n1:5 \u2014 334, 335.\n\n1:5, 6 \u2014 474.\n\n1:5, 6, 9 \u2014 397.\n\n1:5\u20108 \u2014 781.\n\n1:6 \u2014 774.\n\n1:7 \u2014 114, 849, 855.\n\n1:9 \u2014 253.\n\n1:9\u201011 \u2014 780.\n\n1:10 \u2014 444, 450, 680.\n\n1:11 \u2014 253, 287, 353, 355, 421.\n\n1:13 \u2014 844.\n\n1:14 \u2014 781.\n\n1:17\u201018 \u2014 823.\n\n1:18 \u2014 4, 69, 825, 791.\n\n1:19 \u2014 287.\n\n1:19, 20 \u2014 811.\n\n1:21, 22 \u2014 699.\n\n1:22 \u2014 776.\n\n1:22, 23 \u2014 109, 685, 708, 796, 887, 888.\n\n1:23 \u2014 163, 310, 418.\n\n2:1 \u2014 521, 643, 659, 810, 983, 992.\n\n2:2 \u2014 448, 451, 455, 642.\n\n2:3 \u2014 459, 475, 495, 578, 579, 593, 603, 609, 645, 661, 810.\n\n2:5 \u2014 811.\n\n2:5, 6 \u2014 805.\n\n2:6 \u2014 890.\n\n2:8 \u2014 781.\n\n2:8\u201010 \u2014 643.\n\n2:10 \u2014 355, 364, 423, 475, 521, 598, 782, 785, 804, 811, 819, 824, 826,\n 831.\n\n2:12 \u2014 68.\n\n2:12, 16, 18, 19 \u2014 719.\n\n2:13 \u2014 797.\n\n2:15 \u2014 545.\n\n2:16\u201018, 21, 22 \u2014 685.\n\n2:18 \u2014 774.\n\n2:20 \u2014 710, 909.\n\n2:20\u201022 \u2014 795.\n\n2:28 \u2014 338.\n\n3:1 \u2014 431.\n\n3:5 \u2014 710.\n\n3:9 \u2014 27, 113, 378.\n\n3:10 \u2014 282, 446, 450, 460, 713, 887, 1052.\n\n3:10, 11 \u2014 356.\n\n3:11 \u2014 353.\n\n3:12 \u2014 774.\n\n3:14, 15 \u2014 334, 448, 474, 811.\n\n3:16, 17 \u2014 801.\n\n3:17 \u2014 797, 804, 839.\n\n3:18 \u2014 905.\n\n3:19 \u2014 8.\n\n3:20 \u2014 287.\n\n4:3 \u2014 904.\n\n4:5 \u2014 758, 941.\n\n4:5, 6 \u2014 259.\n\n4:6 \u2014 102, 333.\n\n4:7\u20108 \u2014 309.\n\n4:8 \u2014 340.\n\n4:10 \u2014 685, 708.\n\n4:11 \u2014 19, 745, 902, 915.\n\n4:15, 16 \u2014 796.\n\n4:18 \u2014 639, 820.\n\n4:18, 19 \u2014 647.\n\n4:20 \u2014 261.\n\n4:22 \u2014 824.\n\n4:22\u201024 \u2014 639.\n\n4:23 \u2014 484, 633.\n\n4:23, 24 \u2014 811.\n\n4:24 \u2014 514, 517.\n\n4:26 \u2014 234, 294, 743.\n\n4:30 \u2014 266, 316, 324, 325.\n\n4:32 \u2014 314.\n\n5:1 \u2014 543.\n\n5:2 \u2014 719, 736.\n\n5:9 \u2014 31.\n\n5:10 \u2014 32.\n\n5:14 \u2014 659, 810, 829, 992.\n\n5:18 \u2014 464.\n\n5:21 \u2014 311.\n\n5:23 \u2014 680.\n\n5:24, 25 \u2014 887.\n\n5:25, 27 \u2014 717.\n\n5:26 \u2014 946.\n\n5:27 \u2014 739.\n\n5:29 \u2014 1022.\n\n5:29, 30 \u2014 800.\n\n5:31 \u2014 706.\n\n5:31, 32 \u2014 796.\n\n5:32 \u2014 801.\n\n6:11 \u2014 458.\n\n6:12 \u2014 382, 445, 455.\n\n6:16 \u2014 458.\n\n6:17 \u2014 17, 32, 220, 811, 815, 819.\n\n6:23 \u2014 782.\n\nPhilippians.\n\n1:1 \u2014 894, 902, 914.\n\n1:6 \u2014 999.\n\n1:9 \u2014 265, 297, 440.\n\n1:19 \u2014 333.\n\n1:21, 23 \u2014 659.\n\n1:23 \u2014 731, 999.\n\n1:27 \u2014 904.\n\n2:5 \u2014 806.\n\n2:6 \u2014 308, 313, 314, 326, 336, 703, 718.\n\n2:6, 7 \u2014 249, 703.\n\n2:6\u201011 \u2014 702, 706.\n\n2:7 \u2014 314, 572, 689, 943.\n\n2:7, 8 \u2014 288.\n\n2:10 \u2014 314.\n\n2:10, 11 \u2014 311.\n\n2:12 \u2014 829.\n\n2:12, 13 \u2014 258, 356, 364, 418, 641, 715, 785, 792, 799, 811, 830.\n\n2:13 \u2014 423, 782, 816.\n\n2:16 \u2014 33.\n\n2:30 \u2014 895.\n\n3:6 \u2014 891, 912.\n\n3:8 \u2014 706.\n\n3:8, 9 \u2014 544, 805.\n\n3:8, 10 \u2014 691.\n\n3:9 \u2014 856.\n\n3:11 \u2014 1002.\n\n3:14 \u2014 791.\n\n3:15 \u2014 574.\n\n3:18 \u2014 895.\n\n3:20, 21 \u2014 806.\n\n3:21 \u2014 678, 1015, 1017.\n\n4:3 \u2014 547, 781.\n\n4:5 \u2014 236, 1006.\n\n4:13 \u2014 512.\n\n4:19 \u2014 421.\n\nColossians.\n\n1:9, 10 \u2014 440.\n\n1:13 \u2014 811.\n\n1:15 \u2014 313, 336, 340, 341, 515.\n\n1:15, 17 \u2014 326.\n\n1:16 \u2014 16, 310, 326, 378, 382, 397, 444, 445, 448, 474, 475, 679.\n\n1:16, 17 \u2014 109, 377, 464.\n\n1:17 \u2014 110, 310, 311, 378, 412, 759.\n\n1:18 \u2014 150, 678, 680, 887.\n\n1:19 \u2014 313.\n\n1:20 \u2014 109, 310, 388, 450, 719.\n\n1:22 \u2014 717.\n\n1:23 \u2014 1008.\n\n1:24 \u2014 716.\n\n1:27 \u2014 19, 691, 801, 842.\n\n1:28 \u2014 260.\n\n2:2 \u2014 691.\n\n2:2, 3 \u2014 109.\n\n2:3 \u2014 28, 310.\n\n2:5 \u2014 895.\n\n2:7 \u2014 795.\n\n2:9 \u2014 109, 308, 313, 348, 680, 686, 692.\n\n2:9, 10 \u2014 32, 253.\n\n2:10 \u2014 444.\n\n2:11, 12 \u2014 931.\n\n2:12 \u2014 821, 822, 936, 940, 941.\n\n2:15 \u2014 442, 459.\n\n2:18 \u2014 446, 452, 453.\n\n2:20, 21, 22 \u2014 217.\n\n2:21 \u2014 216.\n\n3:2 \u2014 941.\n\n3:3 \u2014 829.\n\n3:3, 4 \u2014 810.\n\n3:10 \u2014 514, 517.\n\n3:11 \u2014 546.\n\n3:12 \u2014 780.\n\n4:16 \u2014 201.\n\n1 Thessalonians.\n\n1:1, 2 \u2014 848.\n\n1:6 \u2014 294.\n\n1:9 \u2014 251.\n\n2:10 \u2014 294.\n\n2:12 \u2014 791.\n\n2:14 \u2014 890.\n\n2:18 \u2014 455.\n\n3:5 \u2014 455.\n\n3:13 \u2014 268, 303.\n\n4:2, 8 \u2014 200.\n\n4:7 \u2014 268.\n\n4:13\u201017 \u2014 1017.\n\n4:14 \u2014 1000.\n\n4:14\u201016 \u2014 1015.\n\n4:16 \u2014 1004, 1005.\n\n4:14, 17 \u2014 801.\n\n4:15\u201017 \u2014 137, 235.\n\n4:16 \u2014 448, 998, 1004, 1005.\n\n4:17 \u2014 1005.\n\n5:10 \u2014 999, 1000.\n\n5:11 \u2014 899.\n\n5:12 \u2014 916.\n\n5:12, 13 \u2014 780, 902.\n\n5:22 \u2014 732.\n\n5:23 \u2014 484, 485, 806.\n\n5:24 \u2014 288.\n\n2 Thessalonians.\n\n1:5\u201010 \u2014 778.\n\n1:6\u201010 \u2014 1011.\n\n1:7 \u2014 445.\n\n1:7, 10 \u2014 1004.\n\n1:9 \u2014 660.\n\n2:1, 2 \u2014 138, 140.\n\n2:1, 3 \u2014 1006.\n\n2:2 \u2014 150, 1005.\n\n2:3 \u2014 137, 138.\n\n2:3, 4 \u2014 572.\n\n2:3, 4, 7, 8 \u2014 1008.\n\n2:3, 4, 9 \u2014 454.\n\n2:3\u20105 \u2014 236.\n\n2:7 \u2014 425, 587.\n\n2:8 \u2014 457.\n\n2:9 \u2014 132, 133, 457.\n\n2:10 \u2014 1024.\n\n2:11, 12 \u2014 423.\n\n2:13 \u2014 780.\n\n2:14 \u2014 791.\n\n3:6 \u2014 924, 925.\n\n3:11 \u2014 140.\n\n3:14, 15 \u2014 907.\n\n1 Timothy.\n\n1:3 \u2014 787.\n\n1:10 \u2014 39.\n\n1:11 \u2014 245.\n\n1:12 \u2014 919.\n\n1:13, 15, 16 \u2014 649.\n\n1:15 \u2014 556, 787.\n\n1:16 \u2014 787.\n\n1:17 \u2014 259, 275, 1045.\n\n1:20 \u2014 457.\n\n2:4 \u2014 797.\n\n2:5 \u2014 308, 673, 685.\n\n2:5 \u2014 308, 673, 685, 698.\n\n2:6 \u2014 717, 771.\n\n2:11, 12 \u2014 546.\n\n2:15 \u2014 680.\n\n3:1 \u2014 914.\n\n3:1, 2 \u2014 902.\n\n3:2 \u2014 19, 39, 915.\n\n3:2\u20107 \u2014 919.\n\n3: \u2014 912.\n\n3:5 \u2014 917.\n\n3:8 \u2014 914.\n\n3:8\u201013 \u2014 918.\n\n3:11 \u2014 918.\n\n3:15 \u2014 18, 33, 891, 903, 905, 977.\n\n3:16 \u2014 15, 686, 691, 718, 762, 843, 852, 856.\n\n4:2 \u2014 501.\n\n4:4 \u2014 758.\n\n4:10 \u2014 758, 771.\n\n4:14 \u2014 919, 946.\n\n4:16 \u2014 1056.\n\n5:2 \u2014 464.\n\n5:6 \u2014 659.\n\n5:9 \u2014 895.\n\n5:17 \u2014 915, 917.\n\n5:21 \u2014 447, 450, 452.\n\n5:22 \u2014 919.\n\n5:24 \u2014 650.\n\n6:4 \u2014 39.\n\n6:13 \u2014 412.\n\n6:15 \u2014 259, 445.\n\n6:16 \u2014 14, 246, 262, 275, 444.\n\n6:20 \u2014 39, 149.\n\n2 Timothy.\n\n1:9 \u2014 771, 781, 791, 1044.\n\n1:10 \u2014 131, 590.\n\n1:12 \u2014 67, 149.\n\n1:13 \u2014 18.\n\n1:14 \u2014 149.\n\n1:16\u201018 \u2014 1043.\n\n1:18 \u2014 318.\n\n2:3 \u2014 18.\n\n2:10 \u2014 789.\n\n2:11 \u2014 805.\n\n2:15 \u2014 19.\n\n2:18 \u2014 998, 1017.\n\n2:20 \u2014 790.\n\n2:25 \u2014 17, 451, 782, 835.\n\n2:26 \u2014 445, 835.\n\n3:2 \u2014 572, 639.\n\n3:4 \u2014 639.\n\n3:7 \u2014 814.\n\n3:13 \u2014 633, 638.\n\n3:15 \u2014 218, 804.\n\n3:16 \u2014 197, 200, 205.\n\n4:2 \u2014 19.\n\n4:6 \u2014 236.\n\n4:8 \u2014 1000, 1005.\n\n4:13 \u2014 217.\n\n4:16 \u2014 594.\n\n4:18 \u2014 311, 998.\n\nTitus.\n\n1:1 \u2014 782.\n\n1:2 \u2014 288, 1044.\n\n1:5 \u2014 906, 914.\n\n1:6 \u2014 919.\n\n1:7 \u2014 914.\n\n1:9 \u2014 19, 919.\n\n1:12 \u2014 165, 696.\n\n1:15 \u2014 639.\n\n2:10 \u2014 333.\n\n2:11 \u2014 758, 771.\n\n2:13 \u2014 307.\n\n2:14 \u2014 717.\n\n3:4 \u2014 289.\n\n3:5 \u2014 316, 821, 822, 946.\n\nHebrews.\n\n1:1 \u2014 214, 221.\n\n1:2 \u2014 160, 320, 326, 333, 378.\n\n1:2, 3 \u2014 109, 412, 685.\n\n1:3 \u2014 165, 256, 286, 310, 313, 320, 336, 419, 515, 762, 775.\n\n1:5, 6 \u2014 340.\n\n1:6 \u2014 307, 311, 1004.\n\n1:7 \u2014 457.\n\n1:8 \u2014 307, 318, 598, 776.\n\n1:9 \u2014 266.\n\n1:10 \u2014 310, 326.\n\n1:11 \u2014 310.\n\n1:14 \u2014 445, 452, 1000.\n\n2:2 \u2014 448, 452.\n\n2:2, 3 \u2014 648.\n\n2:3 \u2014 153.\n\n2:4 \u2014 845.\n\n2:6 \u2014 653.\n\n2:6\u201010 \u2014 678.\n\n2:7 \u2014 315, 706.\n\n2:8, 9 \u2014 405, 775.\n\n2:9 \u2014 716, 743.\n\n2:10 \u2014 675, 745.\n\n2:11 \u2014 476, 680, 692.\n\n2:12 \u2014 891.\n\n2:13 \u2014 697.\n\n2:14 \u2014 455, 459, 670, 685.\n\n2:14, 15 \u2014 757.\n\n2:16 \u2014 448, 453, 455, 464, 476, 687, 768, 786.\n\n2:17 \u2014 720.\n\n2:17, 18 \u2014 698, 774.\n\n2:18 \u2014 675.\n\n3:1 \u2014 791, 909.\n\n3:3, 4 \u2014 310.\n\n3:12 \u2014 553, 639.\n\n3:13 \u2014 899.\n\n3:14, 16 \u2014 674.\n\n3:18 \u2014 841.\n\n4:4 \u2014 153.\n\n4:6, 11 \u2014 841.\n\n4:5\u20109 \u2014 410.\n\n4:12 \u2014 484, 485, 811.\n\n4:13 \u2014 282.\n\n4:15 \u2014 677.\n\n4:15, 16 \u2014 698, 774.\n\n5:7 \u2014 674.\n\n5:8 \u2014 675.\n\n5:14 \u2014 16.\n\n6:1, 2 \u2014 15.\n\n6:2 \u2014 1053.\n\n6:10 \u2014 399.\n\n6:11 \u2014 844.\n\n6:18 \u2014 288.\n\n6:18, 19 \u2014 485.\n\n7:10 \u2014 494.\n\n7:15, 16 \u2014 680, 694, 846.\n\n7:16 \u2014 309.\n\n7:23, 25 \u2014 773.\n\n7:24, 25 \u2014 698.