BT 765 .F85 Copy 1 > 3> > >> > > >> > - ^7^^ - > • fr > •• si > ^> >o » ~>^ > :» ^T > >*> 3>T3 > > > z> > > _._zx^ > > > > > > > > * > > :>» > ^3^ 1 > ^> i> ^> z :> : > > 3> £>_, 3 > ^^ ^ ^ ^^~-^^ I> 35*> ■ ^^ >>r^ > > _^ mi 5T> bj^ ^> >^> i>-">>:> > > ^> > > j->> S^l m 33 > ^> o > ■■■■> J * 5? *>_3 £P )>* j » ^> >^s> mtZ ^ -> pr> m ► ■ ■> \% ~~* Jg , » ~> ~> ~3> 5> > ^ Bfe ' "5i> ' *~^> . ^> >o« " 3t7 5 ^^> ^> > ^^ 3 S> y& ^p ^T :b* :> ^ > > ~ : H* ^> >> 9 :2>> ^ :■» :> > ^s> :> 2j^ '^3?> ^y ' \> 55Q&» J>^ :j*> 3> > 3^ ^ ^C* ^> ^>S ^> ^^> x^> > T* ;^> >> ;T& 3» ;z*> w J> > ;> : : >>. -^ jp » » 2» ®k& i: ^r ' ►~> >:> >j> "3 0* >> s> S> 2fe> 4 3^ 3> X> oo ^Ji » , > :T> > ^P} > * ;> f>1 ~> >/> "^ ' .~VT> >^ ~"5£> t> >>_> >.> ^"^ k» ' * > -y> » _ *> > -y»T> ;:> »~> "^■T" fcV"T> » -5r> > v> ^> 'y V j) "~^3> | Z>:>3> !3» -» :> v> :g> v t) ^3 »> ^z> > ^» > • > > i . K> ^3j >^^>> >^> » » >> o ) i ■ "O ~^ » > >-> > 2> ;»£> o > 0> ~^» >VX> '^> » > r> ,.r> i »o 7> >> :>> ^> "X>'"> >">-X> , V Z^&* ^^ ^> 5> ^S>3 >>> . ■ ) ~~^)t *> 5> ^> "» > ' P " ►■ , ,> I^F* »•> 1> ,, >7> . "»> O^E> > g> ~^> > y> yz> » ^> ->> D Z3** > ^r> k) : g> *> , O ~~^ O ^> ■ §> >-> > ^> > • s> Si »S \> p >;> C^vSS* . >■- "5>~> % >^ v> ; r> *.; ^^>-?> o J S> 3 ► > . T> , >, >7> ^-imo.. _> O 7% r> ^ "~ >> > ■> > S> v> THE NEW BIRTH OR Bible Sancttfication. BY F. F. FRENCH. rWOQ _^i It MONTPELIER: FREEMAN STEAM PRINTING HOUSE AND BINDERY. 1874. X «5 Entered, according- to Act of Congress, in the year 1874, by FRANKLIN F. FRENCH, In the Office of the Librarian of Congress, at Washington. The Library of Congress WASHINGTON PREFACE. My only apology for offering this book to the reader is a conviction of duty. It is a very imperfect presentation of the subject I have endeavored to explain, but if God shall see fit to make use of it in influencing others to examine the views thus imperfectly presented, my labor may not be in vain. There is some repetition, not only of my own lan- guage, bat also of Scripture quotations, which may not be profitable ; but which, on the whole, I have not thought best to avoid. AUTHOR. EXPLANATION OF FIRST PRINCIPLES. CHAPTER L General Vieiv of the Two Covenants. The Abrahamic covenant, or covenant of promise, was made with Abram when he departed out of Haran to sojourn in the land of Canaan. This covenant made with Abram, and confirmed or ratified through his seed, Christ, was made four hun- dred and thirty years before the giving of the law. This covenant of promise made with Abram, and also with the Fathers, was the gospel covenant in promise. That is, the promise made in the covenant was not to be ful- filled until after a specified length of time. The covenant promised something in the future. Now the Lord said unto Abram, get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father's house, unto a land that I will show thee : And I will make of thee a great nation, and will bless thee, and make thy name great ; and thou shalt be a blessing : 6 General View of the Two Covenants. And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee : and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed. — Gen. 12 : 1-3. And the Angel of the Lord called unto Abra- ham out of heaven the second time, And said, By myself have I sworn, saith the Lord, for because thou hast done this thing, and hast not withheld thy son, thine only son, That in blessing I will bless thee, and in multi- plying I will multiply thy seed as the stars of heaven, and as the sand which is upon the sea shore ; and thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies : And in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed ; because thou hast obeyed my voice.— Gen. 22: 15-18. And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preach- ed before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, in thee shall all nations be blessed. — Gal. 3: 8. The seed through whom the promised blessing was to come, was Christ. I^ow to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one. And to thy seed, which is Christ. — Gal. 3:16. Christ did not come until about 1911 years after the covenant of 'promise was made with Abram. Therefore General View of the Two Covenants. 7 the fulfillment of the promise contained in the covenant could not take place before that time. Now this covenant of promise was to remain the cov- enant of promise until the seed should come through whom the promise was to be fulfilled. The promise was to be fulfilled through, not to the seed that was to come. During the time that intervened between the making of the covenant with Abram, and the fulfillment of the promise contained in the covenant, by the coming of Christ, the covenant is regarded as the old covenant. It is called the old, or first covenant during that time. The promise referred to, as peculiar to the covenant of promise, is the following : I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts. — Jere. 31 : 33. After Christ came and fulfilled said promise, it was then called the new or gospel covenant. Before Christ came it was the gospel covenant in promise, but not ratified. It lacked the ratification blood, the blood of Christ. A peculiar characteristic of the covenant of promise was this : it made promise of something in the future, that could not be realized, or fulfilled in the present tense. Hence, the true worshiper under the old covenant looked forward to the time of Messiah's coming as a time of redemption or salvation. 