\n\n7:25 \u2014 639, 698, 774, 776.\n\n7:26 \u2014 309, 646, 677.\n\n8:2 \u2014 260.\n\n8:5 \u2014 152, 310.\n\n8:8, 9 \u2014 614.\n\n8:13 \u2014 152.\n\n9:1 \u2014 852.\n\n9:11, 12 \u2014 718.\n\n9:13, 14 \u2014 724.\n\n9:14 \u2014 298, 415, 316, 317, 326, 338, 341, 378, 677, 696, 703, 736, 1045.\n\n9:14, 22, 25 \u2014 719.\n\n9:15 \u2014 718.\n\n9:22 \u2014 645, 765.\n\n9:26 \u2014 943, 1044.\n\n9:27 \u2014 1001, 1024.\n\n9:27, 28 \u2014 1023.\n\n9:28 \u2014 718, 1001, 1004.\n\n10:5\u20107 \u2014 234.\n\n10:7 \u2014 830.\n\n10:9 \u2014 539.\n\n10:12 \u2014 936.\n\n10:19\u201025 \u2014 848.\n\n10:22 \u2014 501, 946.\n\n10:25 \u2014 894, 899.\n\n10:26, 29. \u2014 350.\n\n10:27 \u2014 1052.\n\n10:28 \u2014 650.\n\n10:31 \u2014 539, 652, 660, 1056.\n\n10:38 \u2014 485.\n\n11:1 \u2014 839.\n\n11:2 \u2014 675.\n\n11:3 \u2014 377.\n\n11:4 \u2014 726.\n\n11:4\u20107 \u2014 850.\n\n11:5 \u2014 995, 996.\n\n11:6 \u2014 643.\n\n11:8 \u2014 280, 441.\n\n11:12 \u2014 234.\n\n11:13\u201016 \u2014 995, 996.\n\n11:31 \u2014 230, 841.\n\n11:34, 38 \u2014 165.\n\n12:2 \u2014 266.\n\n12:2, 16 \u2014 717.\n\n12:6 \u2014 272, 983.\n\n12:9 \u2014 465, 474, 483, 491, 495.\n\n12:14 \u2014 296.\n\n12:19 \u2014 209.\n\n12:20 \u2014 234.\n\n12:22, 23 \u2014 446.\n\n12:23 \u2014 333, 367, 483, 509, 887, 998, 1000.\n\n12:29 \u2014 268, 272, 653.\n\n13:7 \u2014 915, 916.\n\n13:8 \u2014 163, 309, 888, 1003.\n\n13:17 \u2014 916.\n\n13:21 \u2014 311.\n\n13:33 \u2014 680.\n\nJames.\n\n1:5 \u2014 265, 440.\n\n1:13, 14 \u2014 562.\n\n1:14, 15 \u2014 562.\n\n1:15 \u2014 573, 585, 633, 981.\n\n1:17 \u2014 256, 257, 359.\n\n1:18 \u2014 782, 811, 889.\n\n1:21 \u2014 485.\n\n1:23, 24 \u2014 543.\n\n1:23\u201025 \u2014 219, 681.\n\n1:27 \u2014 24.\n\n2:8 \u2014 572.\n\n2:10 \u2014 543.\n\n2:14\u201026 \u2014 846.\n\n2:19 \u2014 457, 837.\n\n2:21, 23, 24 \u2014 851.\n\n2:23 \u2014 782.\n\n2:25 \u2014 230.\n\n2:26 \u2014 483.\n\n3:2 \u2014 573.\n\n3:9 \u2014 515.\n\n3:17 \u2014 297, 911.\n\n4:7 \u2014 458.\n\n4:12 \u2014 543.\n\n4:13\u201015 \u2014 423.\n\n4:17 \u2014 542, 553, 648.\n\n5:7 \u2014 1006.\n\n5:8, 9 \u2014 1007.\n\n5:9 \u2014 236.\n\n5:11 \u2014 241.\n\n5:14 \u2014 902.\n\n5:16 \u2014 834.\n\n5:19, 20 \u2014 850.\n\n5:20 \u2014 660, 992.\n\n1 Peter.\n\n1:1, 2 \u2014 324, 450, 780, 781.\n\n1:2 \u2014 305, 316, 324, 778, 782, 788.\n\n1:3 \u2014 418, 811.\n\n1:5 \u2014 848.\n\n1:10, 11 \u2014 235.\n\n1:11 \u2014 134, 137, 197, 206.\n\n1:11, 12 \u2014 200.\n\n1:12 \u2014 445, 450.\n\n1:16 \u2014 290, 296, 302, 543.\n\n1:18 \u2014 719.\n\n1:19 \u2014 677.\n\n1:19, 20 \u2014 266.\n\n1:20 \u2014 780.\n\n1:23 \u2014 33, 811, 824.\n\n2:4, 5 \u2014 795.\n\n2:5 \u2014 774.\n\n2:5, 9 \u2014 805.\n\n2:8 \u2014 355, 784, 790.\n\n2:9 \u2014 401, 781, 811.\n\n2:17 \u2014 515.\n\n2:21 \u2014 678, 729, 732.\n\n2:21, 24 \u2014 717.\n\n2:22 \u2014 677.\n\n3:1, 2 \u2014 914.\n\n3:8 \u2014 904.\n\n3:15 \u2014 311, 739.\n\n3:16 \u2014 501.\n\n3:18 \u2014 685, 720, 762.\n\n3:18, 20 \u2014 707, 708.\n\n3:19 \u2014 999, 1000.\n\n3:21 \u2014 501, 776, 821, 941.\n\n3:32 \u2014 444.\n\n4:6 \u2014 657, 762, 983.\n\n4:7 \u2014 236, 1006.\n\n4:11 \u2014 401, 641.\n\n4:14 \u2014 256.\n\n4:19 \u2014 288.\n\n5:1 \u2014 909.\n\n5:2 \u2014 894, 911.\n\n5:2, 3 \u2014 917.\n\n5:3 \u2014 898.\n\n5:6 \u2014 288.\n\n5:8 \u2014 454, 455.\n\n5:9 \u2014 458.\n\n2 Peter.\n\n1:3 \u2014 289, 842.\n\n1:4 \u2014 475, 515, 592, 685, 693, 797, 811.\n\n1:10 \u2014 311, 791, 844.\n\n1:11 \u2014 776.\n\n1:16 \u2014 157.\n\n1:19 \u2014 112.\n\n1:19, 20 \u2014 139.\n\n1:21 \u2014 137, 197, 200, 205, 317, 325, 339.\n\n2:1 \u2014 717, 771.\n\n2:4 \u2014 296, 382, 450, 464, 786.\n\n2:4, 9 \u2014 1024.\n\n2:9 \u2014 1000, 1002.\n\n2:11 \u2014 445.\n\n3:2 \u2014 200.\n\n3:3\u201012 \u2014 1007.\n\n3:4 \u2014 236.\n\n3:5 \u2014 509, 558.\n\n3:7, 10 \u2014 1011, 1024.\n\n3:7, 10, 13 \u2014 1015.\n\n3:7\u201013 \u2014 287.\n\n3:15, 16 \u2014 201.\n\n3:16 \u2014 200.\n\n3:18 \u2014 16, 311.\n\n1 John.\n\n1:1 \u2014 674.\n\n1:3 \u2014 797.\n\n1:5 \u2014 250, 269, 273, 344.\n\n1:7 \u2014 719.\n\n1:7, 8 \u2014 645.\n\n1:8 \u2014 573.\n\n1:9 \u2014 289, 739.\n\n1:12 \u2014 856.\n\n2:1 \u2014 322, 339, 739, 774.\n\n2:1, 2 \u2014 323.\n\n2:2 \u2014 720.\n\n2:7 \u2014 40.\n\n2:7, 8 \u2014 263.\n\n2:18 \u2014 1006.\n\n2:20 \u2014 805, 897.\n\n3:1, 2 \u2014 474.\n\n3:2 \u2014 524, 663, 705, 806.\n\n3:3 \u2014 678.\n\n3:3\u20106 \u2014 263.\n\n3:4 \u2014 552.\n\n3:5\u20107 \u2014 677.\n\n3:8 \u2014 459.\n\n3:9 \u2014 418.\n\n3:14 \u2014 660, 992.\n\n3:16 \u2014 309.\n\n3:20 \u2014 647, 722.\n\n4:1 \u2014 440.\n\n4:2 \u2014 674, 684, 686.\n\n4:7 \u2014 68, 152, 570.\n\n4:7, 8 \u2014 4.\n\n4:8 \u2014 250, 263, 336, 520.\n\n4:9 \u2014 716.\n\n4:10 \u2014 720, 776.\n\n4:13 \u2014 844.\n\n4:16 \u2014 797.\n\n4:19 \u2014 694.\n\n4:21 \u2014 460.\n\n5:1 \u2014 893.\n\n5:4 \u2014 732.\n\n5:6 \u2014 943.\n\n5:7 \u2014 261, 288.\n\n5:10 \u2014 200, 844.\n\n5:14, 15 \u2014 848.\n\n5:16, 17 \u2014 650.\n\n5:17 \u2014 553.\n\n5:18, 19 \u2014 450.\n\n5:19 \u2014 574.\n\n5:20 \u2014 260, 308.\n\n2 John.\n\n7 \u2014 686, 1005.\n\n8 \u2014 293.\n\n3 John.\n\n2 \u2014 483.\n\nJude.\n\n3 \u2014 42, 200, 202, 905.\n\n4 \u2014 790.\n\n6 \u2014 165, 450, 458, 1046.\n\n6, 7 \u2014 1044.\n\n9 \u2014 165, 448.\n\n19 \u2014 484, 485.\n\n21 \u2014 324.\n\n23 \u2014 899.\n\n25 \u2014 275, 388.\n\n28 \u2014 1055.\n\nRevelation.\n\n1:1 \u2014 140.\n\n1:3 \u2014 1007.\n\n1:6 \u2014 776, 917.\n\n1:7 \u2014 460, 710, 1004, 1005.\n\n1:8 \u2014 275, 310.\n\n1:10 \u2014 410.\n\n1:10, 11 \u2014 209.\n\n1:18 \u2014 1045.\n\n1:20 \u2014 452.\n\n2: \u2014 905.\n\n2:1 \u2014 916.\n\n2:6 \u2014 310.\n\n2:7 \u2014 999.\n\n2:8 \u2014 916.\n\n2:11 \u2014 983.\n\n2:12 \u2014 916.\n\n2:13 \u2014 448.\n\n2:18 \u2014 916.\n\n2:21 \u2014 841.\n\n3:1 \u2014 916, 992.\n\n3:7 \u2014 309, 916.\n\n3:14 \u2014 310, 916.\n\n3:20 \u2014 464, 791, 839, 1003.\n\n3:21 \u2014 805.\n\n4:3 \u2014 272.\n\n4:6\u20108 \u2014 449.\n\n4:8 \u2014 296.\n\n4:11 \u2014 397, 406.\n\n5:1, 7, 9 \u2014 356.\n\n5:6 \u2014 333, 774.\n\n5:9 \u2014 449.\n\n5:10 \u2014 805.\n\n5:11 \u2014 447.\n\n5:12 \u2014 140.\n\n5:13, 14 \u2014 311\n\n5:20 \u2014 665.\n\n6:9 \u2014 483, 485.\n\n6:9\u201011 \u2014 999.\n\n6:10, 11 \u2014 1002.\n\n6:16 \u2014 350.\n\n7: \u2014 896.\n\n7:16 \u2014 251.\n\n7:16, 17 \u2014 774.\n\n8:28, 29 \u2014 782.\n\n10:6 \u2014 278.\n\n10:8\u201011 \u2014 823.\n\n11:11 \u2014 251.\n\n11:17 \u2014 889.\n\n12:9\u201012 \u2014 457.\n\n12:10 \u2014 454.\n\n12:11 \u2014 732, 751.\n\n12:12 \u2014 445, 461.\n\n13:8 \u2014 266, 285, 298, 762.\n\n14:10 \u2014 464.\n\n14:11 \u2014 660.\n\n14:13 \u2014 999.\n\n15:1\u20104 \u2014 273, 653.\n\n15:2 \u2014 274.\n\n15:8 \u2014 275.\n\n15:13 \u2014 325.\n\n16:3 \u2014 485.\n\n16:5 \u2014 273, 653.\n\n16:10 \u2014 448.\n\n17:17 \u2014 355.\n\n18:13 \u2014 445, 516.\n\n19:2 \u2014 273, 653.\n\n19:5 \u2014 653.\n\n19:7 \u2014 796.\n\n19:9 \u2014 209.\n\n19:10 \u2014 842.\n\n19:14 \u2014 448.\n\n19:15, 16 \u2014 775.\n\n20:1\u20105 \u2014 403, 1015.\n\n20:2 \u2014 382, 455.\n\n20:2, 3 \u2014 425.\n\n20:2\u201010 \u2014 445.\n\n20:4\u20106 \u2014 1008.\n\n20:6 \u2014 805.\n\n20:10 \u2014 382, 457, 464.\n\n20:11\u201015 \u2014 1011.\n\n20:12 \u2014 1023.\n\n20:12, 13 \u2014 1023, 1050.\n\n20:13 \u2014 1015.\n\n20:14 \u2014 983, 999.\n\n20:15 \u2014 781.\n\n21:4, 5 \u2014 1018.\n\n21:5 \u2014 209, 810, 1004.\n\n21:8 \u2014 983, 1048.\n\n21:9 \u2014 1048.\n\n21:10 \u2014 310.\n\n21:11 \u2014 1049.\n\n21:14 \u2014 909.\n\n21:17 \u2014 781.\n\n21:22 \u2014 893.\n\n21:23 \u2014 256, 712.\n\n22:2 \u2014 914.\n\n21:27 \u2014 790.\n\n22:4 \u2014 67.\n\n22:6 \u2014 200, 465.\n\n22:8, 9 \u2014 319, 453, 515.\n\n22:9 \u2014 446.\n\n22:11 \u2014 851, 852, 1001, 1048.\n\n22:12, 20 \u2014 1007.\n\n22:13, 14 \u2014 326.\n\n22:14 \u2014 527.\n\n22:16 \u2014 680, 697.\n\n22:17 \u2014 392, 547, 796.\n\n\n\n\nIndex Of Apocryphal Texts.\n\n\n1 Esdras.\n\n1:28 \u2014 166.\n\n1:38 \u2014 261.\n\n4:35\u201038 \u2014 320.\n\n6:1 \u2014 261.\n\n2 Esdras.\n\n3:7 \u2014 626.\n\n3:21 \u2014 626.\n\n6:55, 66 \u2014 156.\n\n7:11 \u2014 626.\n\n7:46 \u2014 626.\n\n7:48 \u2014 626.\n\n7:118 \u2014 626.\n\n9:19 \u2014 626.\n\nTobit.\n\n4:15 \u2014 181.\n\nJudith.\n\n12:71 \u2014 934.\n\nEsther, Continuation of.\n\n1:1 \u2014 309.\n\nWisdom.\n\n2:23, 24 \u2014 626.\n\n7:26 \u2014 320.\n\n7:28 \u2014 320.\n\n9:9, 10 \u2014 320.\n\n11:16 \u2014 633.\n\n11:17 \u2014 377.\n\nEcclesiasticus, or Sirach.\n\nPrologue \u2014 166.\n\n2:1 \u2014 870.\n\n2:30 \u2014 865.\n\n18:1 \u2014 446.\n\n24:23\u201027 \u2014 166.\n\n25:24 \u2014 626.\n\n31:25 \u2014 934.\n\n48:24 \u2014 166.\n\nBaruch.\n\n2:21 \u2014 166.\n\nBel and the Dragon.\n\nBook of \u2014 115.\n\n1 Maccabees.\n\nBook of \u2014 165, 309.\n\n12:9 \u2014 166.\n\n2 Maccabees.\n\n2:13\u201015 \u2014 167.\n\n6:23 \u2014 166.\n\n7:28 \u2014 377.\n\n12:39 \u2014 1043.\n\nBook of Enoch.\n\n165.\n\nAssumption of Moses.\n\nBook of \u2014 165.\n\nv. 9 \u2014 658.\n\n\n\n\nIndex Of Greek Words.\n\n\n\u1f04 \u03bf\u1f36\u03b4\u03b5\u03bd, 67\n\n\u1f00\u03b3\u03b1\u03b8\u1fc6\u03c2, 821\n\n\u1f00\u03b3\u03b1\u03b8\u03cc\u03bd, 562, 687\n\n\u1f00\u03b3\u03b1\u03c0\u03ac\u03c9, 264\n\n\u1f00\u03b3\u03ac\u03c0\u03b7, 35, 342\n\n\u1f00\u03b3\u03ac\u03c0\u03b7\u03bd, \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd, 1 John 3:16, = the personal Love, 309\n\n\u1f00\u03b3\u03b3\u03ad\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2, 706\n\n\u1f00\u03b3\u03b9\u03ac\u03b6\u03c9, 728\n\n\u1f00\u03b3\u03bd\u03c9\u03c3\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u0398\u03b5\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03b5\u03c2 \u1f14\u03c7\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd, 68\n\n\u1f00\u03b3\u1ff6\u03bd\u03b1, 870\n\n\u1f00\u03b3\u03c9\u03bd\u03af\u03b6\u03bf\u03c5, 870\n\n\u1f04\u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03c6\u03bf\u03c2 \u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03bf\u03c2, 541\n\n\u1f00\u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03af\u03b1, 552\n\n\u1f04\u03b8\u03b5\u03bf\u03b9 \u1f10\u03bd \u1ff7 \u03ba\u03cc\u03c3\u03bc\u1ff3, forsaken of God, 68\n\n\u1f00\u03b8\u03b5\u03c1\u03ac\u03c0\u03b5\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd, 671\n\n\u1f0c\u03b9\u03b4\u03b7\u03c2, 994\n\n\u1f00\u0390\u03b4\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2, 1044, 1046\n\n\u03b1\u1f35\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9, 753\n\n\u03b1\u1f31\u03c1\u03b5\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f04\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\u03c0\u03bf\u03c2, meaning in Titus 3:10, 974\n\n\u03b1\u1f34\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd, its meaning in John 1:29, 719\n\n\u03b1\u1f34\u03c3\u03b8\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2, spiritual discernment, Phil. 1:9, 440\n\n\u03b1\u1f30\u1ff6\u03bd, 1038, 1044, 1045, 1046\n\n\u03b1\u1f30\u1ff6\u03bd\u03b1, 307\n\n\u03b1\u1f30\u03ce\u03bd\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2, 1038, 1044, 1045, 1046\n\n\u03b1\u1f30\u03ce\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2, 1025\n\n\u03b1\u1f30\u03ce\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd, \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd, 275\n\n\u1f00\u03bb\u03ae\u03b8\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1, 204, 549\n\n\u1f00\u03bb\u03b7\u03b8\u03ae\u03c2, the Veracious, 260\n\n\u1f00\u03bb\u03b7\u03b8\u03b9\u03bd\u03cc\u03c2, 1 John 5:20, 151, 260, 308\n\n\u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf and the \u03b5\u1f36\u03c2, 671\n\n\u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2 and the \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03ac\u03c6\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1, 671\n\n\u1f01\u03bc\u03b1\u03c1\u03c4\u03ac\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd, Rom. 5:12, 19, 626\n\n\u1f01\u03bc\u03b1\u03c1\u03c4\u03ac\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd, 626\n\n\u1f01\u03bc\u03b1\u03c1\u03c4\u03af\u03b1, 552, 657, 706, 714, 761, 832, 851\n\n\u1f01\u03bc\u03b1\u03c1\u03c4\u03c9\u03bb\u03bf\u1f76 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u03c3\u03c4\u03ac\u03b8\u03b7\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd, 627\n\n\u1f01\u03bc\u03b1\u03c1\u03c4\u03c9\u03bb\u1f78\u03bd \u03b3\u03af\u03b3\u03bd\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9, 626\n\n\u1f00\u03bc\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2, 151\n\n\u1f00\u03bd\u03ac, 523\n\n\u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03b2\u03b1\u03af\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd, 935\n\n\u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03ba\u03b5\u03c6\u03b1\u03bb\u03b1\u03b9\u03ce\u03c3\u03b1\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9, 680\n\n\u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03bb\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9, 999\n\n\u1f00\u03bd\u03ac\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03bc\u03ad\u03bb\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd, \u1f14\u03c3\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9, 998\n\n\u1f00\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03cc\u03c2, 494\n\n\u1f00\u03bd\u03ad\u03b2\u03b7\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd, 935\n\n\u1f00\u03bd\u03ae\u03c1, 666\n\n\u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\u03c0\u03af\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03af\u03b1\u03c2, 210\n\n\u1f04\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\u03c0\u03bf\u03c2, 506, 523, 974\n\n\u1f00\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03af\u03b1, the state of, 552\n\n\u1f00\u03bd\u03c4\u03ac\u03bb\u03bb\u03b1\u03b3\u03bc\u03b1, 717, 721\n\n\u1f00\u03bd\u03c4\u03af, 717, 720\n\n\u1f00\u03bd\u03c4\u03af\u03bb\u03b7\u03c8\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2, 902, 917, 918\n\n\u1f00\u03bd\u03c4\u03af\u03bb\u03c5\u03c4\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd, 717\n\n\u1f00\u03bd\u03c5\u03c0\u03bf\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03af\u03b1, 673, 679\n\n\u1f04\u03bd\u03c9, 523\n\n\u1f00\u03c0\u1fbd \u1f04\u03c1\u03c4\u03b9, 1003\n\n\u1f05\u03c0\u03b1\u03be, once for all, 200, 885, 967\n\n\u1f05\u03c0\u03b1\u03be \u03bb\u03b5\u03b3\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd, 222\n\n\u1f00\u03c0\u03b1\u03cd\u03b3\u03b1\u03c3\u03bc\u03b1, 336\n\n\u1f00\u03c0\u03b5\u03b8\u03ac\u03bd\u03b5\u03c4\u03b5, 803\n\n\u1f00\u03c0\u03b5\u03b9\u03b8\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd, 1 Pet. 3:20, 708\n\n\u1f00\u03c0\u03b7\u03bb\u03ac\u03b8\u03b7\u03bd, 233\n\n\u1f00\u03c0\u03b7\u03bb\u03b3\u03b7\u03ba\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2, 647\n\n\u1f01\u03c0\u03bb\u1ff6\u03c2 \u1f14\u03bd, \u03c4\u03cc, 245\n\n\u1f00\u03c0\u03cc, 833, 1034\n\n\u1f00\u03c0\u1f78 \u1f41 \u1f66\u03bd, 151\n\n\u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03cd\u03c0\u03c4\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, 26\n\n\u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03ba\u03ac\u03bb\u03c5\u03c8\u03b9\u03c2, 13\n\n\u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03bc\u03bd\u03b7\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\u03b5\u03cd\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1, 148\n\n\u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03b4\u03ce\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9, \u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03b4\u03ce\u03b7, 231\n\n\u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03b8\u03b1\u03bd\u1ff6\u03bd, 851\n\n\u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03af\u03b1, 552, 1008\n\n\u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03c3\u03c4\u03c1\u03ad\u03c6\u03c9, 829\n\n\u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03ad\u03bb\u03b5\u03c3\u03bc\u03b1, _genus apotelesmaticum_, 686\n\n\u1f00\u03c0\u03c1\u03cc\u03c3\u03bb\u03b7\u03c0\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03b8\u03b5\u03c1\u03ac\u03c0\u03b5\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd, \u03c4\u1f78, a patristic dictum, 671\n\n\u1f00\u03c0\u03ce\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1, 721, 993\n\n\u1f00\u03c0\u03ce\u03bb\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf, 993\n\n\u1f00\u03c1\u03bd\u03af\u03bf\u03bd, 151\n\n\u1f05\u03c1\u03c4\u03b9, 1003\n\n\u1f00\u03c1\u03c4\u03bf\u03bb\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u03af\u03b1, 969\n\n\u1f00\u03c1\u03c7\u03ac\u03b3\u03b3\u03b5\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2, 320\n\n\u1f00\u03c1\u03c7\u03ae, 310, 675\n\n\u1f00\u03c1\u03c7\u1fc7, \u1f10\u03bd, 309\n\n\u1f00\u03c1\u03c7\u03ae\u03bd, 450\n\n\u1f00\u03c1\u03c7\u03b9\u03b5\u03c1\u03b5\u03cd\u03c2, 320\n\n\u1f00\u03c3\u03ad\u03b2\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1, 552\n\n\u1f00\u03c4\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03af\u03b6\u03c9\u03bd, 665\n\n\u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u03bc\u03ac\u03c4\u03b7, 393\n\n\u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03cc\u03c2, 310\n\n\u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff7, 837\n\n\u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd, 906\n\n\u1f00\u03c6\u03b1\u03bd\u03af\u03b6\u03c9, 993\n\n\u1f00\u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u03af\u03c3\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5, 906\n\n\u03b2\u03b1\u03c0\u03c4\u03af\u03b6\u03c9, 933, 934, 935, 937, 938, 942, 948\n\n\u03b2\u03ac\u03c0\u03c4\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u03b1, 933\n\n\u03b2\u03b1\u03c0\u03c4\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u03cc\u03c2, 937\n\n\u03b2\u03ac\u03c0\u03c4\u03c9, 933, 934, 