8 General View of the Two Covenants. Although the salvation to be realized by the people of God, and by all nations, through the coming of Christ, the Messiah, was but imperfectly comprehended by the worshiper, under the old covenant, yet, it was distinctly and clearly stated in the Scriptures. Something of the same vagueness, or imperfect com- prehension of what that redemption or salvation was, to be, which was to come through Messiah, and which could not be realized before His advent, seems to hang, as a vail, over the understanding of the Church, as it appears to me, even at the present day. The redemption that was lacking to the people of God under the old covenant, and for the realization of which they looked forward to the coming of Messiah as the time when they were to come in possession of it, w r as a spiritual redemption. The lack of this spiritual redemption experienced by the people of God, under the old covenant, made it nec- essary to introduce the " ceremonial law" or the "hand- writing of ordinances" until Christ should come, and by the shedding of His own blood redeem His people, not only from legal but also from spiritual bondage. When Christ came, the " ceremonial law," or " hand- writing of ordinances," was taken out of the way, or done away, and the long-promised redemption be- stowed. Then, the gospel covenant, which had been a covenant of promise, and called the first, ovoid covenant, became the new, or second covenant. Genekal View of the Two Covenants. 9 In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away. — Heb. 8:13. The first covenant waxed old because the " ceremo- nial law " was about to be abrogated. The covenant of promise became the new covenant after it was ratified by the blood of Christ, because a new dispensation of grace, not before enjoyed, was then bestowed. The promise of the covenant which writes the law of God in the heart was then fulfilled, and a " new and living way consecrated for us, through the vail, that is to say, his flesh. " This " new and living way " " consecrated" or opened up * through the vail of Christ's flesh,' was a spiritual kingdom set up in the heart, not before experienced. Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah : Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that 1 took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although 1 was a husband unto them, saith the Lord : Bat this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord ; I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts. — Jere. 31 : 31-33. 10 General View of the Two Covenants. The nature, therefore, of the first or old covenant was like that of a promise, not to be fulfilled until after n specified length of time ; — made in the form of a will or testament, (called sometimes the "first testament,") hy a father to his child. It contained certain carnal ordinances binding upon the child, until he came in possession of the promised inheritance contained in the will or testament made by iris father. He was under a tutor, or school-master, the law. He was therefore in bondage, under the elements of a car- nal, or "ceremonial law," which could not, with all of Its ordinances, make him free in Christ. The old or first covenant kept the child of God not only in a state of legal, but also a state of spiritual non- age ; but promised freedom when Christ, the Messiah, should come. The nature of the new or second covenant is like that of a pledge, or promise to be verified in the present tense; and under which the promisee has, or may have already come in possession of the promised estate of his iather . The contrast between the nature of the two covenants, or between the gospel covenant before it was ratified by the blood of Christ, and the gospel covenant after it was ratified by the blood of Christ, (or what is the same thing, the contrast between the spiritual conditions of the children of God under these two covenants respect- ively,) is illustrated or explained by the following fig- ure : General View of the Two Covenants. 11 Now I say, that the heir, as long as he is a child, differeth nothing from a servant, though he be lord of all ; But is under tutors and governors until the time appointed of the father. Even so we, when we were children, were in bondage -under* the elements of the world : But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons. — Gal. 4 : 1-5. That is, under the old covenant, or before Christ came, we were in bondage to the law, and under the el- ements of the world, with no way of redemption there- from. Know ye not, brethren, (for I speak to them that know the law,) how that the law hath do- minion over a man as long as he liveth? For the woman which hath a husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth ; but if the husband be dead, she is ' loosed from the law of her husband. So then if while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress : but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law ; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man. 12 General View of the Two Covenants. Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that ye should bring forth fruit unto God. For when we were in the flesh, the motions of sin, which were by the law, dfd work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death. But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held ; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter. — Rom. 7 : 1-6. As I understand it, the meaning of the Holy Spirit, as explained by the figure here introduced is this : The brethren to whom Paul wrote were under the dominion of the law of ordinances as long as they were in the flesh, or until the flesh was dead; the same as the wo- man, who had a husband, was bound by the law that existed between husband and wife, until the husband was dead. By the "flesh" is here meant inbred sin, or the car- nal mind ; — called also "The old man,' 1 "The law of sin and death," &c. In Gal. 4 : 3, the same thing is meant by the expres- sion, "The elements of the world." That is, the law of the carnal mind, under which the world is held, or bound . Now this inbred sin, or the " flesh," must be destroyed or die, before the worshiper could be freed from the law of ordinances, the same as the husband must die, before General View of the Two Covenants. 13 the wife could be free from the law which bound her to her husband. "But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held." The thing here referred to, as being dead, is not the law but inbred sin, or the "fleshy When inbred sin was dead, then, the worshiper was dead to the law. " Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ" That is, the body of Christ has slain inbred sin, — (not the law) . The shedding of Christ's blood washed away inbre'd sin, and freed the worshiper from that service which was according to the " oldness of the letter," and ena- bled him to " serve in newness of spirit." By the "oldness of the letter," is meant that bondage to inbred sin which excluded the " law of the spirit of life in Christ Jesus." That is, the worshiper under the old covenant was dragged down, (if I can be allowed the expression,) and fettered or bound, in his spiritual movements, by a law in his members, that warred against the law of spiritual advancement and victory. The motions of sin, or of that " body of death " from which he could not be delivered, were discovered by the law, and worked by the law, in his members, to " bring forth fruit unto death." From this bondage to inbred sin, there was no deliv- erance until the " body of sin and death" was destroy- ed by the " body of Christ." The destruction of inbred sin by the " body of Christ," makes the difference between that service winch 14: General View op the Two Covenants. is rendered according to the " oldness of the letter," and that which is rendered in " newness of spirit." The destruction of inbred sin, or the " body of this death," (as Paul expresses it,) by the " body of Christ," delivered the worshiper, under the old covenant, from the law, marked the commencement of the New-cove- nant era, and makes the difference between the two cov- enants. The difference between the spiritual conditions of the worshipers under the two covenants respectively, is ex- plained in another place as follows : For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus, hath made me free from the law of sin and death. For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sendiftg his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh : That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. — Rom. 8 : 2-4. That is, the worshiper under the old covenant was in bondage to the "law of sin and death," and could not be freed therefrom until the sending of God's Son in the likeness of sinful flesh," " condemned sin in the flesh." TJien, the " righteousness of the law " could be fulfilled in the experience of the worshiper. Then his marriage with inbred sin, or the " law of sin and death," and consequently with the "law of ordi- nances," could be dissolved, and he could be married to General View of the Two Covenants. 1£ Christ in the union of a new and spiritual life, not be- fore enjoyed. The inevitable condition of the children of God under the old covenant, was that of bondage to the " law or sin and death." The speciality of the New-covenant dispensation i& freedom from that bondage. The same doctrine is taught again by the following: figure : Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law ? For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a free- woman. But he who was of the bond-woman, was born after the flesh ; but he of the free woman was by promise. Which things are an allegory : for these are the two covenants ; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth, (or beareth children) to bondage, which is Agar. — Gal. 4 : 21-24. The apostle continues this doctrinal explanation un- der another figure, and says : For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children. — Verse 25. That is, ''this Agar" is the mount-Sinai covenant, or the old covenant which included the law, as given from mount Sinai. 