938\n\n\u03b2\u03ac\u03c1\u03b2\u03b1\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9, 579\n\n\u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03ac\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2, \u1f10\u03bd, 999\n\n\u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd, 445\n\n\u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bb\u03b5\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b1\u1f30\u03ce\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd, 275\n\n\u03b2\u03b4\u03ad\u03bb\u03c5\u03b3\u03bc\u03b1 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c1\u03b7\u03bc\u03ce\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2, 151\n\n\u03b2\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03ae, arbitrium, Willk\u00fcr, 557\n\n\u03b2\u03c1\u03b1\u03c7\u03cd \u03c4\u03b9, its translation in Heb. 2:7, 706\n\n\u03b3\u03ad\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd\u03b5\u03bd, 311\n\n\u03b3\u03ad\u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03c0\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, 148\n\n\u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03b7\u03c3\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd, 1019\n\n\u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03ae\u03c3\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, 914\n\n\u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2, 705\n\n\u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2, 681\n\n\u03b3\u1fc6, 393\n\n\u03b3\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bc\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c0\u03b7\u03bb\u03ac\u03b8\u03b7\u03bd, 233\n\n\u03b3\u03b9\u03b3\u03bd\u03ce\u03c3\u03ba\u03c9\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd, 841\n\n\u03b3\u03b9\u03bd\u03ce\u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9, 781\n\n\u03b3\u03b9\u03bd\u03ce\u03c3\u03ba\u03c9, 781\n\n\u03b3\u03bd\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1, 761\n\n\u03b3\u03bd\u03ce\u03bc\u03b7, 221\n\n\u03b3\u03bd\u1ff6\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2, 1 Tim. 6:20; _cf._ \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03b3\u03bd\u03c9\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2, 2 Pet. 1:2, 31, 841\n\n\u03b3\u03bd\u03c9\u03c3\u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03b8\u03b5\u03bf\u1fe6, 26, 68\n\n\u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03c6\u03ae, \u1f21, singular denotes unity, 199\n\n\u03b4\u03b1\u03af\u03bc\u03c9\u03bd, 506\n\n\u03b4\u03b5\u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03af\u03c9\u03bc\u03b1\u03b9, \u03b4\u03b5\u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03af\u03c9\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, 851\n\n\u03b4\u03b5\u03cd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b8\u03b5\u03cc\u03c2, applied by Philo to his Logos, 320\n\n\u03b4\u03b5\u03be\u03ac\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9, 1 Thess. 1:6, 708\n\n\u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03bd, justification not, but \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 or \u1f10\u03ba \u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2, 864\n\n\u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f78 \u1f10\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd and \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f10\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, Rom. 8:11, 488, 1017\n\n\u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf, Rom. 5:12, 39\n\n\u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03b8\u03ae\u03ba\u03b7\u03bd, 614\n\n\u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03ba\u03bf\u03bd\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd \u03c4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c0\u03ad\u03b6\u03b1\u03b9\u03c2, 918\n\n\u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03ba\u03bf\u03bd\u03af\u03b1, 902, 917\n\n\u03b4\u03b9\u03ac\u03ba\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2, 902\n\n\u03b4\u03b9\u03ac\u03b2\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2, 454\n\n\u03b4\u03b9\u03b4\u03b1\u03ba\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03cc\u03bd, 915\n\n\u03b4\u03b9\u03b4\u03b1\u03ba\u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2, 210\n\n\u03b4\u03b9\u03b4\u03ac\u03c3\u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2, 902\n\n\u03b4\u03b9\u1fc6\u03bb\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd, 623\n\n\u03b4\u03af\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03bf\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03b8\u03ae\u03c3\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, 627\n\n\u03b4\u03af\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2, 291\n\n\u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03bf\u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b7, 852, 853\n\n\u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03bf\u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b7 \u0398\u03b5\u03bf\u1fe6, that required and provided for by God, 847, 852, 853\n\n\u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03bf\u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b7\u03bd \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03b7\u03c3\u03ac\u03c4\u03c9, 851\n\n\u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03bf\u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b7\u03bd, \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f30\u03b4\u03af\u03b1\u03bd, repudiated by Paul, 852\n\n\u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03bf\u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b7 \u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2, or \u1f10\u03ba \u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2, 852\n\n\u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03bf\u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2, 753\n\n\u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03cc\u03c9, 850, 851, 853\n\n\u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03c9\u03b8\u03ad\u03bd\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2, 856\n\n\u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03af\u03c9\u03bc\u03b1, 852\n\n\u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03af\u03c9\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2, 852, 853\n\n\u03b4\u03af\u03c7\u03b1, 483\n\n\u03b4\u03b9\u03c8\u1fb7\u03bd, 151\n\n\u03b4\u03bf\u03ba\u1ff6, 242, 670\n\n\u03b4\u03cc\u03be\u03b7\u03c2, 307, 336\n\n\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03c9, 576\n\n\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9, 579\n\n\u03b4\u03c1\u03ac\u03ba\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1, \u03c4\u03cc\u03bd, \u1f41 \u1f44\u03c6\u03b9\u03c2, 151\n\n\u03b4\u03c5\u03bd\u03ac\u03bc\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2, 117\n\n\u03b4\u03cd\u03bf, 345\n\n\u1f11\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03cc\u03bd, LXX, for Hebrew \u201chis soul,\u201d, 485\n\n\u1f11\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c2, 780\n\n\u1f10\u03b3\u03b3\u03cd\u03c2, Phil. 4:5, 1006\n\n\u1f10\u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf, 687\n\n\u1f14\u03b3\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd, 781\n\n\u03b5\u1f36\u03b4\u03bf\u03bd \u1f44\u03c7\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03cd\u03c2, 151\n\n\u03b5\u1f30\u03ba\u03ce\u03bd, 335\n\n\u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9, \u03c4\u1f78, 377, 753\n\n\u03b5\u1f36\u03c0\u03b5\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff7, 306\n\n\u03b5\u1f36\u03c2, 313, 627, 671\n\n\u03b5\u1f30\u03c2, 935, 948\n\n\u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 and \u1f10\u03c0\u03af, Rom. 3:22, 722\n\n\u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03cc\u03bd, 837\n\n\u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u1f44\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03b1, 312\n\n\u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03c3\u03ad, 924\n\n\u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f78 \u1f44\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03b1, 951\n\n\u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03ba\u03cc\u03bb\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd, John 1:18, 337\n\n\u1f10\u03ba, 833, 891\n\n\u1f18\u03ba\u03b4\u03bf\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f00\u03ba\u03c1\u03b9\u03b2\u1f74\u03c2 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f40\u03c1\u03b8\u03bf\u03b4\u03cc\u03be\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2, earliest work on Systematic\n Theology, 44\n\n\u1f10\u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2, applied to the Holy Spirit, 323\n\n\u1f10\u03ba\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9\u03c3\u03b5\u03bd, Phil. 2:7, 701\n\n\u1f10\u03ba\u03ae\u03c1\u03c5\u03be\u03b5\u03bd, 707\n\n\u1f10\u03ba\u03ba\u03bb\u03b7\u03c3\u03af\u03b1, 890, 891, 892, 905, 906, 912\n\n\u1f10\u03ba\u03ba\u03bb\u03b7\u03c3\u03af\u03b1\u03bd, 308\n\n\u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b8\u03b5\u03c1\u03af\u03b1\u03c2, 549\n\n\u1f10\u03bb\u03b7\u03bb\u03c5\u03b8\u03cc\u03c4\u03b1, 687\n\n\u1f10\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u1fb6\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, 594\n\n\u1f15\u03bd, 313, 352\n\n\u1f10\u03bd, its force with \u03b2\u03b1\u03c0\u03c4\u03af\u03b6\u03c9, 935\n\n\u1f10\u03bd \u1f00\u03c1\u03c7\u1fc7, John 1:1, 309\n\n\u1f10\u03bd \u03c3\u03b1\u03c1\u03ba\u1f76 \u1f10\u03bb\u03b7\u03bb\u03c5\u03b8\u03cc\u03c4\u03b1, 687\n\n\u1f14\u03bd\u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\u03be\u03b9\u03c2, Rom. 3:25, 753\n\n\u1f10\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd, \u1f10\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, 488, 1017\n\n\u1f10\u03bd\u03c5\u03c0\u03bf\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03af\u03b1, 679\n\n\u1f15\u03bd\u03c9\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2, 671\n\n\u1f15\u03bd\u03c9\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f51\u03c0\u03bf\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae, 673\n\n\u1f10\u03be \u1f00\u03bc\u03cc\u03c1\u03c6\u03bf\u03c5 \u1f55\u03bb\u03b7\u03c2, 377\n\n\u1f10\u03be\u03b1\u03ba\u03bf\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b8\u03ad\u03c9, 157\n\n\u1f10\u03be\u03b7\u03b3\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf, 349\n\n\u1f10\u03be\u03b9\u03bb\u03ac\u03c3\u03bf\u03bc\u03b1\u03b9, 729, 737\n\n\u1f10\u03be \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f45\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd, ex nihilo, 2 Maccabees 7:28, 377\n\n\u1f10\u03be\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03af\u03b1\u03bd, John 1:12, 825\n\n\u1f10\u03c0\u1fbd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff7, 873\n\n\u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u03bd\u03b4\u03cd\u03c3\u03b1\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9, 2 Cor. 5:2, 4, 235, 998\n\n\u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03ce\u03c4\u03b7\u03bc\u03b1, 821\n\n\u1f10\u03c0\u03af, 772, 833\n\n\u1f10\u03c0\u03af\u03b3\u03bd\u03c9\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2, 2 Pet. 1:12; cf. \u03b3\u03bd\u1ff6\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2, 1 Tim. 6:20, 31, \u1f10\u03c0\u03af\u03b3\u03bd\u03c9\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f01\u03bc\u03b1\u03c1\u03c4\u03af\u03b1\u03c2,\n 832\n\n\u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03b8\u03c5\u03bc\u03af\u03b1, state, 552\n\n\u1f10\u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03c2, 897, 902, 914, 915\n\n\u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2, 914, 915\n\n\u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03c1\u03ad\u03c6\u03c9, 829\n\n\u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c4\u03b1\u03b3\u1f74 \u03ba\u03c5\u03c1\u03af\u03bf\u03c5, 221\n\n\u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c6\u03ac\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1, 307\n\n\u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c7\u03bf\u03c1\u03b7\u03b3\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5, 871\n\n\u1f14\u03c1\u03b3\u03b1, 117\n\n\u1f14\u03c1\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u0398\u03b5\u03bf\u03cd, 847\n\n\u1f14\u03c1\u03c7\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f62\u03c1\u03b1, John 5:28\u201030, 998\n\n\u1f10\u03c3\u03ba\u03ae\u03bd\u03c9\u03c3\u03b5\u03bd, John 1:14, 234, 687\n\n\u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u03af\u03bd, 310, 562, 687\n\n\u1f10\u03c4\u03ad\u03b8\u03b7\u03bd, 919\n\n\u03b5\u1f50\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03b7\u03c4\u03cc\u03c2, Rom. 9:5, 306\n\n\u03b5\u1f50\u03c1\u03b5\u03b8\u03b5\u03af\u03c2, Phil. 2:8, 705\n\n\u1f10\u03c6\u1fbd \u1fa7, Rom. 5:12, 39, 626\n\n\u1f10\u03c6\u03b1\u03bd\u03b5\u03c1\u03ce\u03b8\u03b7, 308\n\n\u1f10\u03c6\u03b8\u03ac\u03c1\u03b7, Gen. 6:11, LXX, 993\n\n\u1f14\u03c7\u03b8\u03c1\u03b1, state, 552\n\n\u1f10\u03c7\u03b8\u03c1\u03bf\u03af, 719\n\n\u03b6\u03b9\u03b6\u03ac\u03bd\u03b9\u03b1, 149\n\n\u03b6\u03c9\u03ae, 311, 626, 1045\n\n\u03b6\u03c9\u03bf\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1, 412, 883\n\n\u1f21\u03b3\u03bf\u03cd\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9, 897\n\n\u1f26\u03b8\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u1ff3 \u03b4\u03b1\u03af\u03bc\u03c9\u03bd, 506\n\n\u1f20\u03bb\u03ac\u03c4\u03c4\u03c9\u03c3\u03b1\u03c2, 106\n\n\u1f25\u03bc\u03b1\u03c1\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd, 610, 622, 623, 625, 626\n\n\u1f24\u03bd, 309, 310\n\n\u1f20\u03c1\u03b5\u03bc\u03af\u03b1, rest, summit of Aristotle\u2019s \u201cslope\u201d, 580\n\n\u03b8\u03ac\u03bd\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, 626\n\n\u03b8\u03b1\u03bd\u03b1\u03c4\u03c9\u03b8\u03b5\u03af\u03c2, 708\n\n\u03b8\u03b5\u1fd6\u03b1, 166\n\n\u03b8\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bf\u03bd, 57, 681\n\n\u03b8\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bd\u03ae\u03c1, 666\n\n\u03b8\u03ad\u03bb\u03b7\u03bc\u03b1, _voluntas_, _Wille_, 557\n\n\u03b8\u03b5\u03cc\u03c0\u03bd\u03b5\u03c5\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, 197, 205\n\n\u03b8\u03b5\u03cc\u03c2, 57, 305, 306, 307, 308, 309, 321, 342, 517\n\n\u03b8\u03b5\u03bf\u1fe6, 731, 781 847\n\n\u03b8\u03b7\u03c1\u03af\u03bf\u03bd, 151\n\n\u03b8\u03c1\u03ae\u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1, 24\n\n\u03b8\u03c1\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2, 307\n\n\u03b8\u03c5\u03c3\u03af\u03b1, 728\n\n\u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u03ce\u03c4\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, 203\n\n\u1f31\u03bb\u03ac\u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03bc\u03b1\u03b9, 728\n\n\u1f31\u03bb\u03b1\u03c3\u03bc\u03cc\u03c2, 728\n\n\u1f31\u03bb\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03ae\u03c1\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd, 753\n\n\u1f38\u03bf\u03c1\u03b4\u03ac\u03bd\u03b7\u03bd, 935\n\n\u1f38\u03c3\u03b1\u03ac\u03ba, 517\n\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03b1\u03af\u03c1\u03c9, 728\n\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03bf\u03c1\u1fb6\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, 68\n\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03c1\u1ff6, 753\n\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03ba\u03af\u03b1, 552\n\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03ad\u03c9, 891, 896\n\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03cc\u03bd, 870\n\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03bd\u03ce\u03bd, 145\n\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03c1\u03c0\u03bf\u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u03b5\u1fd6, 393\n\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1fbd \u03bf\u1f36\u03ba\u03bf\u03bd, Acts 2:46, 960, 961\n\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b2\u03bf\u03bb\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03ba\u03cc\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5, \u03c0\u03c1\u03cc, 275\n\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03ac\u03c1\u03b1, 761\n\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03b8\u03ae\u03c3\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, 627\n\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u03c3\u03c4\u03ac\u03b8\u03b7\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd, 627\n\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03ad\u03b2\u03b7\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd, 935\n\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b7\u03c1\u03c4\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b1, Rom. 9:23, 780\n\n\u03ba\u03b5\u03bd\u03c4\u03c5\u03c1\u03af\u03c9\u03bd, 151\n\n\u03ba\u03b7\u03c1\u03cd\u03c3\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd, 1 Pet. 3:18\u201020, 707\n\n\u03ba\u03bb\u1fc6\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2, 911\n\n\u03ba\u03bf\u03b9\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd\u03af\u03b1, 1 Cor. 10:16, 17; 1 John 1:3, 796, 807, 965\n\n\u03ba\u03bf\u03bb\u03b1\u03b6\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2, 2 Pet. 2:9, 1000\n\n\u03ba\u03cc\u03bb\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2, Mat. 25:46; 1 John 4:18, 1036\n\n\u03ba\u03cc\u03bb\u03c0\u1ff3, 337\n\n\u03ba\u03cc\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf\u03c2, 563\n\n\u03ba\u03cc\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf\u03c2 \u03bd\u03bf\u03b7\u03c4\u03cc\u03c2, 320\n\n\u03ba\u03cc\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5, 275\n\n\u03ba\u03c4\u03af\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2, 