16 General View of the Two Covenants. " And answer eth to Jerusalem which now is " — Resem- bles Jerusalem now in bondage to her enemies — a fit representation of that part of the Jewish Church which had rejected Christ, and were then living in the bond- age of the old-covenant dispensation. By implication, the old covenant is here called the Jerusalem which is below, in contradistinction to the new covenant, or the "Jerusalem which is above," " which," (as the Apostle says,) "is the mother of us all." That is, all that believe. After this presentation of the two covenants, by the two Jerusalem.?, the apostle returns to his former fig- ure of the bond-woman and of the free. Alluding to Sarah, the free woman, as a representative of the covenant of promise before it was ratified by the blood of Christ, it is said : (verse 27,) Bcjoice, thou bar- ren, that bear est not ; break forth and cry, thou that trav- aileth not, Sarah, the free woman, was barren, or bore no chil- dren. In this particular she represents the covenant of promise previous to its ratification by the blood of Christ, Previous to its ratification, the covenant of promise gendered, or bore no children. The promise of the covenant by which the law of God was written in the heart, being unfulfilled,, the cov- enant, as represented by Sarah in her barrenness, was destitute of children. General View of the Two Covenants. 1? As Sarah obtained adopted children by Kagar, the bond- woman, so the covenant of promise claimed adopt- ed children by the covenant of bondage, or law of or- dinances, represented by the bond-woman, God made the following promise to Abraham in re- gard to Sarah : I will certainly return unto thee according to the time of life : and lo, Sarah thy wife shall have a son. — Gen. 18 : 10. When this promise was fulfilled, it was then proper to use the following language in reference to the once barren but now fruitful woman : " Rejoice, thou barren. that bearest not;" (didst not bear) "break forth and cry, thou that travailest not," (didst not travail.) The fulfillment of the promise by which the barren woman became fruitful, represents the fulfillment of the new-covenant promise, by which the new-covenant bore children. This promise was fulfilled when the blood of Christ was shed, and inbred sin thereby taken away. It was then proper to apply the language applied to the woman, as an allegorical representative of the cov- enant, to the covenant itself. And the fulfillment of the new-covenant promise, by which the hitherto barren covenant could gender, or bear children, is what is meant by the Holy Spirit, when He cries by the month of the prophet in the following language: 3 18 General View of the Two Covenants. Sing, barren, thou that didst not bear, break forth into singing, and cry aloud, thou that didst not travail with child : for more are the children of the desolate than the children of the married wife, saith the Lord. — Isa. 54: 1. The covenant of promise was not in force until after its ratification by the blood of Christ; and consequently bore no children until after that time. For this reason it was spoken of as desolate, or un- married, and as barren, or without children. This desolate or barren state of the new covenant be- fore its ratification, is phototyped, or allegorically rep- resente*d by Sarah's barrenness, before the promise. of a son was fulfilled to tier. After its ratification, the new covenant is spoken of as having more children than the old covenant, or the mar- rie& wife. That is, the fruitful wife. This is in accordance with the following promise made to Abraham. I will multiply thy seed as the stars of heav- en, and as the sand which is upon the sea shore. —Gen. 22 : 17. The children of the new covenant, after its ratifica- tion, included all that believed, both Jews and Gentiles. The children of the free, but once barren woman, .are more numerous than the children of the bond- woman, or the old covenant, which had always gendered or borne children to bondage. General View of the Two Covenants. 