341\n\n\u03ba\u03c4\u03af\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2, _creatura_, 392\n\n\u03ba\u03c4\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2, \u03bf\u1f50 \u03c4\u03b5\u03c7\u03bd\u03af\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2, 388\n\n\u03ba\u03c5\u03b2\u03b5\u03c1\u03bd\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2, 1 Cor. 12:28, 902, 917\n\n\u03ba\u03c5\u03c1\u03b9\u03b1\u03ba\u03ae, _Kirche_, kirk, church, 891\n\n\u03ba\u03c5\u03c1\u03b9\u03b5\u03c5\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd, 445\n\n\u039a\u03cd\u03c1\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2, 306, 309\n\n\u03ba\u03c5\u03c1\u03af\u03bf\u03c5, 308\n\n\u039a\u03c5\u03c1\u03af\u03bf\u03c5 \u03a0\u03bd\u03b5\u03cd\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, 2 Cor. 3:18, 315\n\n\u03bb\u03b1\u03b2\u03ce\u03bd, Phil. 2:7, 705\n\n\u03bb\u03b5\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9, 936\n\n\u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03b9\u03b1, 148\n\n\u039b\u03bf\u03b3\u03af\u03c9\u03bd \u03ba\u03c5\u03c1\u03b9\u03b1\u03ba\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f10\u03be\u03ae\u03b3\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2, 149\n\n\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03b9\u03c3\u03b8\u03b5\u03af\u03b7, 594\n\n\u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2, 2, 305, 306, 321, 335, 342, 549, 665, 687, 700\n\n\u039b\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b7\u03c7\u03b7\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f41 \u03bc\u03ad\u03b3\u03b1\u03c2, by Gregory of Nyssa, 44\n\n\u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c3\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03cc\u03c2, 665\n\n\u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03af\u03b1\u03c2, 200\n\n\u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u03ad\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2, 549\n\n\u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03c5 \u0398\u03b5\u03af\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03cc\u03c2, 111\n\n\u03bb\u03bf\u03cd\u03c9, 936\n\n\u03bb\u03cd\u03c0\u03b7 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u0398\u03b5\u03cc\u03bd, 832\n\n\u03bb\u03cd\u03c0\u03b7 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03ba\u03cc\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5, 832\n\n\u03bb\u03cd\u03c4\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd, 717, 720, 721\n\n\u03bc\u03ad\u03b3\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b8\u03b5\u03cc\u03c2, \u1f41, 57\n\n\u03bc\u03b5\u03c3\u03af\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2, 710\n\n\u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b2\u03bf\u03bb\u03ae, 672\n\n\u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03bc\u03ad\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1, 833\n\n\u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03bc\u03ad\u03bb\u03bf\u03bc\u03b1\u03b9, 832\n\n\u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03ac\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03b1, 833\n\n\u03bc\u1f74 \u03b3\u03bd\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u1f01\u03bc\u03b1\u03c1\u03c4\u03af\u03b1\u03bd, 761\n\n\u03bc\u1f74 \u1f44\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, 377\n\n\u03bc\u03cc\u03bd\u03b7 \u1f00\u03c1\u03c7\u03ae, 327\n\n\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03ae\u03c2, 336\n\n\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03ae\u03c2 \u0398\u03b5\u03cc\u03c2, variant in John 1:18, 306, 341\n\n\u03bc\u03bf\u03c1\u03c6\u1fc7 \u0398\u03b5\u03bf\u1fe6, Phil. 2:6, 705\n\n\u03bc\u03bf\u03c1\u03c6\u1f74\u03bd \u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5, 705\n\n\u03bc\u03cd\u03b8\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2, 157\n\n\u03bc\u03c5\u03c3\u03c4\u03ae\u03c1\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd, 691\n\n\u03bc\u03cd\u03c9, 31\n\n\u039c\u03c9\u03c3\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c4\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03af\u03b6\u03c9\u03bd, 665\n\n\u03bd\u03b5\u03b1\u03bd\u03af\u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03b9, 918\n\n\u03bd\u03b5\u03ba\u03c1\u03bf\u1fe6, 934\n\n\u03bd\u03ad\u03bc\u03c9, 533\n\n\u03bd\u03b5\u03ce\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9, 918\n\n\u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03bf\u03c2, 533, 541\n\n\u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u03ad\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2, Jas. 1:25, 549\n\n\u03bd\u03bf\u03c3\u1ff6\u03bd, 39\n\n\u03bd\u03bf\u03bf\u03cd\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03b1, Rom. 1:19\u201021, 68\n\n\u03bd\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c2, 33, 68, 352, 394, 670, 671\n\n\u03bd\u1fe6\u03bd \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u03af\u03bd, 998\n\n\u1f41, in John 1:1 and 4:24, 305\n\n\u1f41\u03b4\u03b7\u03b3\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd, 151\n\n\u03bf\u1f31 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2, 2 Cor. 5:14, 623\n\n\u03bf\u1f31 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03af, Rom. 5:19, 627\n\n\u03bf\u1f36\u03b4\u03b5\u03bd, 67\n\n\u03bf\u1f30\u03ba\u03b5\u1fd6, 562\n\n\u03bf\u1f30\u03ba\u03af\u03b1, 961\n\n\u03bf\u1f36\u03ba\u03bf\u03c2, 960, 961\n\n\u1f41\u03bc\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf\u03cd\u03c3\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd and \u1f41\u03bc\u03bf\u03bf\u03cd\u03c3\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd, 329, 336, 700\n\n\u1f41\u03bc\u03bf\u03b9\u03ce\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9 \u03c3\u03b1\u03c1\u03ba\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f01\u03bc\u03b1\u03c1\u03c4\u03af\u03b1\u03c2, \u1f10\u03bd, 706\n\n\u1f41\u03bc\u03bf\u03af\u03c9\u03c2, 626\n\n\u1f45\u03bd \u03c4\u03c1\u03cc\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd, Acts 1:11, 1004\n\n\u1f44\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03b1, 951\n\n\u1f40\u03c1\u03b3\u03ae, Rom. 1:18, 26\n\n\u1f41\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03b8\u03ad\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, 341\n\n\u1f40\u03c1\u03b8\u1ff6\u03c2 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03b5\u03bd\u03ad\u03b3\u03ba\u1fc3\u03c2, Gen. 4:7, 727\n\n\u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u03bf\u1f36\u03b4\u03b5\u03bd, 67\n\n\u03bf\u1f50 \u03c4\u03ac\u03be\u03b5\u03b9, 149\n\n\u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u1f72\u03bd \u1f10\u03bc\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03b4\u03b1, 851\n\n\u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u03ad\u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03b5, 781\n\n\u03bf\u1f50\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd\u03cc\u03c2, 309\n\n\u03bf\u1f50\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd\u1ff7, 681, 686, 697\n\n\u03bf\u1f50\u03c3\u03af\u03b1, 333, 578, 673\n\n\u03bf\u1f54\u03c4\u03c9\u03c2, Rom. 5:12, 626\n\n\u03c0\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2, 697\n\n\u03c0\u1fb6\u03bd, \u03c4\u03cc, 102, 392\n\n\u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1, \u03c4\u03ac, 102\n\n\u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03b4\u03b9\u1fbd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f10\u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf, 311\n\n\u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2, 772\n\n\u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u1f25\u03bc\u03b1\u03c1\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd, Rom. 5:12, 622, 623, 626\n\n\u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03ac, 337, 341\n\n\u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03b2\u03b1\u03af\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd, 614\n\n\u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03b8\u03ae\u03ba\u03b7\u03bd, 149, 882\n\n\u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u1ff6, 914\n\n\u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03ac\u03ba\u03bb\u03b7\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, 323, 339, 710\n\n\u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03ba\u03bf\u03ae, Rom. 5:19, 627\n\n\u03c0\u03ac\u03c1\u03b5\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2, 753\n\n\u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03c1\u03b7\u03c3\u03af\u03b1, 808\n\n\u03c0\u03b1\u03c4\u03ae\u03c1, 448\n\n\u03c0\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u03b9\u03ac, 334, 448\n\n\u03c0\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd\u03cc\u03bd, 151\n\n\u03c0\u03b5\u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03c5\u03ba\u03b1\u03c2, 306\n\n\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03af, 210, 714, 833\n\n\u03a0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u1f08\u03c1\u03c7\u1ff6\u03bd, of Origen, 44, 489\n\n\u03a0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03a0\u03c5\u03b8\u03b1\u03b3\u03bf\u03c1\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03b2\u03af\u03bf\u03c5, of Iamblicus, 111\n\n\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03c0\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd, 151\n\n\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03c7\u03ce\u03c1\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2, 333\n\n\u03a0\u03ad\u03c4\u03c1\u1ff3, 149\n\n\u03c0\u03b5\u03c6\u03c5\u03ba\u03cc\u03c2, 580\n\n\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03cd\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2, 772\n\n\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03cd\u03c9, 838\n\n\u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2, 753, 847, 864, 870\n\n\u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03c2, 838, 851\n\n\u03c0\u03bb\u03ae\u03c1\u03c9\u03bc\u03b1, 348, 796\n\n\u03c0\u03bd\u03b5\u1fe6\u03bc\u03b1, 213, 323, 483\u2010488, 490, 491, 562, 670, 671, 686, 687, 688, 707,\n 1017\n\n\u03c0\u03bd\u03b5\u03cd\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9, 708\n\n\u03c0\u03bd\u03b5\u03c5\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03cc\u03bd, 1017\n\n\u03c0\u03bd\u03b5\u03cd\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, 210\n\n\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd, 151\n\n\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03ae\u03bc\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd, \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2, 68\n\n\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03bc\u03b1\u03af\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd, 151, 914\n\n\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03bc\u03ac\u03bd\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5, 914\n\n\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2, 902\n\n\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03bc\u03ae\u03bd, \u03b5\u1f36\u03c2, 914\n\n\u03c0\u03bf\u03af\u03bc\u03bd\u03b7, \u03bc\u03af\u03b1, 914\n\n\u03c0\u03bf\u03af\u03bc\u03bd\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd, 964\n\n\u03c0\u03bf\u03af\u03bd\u03b7, 652\n\n\u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b9\u03c2, 337, 900\n\n\u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03af, 627\n\n\u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03cd\u03c2, 627\n\n\u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u1ff6\u03bd, 717, 720\n\n\u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03c5\u03bc\u03b5\u03c1\u1ff6\u03c2, 221\n\n\u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03c5\u03c4\u03c1\u03bf\u03c0\u1ff6\u03c2, 214\n\n\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd\u03b7\u03c1\u03af\u03b1, 552\n\n\u03c0\u03c1\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03c1\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03b1\u03af, 151\n\n\u03c0\u03c1\u03b5\u03c3\u03b2\u03cd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2, 914, 915\n\n\u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03b3\u03b9\u03bd\u03ce\u03c3\u03ba\u03c9, 781\n\n\u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03ad\u03b3\u03bd\u03c9, 781\n\n\u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03ad\u03b8\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf, 753\n\n\u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c3\u03c4\u03ac\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2, 897, 902\n\n\u03c0\u03c1\u03cc\u03c2, John 1:1, 337\n\n\u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03b5\u03bd\u03ad\u03b3\u03ba\u03b7\u03c2, 727\n\n\u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03b5\u03bd\u03b5\u03c7\u03b8\u03b5\u03af\u03c2, 967\n\n\u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03c4\u03ac\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2, 897\n\n\u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u03ac, 728\n\n\u03c0\u03c1\u03cc\u03c3\u03c9\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd, 333, 673\n\n\u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c6\u03ae\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2, 710\n\n\u03c0\u03c1\u03c9\u03c4\u03cc\u03c4\u03bf\u03ba\u03bf\u03c2, 341\n\n\u1fe5\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03af\u03c3\u03c9\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, variant in Mark 7:4, 934\n\n\u1fe5\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u03cc\u03c2, 937\n\n\u03c3\u03ac\u03c1\u03ba\u03b1, 307\n\n\u03c3\u03b1\u03c1\u03ba\u03af, 562, 687\n\n\u03c3\u03b1\u03c1\u03ba\u03cc\u03c2, 687, 706\n\n\u03c3\u03ac\u03c1\u03be, 552, 562, 563, 687\n\n\u03c3\u03ad, 924\n\n\u03c3\u03b5\u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2, 157\n\n\u03c3\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bf\u03bd, 117\n\n\u03c3\u03ba\u03b7\u03bd\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd, 151\n\n\u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03af\u03b6\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd, 157\n\n\u03c3\u03c0\u03b5\u03ba\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03ac\u03c4\u03c9\u03c1, 151\n\n\u03c3\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03cc\u03c2, 665\n\n\u03c3\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03bc\u03ac\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd, 233\n\n\u03c3\u03cd\u03b3\u03c7\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2, 672\n\n\u03c3\u03c5\u03bc\u03b2\u03ac\u03bb\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd, 42\n\n\u03c3\u03c5\u03bc\u03c0\u03ac\u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd, 803\n\n\u03c3\u03c5\u03bc\u03c0\u03b5\u03c6\u03c5\u03ba\u03ce\u03c2, 941\n\n\u03c3\u03c5\u03bc\u03c0\u03c1\u03b5\u03c3\u03b2\u03cd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2, 914\n\n\u03c3\u03cd\u03bc\u03c6\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, 796, 941\n\n\u03c3\u03c5\u03bc\u03c6\u03c9\u03bd\u03ae\u03b8\u03b7, \u03c3\u03c5\u03bc\u03c6\u03c9\u03bd\u03ae\u03c3\u03c9\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd, 927\n\n\u03c3\u1f7a\u03bd \u03a7\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u1ff7 \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9, 999\n\n\u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03ac\u03c6\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1, 671\n\n\u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b4\u03bf\u03be\u03b1\u03c3\u03b8\u1ff6\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd, 803\n\n\u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b5\u03b6\u03c9\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03af\u03b7\u03c3\u03b5\u03bd, 803\n\n\u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9\u03b4\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 \u1f00\u03b3\u03b1\u03b8\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03ce\u03c4\u03b7\u03bc\u03b1, 821\n\n\u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b5\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03cd\u03c1\u03c9\u03bc\u03b1\u03b9, 803\n\n\u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b5\u03c4\u03ac\u03c6\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd, 803\n\n\u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b7\u03b3\u03ad\u03c1\u03b8\u03b7\u03c4\u03b5, 803\n\n\u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03c4\u03ad\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1, Mat. 13:39, 1025\n\n\u03c3\u03c7\u03bf\u03bb\u03ae, 38\n\n\u03c3\u1ff6\u03bc\u03b1, 484, 487, 671, 1019\n\n\u03c3\u03ce\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03a7\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6, 965\n\n\u03c3\u1ff6\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9 and \u03c3\u03c9\u03b8\u1fc6\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9, 791\n\n\u03c3\u03c9\u03c4\u1fc6\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f21\u03bc\u1ff6\u03bd, 307\n\n\u03c3\u03ce\u03c6\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd, 1 Tim. 3:2, 39\n\n\u03c4\u03ac\u03be\u03b5\u03b9, 149\n\n\u03c4\u03ac\u03c3\u03c3\u03c9, 780\n\n\u03c4\u03ad\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2, 879\n\n\u03c4\u03ad\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2, 675\n\n\u03c4\u03ad\u03bc\u03bd\u03c9, 483, 484\n\n\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1, 117\n\n\u03c4\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b3\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9, Acts 13:43, 780\n\n\u03c4\u03b5\u03c4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c7\u03b7\u03bb\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b1, 283\n\n\u03c4\u03b5\u03c7\u03bd\u03af\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2, 388\n\n\u03c4\u03b9\u03bc\u03ae, 717\n\n\u03c4\u1f78 \u03b3\u03bd\u03c9\u03c3\u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u0398\u03b5\u03bf\u1fe6, 26\n\n\u03c4\u1f78 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u1fbd \u03b5\u1f36\u03c2, \u03c4\u1f78 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u1fbd \u1f15\u03bd\u03b1, 151\n\n\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b4\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u0398\u03b5\u03bf\u1fe6, 265, 440\n\n\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf, 781\n\n\u03c4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c0\u03ad\u03b6\u03b1\u03b9\u03c2, 918\n\n\u03c4\u03c1\u03af\u03c7\u03b1, 484\n\n\u03c4\u03c1\u03cc\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd, 1005\n\n\u1f55\u03b2\u03c1\u03b9\u03c2, 569\n\n\u1f51\u03b3\u03b9\u03ae\u03c2, 39\n\n\u1f55\u03b4\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1, \u1f55\u03b4\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, 935\n\n\u1f55\u03b4\u03c9\u03c1, 935\n\n\u03c5\u1f31\u03bf\u03bd, 307\n\n\u03c5\u1f31\u03c3\u03b8\u03b5\u03c3\u03af\u03b1, 335\n\n\u1f54\u03bb\u03b7, 321, 378, 700\n\n\u1f51\u03c0\u03b1\u03ba\u03bf\u03ae, 627\n\n\u1f51\u03c0\u03b1\u03ba\u03bf\u03ae \u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2, 847\n\n\u1f51\u03c0\u03ad\u03c1, 210, 710\n\n\u1f51\u03c0\u03ad\u03c1 and \u1f00\u03bd\u03c4\u03af, 717\n\n\u1f51\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b2\u03ac\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b1 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03b3\u03bd\u03ce\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2, 31\n\n\u1f51\u03c0\u03bf\u03c3\u03c4\u03ac\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2, 336\n\n\u1f51\u03c0\u03cc\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2, 333, 673\n\n\u1f51\u03c0\u03bf\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae, 673\n\n\u1f55\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u03a0\u03ad\u03c4\u03c1\u03c9, 149\n\n\u1f51\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, 623\n\n\u03c6\u03b1\u03bd\u03ad\u03c1\u03c9\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2, Rom. 1:19, 20, 13\n\n\u03c6\u03b5\u03c1\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9, 2 Pet. 1:21, 205\n\n\u03c6\u03b8\u03b5\u03af\u03c1\u03c9, 993\n\n\u03c6\u03b9\u03bb\u03ad\u03c9, 264\n\n\u03c6\u03c5\u03bb\u03b1\u03ba\u1fc7, \u1f10\u03bd, 999\n\n\u03c6\u03cd\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2, _natura_, 392, 579\n\n\u03c7\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03ba\u03c4\u03ae\u03c1, Heb. 1:3, 336\n\n\u03c7\u03ac\u03c1\u03b9\u03bd \u1f00\u03bd\u03c4\u1f76 \u03c7\u03ac\u03c1\u03b9\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, 256\n\n\u03c7\u03ac\u03c1\u03b9\u03c2 and \u1f40\u03c1\u03b3\u03ae, 26\n\n\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u03bf\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2, 906, 907\n\n\u03a7\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03cc\u03c2, 1016\n\n\u03a7\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6, 965\n\n\u03c7\u03c1\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 and \u03b1\u1f30\u03ce\u03bd, 1045\n\n\u03c7\u03c9\u03c1\u03af\u03c2, 311, 731\n\n\u03c8\u03c5\u03c7\u03b1\u03af, 485\n\n\u03c8\u03c5\u03c7\u03ae, 352, 385, 483\u2010487, 490, 491, 671, 717, 1017\n\n\u03c8\u03c5\u03c7\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u03af, 485\n\n\u03c8\u03c5\u03c7\u03b9\u03ba\u03cc\u03bd, 1017\n\n\u1f64\u03bd, 349, 681, 686, 697\n\n\u1f64\u03c1\u03b1, 998\n\n\u1f61\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2, Acts 10:42, 780\n\n\u1f61\u03c2 \u1f04\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\u03c0\u03bf\u03c2, 614\n\n\u1f65\u03c8, 523\n\n\n\n\nIndex Of Hebrew Words.\n\n\n\u05d0, Codex Sinaiticus, 306, 308, 449, 681, 686, 697, 851, 891, 915, 934.\n\n\u05d0\u05e0\u05d9\u05d5\u05df, \u201cpoor,\u201d whence term \u201cEbionite,\u201d, 669\n\n\u05d0\u05d3\u05dd, Hos. 6:7, \u05db\u05d0\u05d3\u05dd, \u1f61\u03c2 \u1f04\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\u03c0\u03bf\u03c2 LXX, \u201clike men that break a covenant,\u201d,\n 614\n\n\u05d0\u05d3\u05e0\u05d9, 309\n\n\u05d0\u05d4\u05d9\u05d4, Exod. 3:14, I am, 252, 257\n\n\u05d0\u05dc, a singular noun, might have been used instead of \u05d0\u05dc\u05d4\u05d9\u05dd, 318\n\n\u05d0\u05dc\u05d4, to fear, to adore, root of \u05d0\u05dc\u05d4\u05d9\u05dd, 318\n\n\u05d0\u05dc\u05d4\u05d9\u05dd, 318\n employed with singular verb, 318\n applied to Son, 318\n not a _pluralis majestaticus_, 318\n according to Oehler, \u201ca quantitative plural,\u201d, 318\n its derivation, 318\n\n\u05d1\u05e8\u05d0, implies production of effect without natural antecedent, 375\n in Kal used only of God, 375\n never has accusative of material, 375\n used, in Gen. 1 and 2, to mark introduction of world of matter, life,\n and spirit, 374\n distinguished from words signifying \u201cto make\u201d and \u201cto form,\u201d, 375\n in Gen. 1:2, must mean \u201ccalling into being,\u201d, 375\n the original signification \u201cto cut,\u201d though retained in Piel, does not\n militate against a more spiritual sense in other species,\n 376\n the only word for absolute creation in Hebrew, 376\n the meaning \u201ccreation by law\u201d suggested, 392\n\n\u05e8\u05de\u05d5\u05ea, \u201cthe likeness of God,\u201d according to Moehler: \u201cthe pious exercise of\n \u05e6\u05dc\u05dd, the religious faculty,\u201d, 522\n according to Romanist theologians, a product of man\u2019s obedience, 520\n a synonym of \u05e6\u05dc\u05dd, 521\n\n\u05d6\u05e8\u05e2, \u201cseed,\u201d Gen. 22:18, referred to in Gal. 3:16, 233\n\n\u05d7\u05d8\u05d0, \u1f01\u03bc\u03b1\u03c1\u03c4\u03ac\u03bd\u03c9, Hiphil, to make a miss, Judges 20:16, 552\n\n\u05d7\u05d8\u05d0\u05d4, \u1f01\u03bc\u03b1\u03c1\u03c4\u03af\u03b1, missing, failure, applicable not merely to act but likewise\n to state, 552\n\n\u05d9\u05d4\u05d5\u05d4, 309\n\n\u05d9\u05d5\u05dd, \u201cday,\u201d Gen. 1, 35\n its hyperliteral interpretation, 394\n often used for a period of indefinite duration, 394\n theory that \u201csix days\u201d indicates series merely, 395\n a scheme harmonizing the Mosaic \u201csix days\u201d creation with the order of\n the geologic record, 393\u2010397\n\n\u05d9\u05e6\u05e8, 375\n\n\u05db\u05e8\u05d5\u05d1\u05d9\u05dd, Ez. 1, Ex. 37:6\u20109, Gen. 3:24, 449\n to be identified with the \u201cseraphim\u201d and \u201cthe living creatures,\u201d, 449\n are temporary symbolic figures, 449\n symbols of human nature spiritualized and sanctified, 449\n exalted to be the dwelling\u2010place of God, 449\n symbols of mercy, 449\n angels and cherubim never together, 449\n in closing visions of Revelation no longer seen, 449\n some regard them as symbols of divine government, 449\n list of authorities on, 449\n\n\u05db\u05ea\u05d9\u05d1, 309\n\n\u05de\u05dc\u05d0\u05e3 \u05d9\u05d4\u05d5\u05d4, identifies himself with Jehovah, 319\n is so identified by others, 319\n accepts divine worship, 319\n with perhaps single exception in O. T., designates pre\u2010incarnate Logos,\n 319\n\n\u05e2\u05d5\u05df, \u1f00\u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03af\u03b1 LXX, bending, perverseness, iniquity, referring to state as\n well as act, 552\n\n\u05e2\u05e9\u05d4, 375\n\n\u05e4\u05e7\u05e8, judicial visitation, punishment, 657\n\n\u05e4\u05e9\u05e2, \u1f00\u03c3\u03ad\u03b2\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1 LXX, separation from, rebellion, indicative of state as well\n as act, 552\n\n\u05e6\u05dc\u05dd, Gen. 1:26, according to Moehler, \u201cthe religious faculty,\u201d, 522\n according to Bellarmine, \u201cipsa natura mentis et voluntatis\u201d, 522\n according to Scholastic and Romanist theologians, alone belonged to\n man\u2019s nature at its creation, 520\n required addition of supernatural grace that it might possess original\n righteousness, 520\n a synonym of \u05d3\u05de\u05d5\u05ea, 521\n\n\u05e6\u05d3\u05e7, Hiphil form in Dan. 12:3, best rendered \u201cthey that justify many,\u201d,\n 850\n\n\u05e7\u05d4\u05dc, its meaning in O. T. and Targums, 892\n perhaps used by Christ in Mat. 18:17, 892\n how it differs from \u1f10\u03ba\u03ba\u03bb\u03b7\u03c3\u03af\u03b1, 892\n\n\u05e7\u05e8\u05d9, 309\n\n\u05e8\u05e2, bad, evil, 552\n\n\u05e8\u05e9\u05e2, a wicked person, 552\n\n\u05e9\u05d0\u05dc, an alleged root of Sheol, 994\n\n\u05e9\u05e2\u05dc, a probable root of Sheol, 994\n\n\u05e9\u05dc, 994\n\n\u05e9\u05d0\u05d5\u05dc, its derivation, 994\n its root\u2010meaning, 994\n the soul is still conscious in, 994\n God can recover men from, 994\n\n\u05e9\u05e8\u05e4\u05d9\u05dd, Is. 6:2, to be identified with the \u201ccherubim\u201d of Genesis, Exodus\n and Ezekiel, and with \u201cthe living creatures\u201d of Revelation,\n 449","title":"Systematic Theology (Volume 3 of 3)","tradition":"scripture-revelation","translated_text":null,"word_count":285829}