19 To carry out the figure, and to mark more plainly the difference between the privileges of the two covenants, the apostle adds, verse 31 : So then, brethren, we are not children of the bond-woman, but of the free. That is we are not children of the old covenant, but of the new. As Agar, the bond-maid, was in bondage as a servant and bore children that were in the same bondage : so the old covenant gendered, or bore children that were in bondage, not only to the law of ordinances, but also to the law of inbred sin, or sin in the " inward parts." As Sarah, the free woman, bore no children until the promise of a son was fulfilled to her; so the new cov- enant, or covenant of promise, bore no children, until the promise of the covenant was fulfilled by the blood of Christ, CHAPTER II. Imperfect view in regard to the difference be- tween the two covenants — the entertaining of which view excludes the possibility of a clear understanding of the new birth or sanctifica- Hon, as taught in the Bible. When I ask what the new covenant does for men, that the old covenant did not do, I get" no answer that ac- cords with my view of the Scriptural teaching in regard to it. The only answer that I get, may be summed up in these words: " Under the new covenant, men have the same spiritual blessings that were enjoyed under the old covenant, but in a greater degree. They have more light and love. The graces of the Spirit are more fully developed under the gospel dispensation, than they were under the old-covenant dispensation." If I ask what was meant by lack of perfection, (fre- quently spoken of as existing under the old-covenant dispensation,) 1 get about the same answer. " Neither the light, love, holiness or happiness of the worshiper Imperfect View of the Two Covenants. 21 was as perfect as is attainable under the new covenant, 11 li They did not have that access or nearness to God that is enjoyed under the gospel dispensation." When I ask wherein the old covenant was faulty, I get the same answer. "It did not perfect the worship- ers in the graces of the Spirit, to that degree of perfec- tion that the new covenant does. 1 ' When I ask in regard to the true children of God, who " died in the faith, not having received the prom- ises," (mentioned in the eleventh chapter of Hebrews,) — whether they were the sons of God by adoption, or by birth, I get no decided answer. There seems to be no definite motion about it. As far as my knowledge extends, the general under- standing in the church is, that the difference between the blessings conferred by the two covenants is in de- gree only, and not in kind. That is, the work of grace wrought in the heart, either in justification or sanctification, is different only in cZe- gree. The idea is, that justification and sanctification are more perfect under the new covenant, than they were under the old covenant. The same imperfect view is entertained by our stand- ard writers and commentators, as far as I am acquainted with them. In Wesley's notes on Hebrews, [ find the following: From all that has been said, it appears that the law, the Mosaic dispensation, being a bare, un substantial shadoio of good things to come, of the gospel blessings, and not 22 Imperfect View of the Two Covenants. the substantial solid image of them, can never, with the same kind of sacrifices, though continually repeated, make the comers thereunto 'perfect, either as to justifica- tion, or sanctification. — Heb. 10: 1. Again; — For there is implied in this new and ever- lasting priesthood, and in the new dispensation connect- ed therewith, a disannulling of the preceding command- ment — An Abrogation of the Mosaic law. For the weak- ness and unprofitableness thereof — For its insufficiency either to justify or to sanctify. For the law — Taken by itself, separate from the gospel. Made nothing perfect — could not perfect its votaries, either in faith or love, in happiness or holiness. But the bringing in of a better hope — Of the gospel dispensation, which gives us a bet- ter ground of confidence, does. — Heb. 7: 18-19. Now the idea contained in these comments, if I am not mistaken, is this: both in justification and sanc- tification, as conferred upon the votaries under the old covenant, there was something lacking. They were not perfect; which lack, or imperfection, is made up under the new covenant. The worshipers, were not free from either the guilt or power of sin. The instruction contained in the comments above quoted is substantially this : although the worshipers were in some degree pardoned, or justified, yet they were not so pardoned, or justified, as to be free from guilt ; and also that they were in about the same degree sanctified. Impekfect View of the Two Covenants. 23 The old covenant, on account of the weakness and unprofitableness thereof, was insufficient either to justi- fy, or to sanctify perfectly. On Heb. 8 : 7, Clarke has the following: (If that first had been faultless.} This is nearly the same argument with that in chapter 7:11. The simple meaning is : If the first covenant had made a provision for and actually conferred pardon or purity, or given a title to eternal life, then there could have been no need of a second ; but the first covenant did not give these things, there- fore a second was necessary: and the covenant that gives these things is the Christian covenant. Again — Clarke, on Heb. 9:9. Which) Tabernacle and its services, was a figure, a dark enigmatical repre- sentation, of the time then present, — of that age and dis- pensation, and of all those Avho lived under it. In which, catli 1 on, during which, time or dispensation, were offered both gifts and sacrifices — eucharistic offer- ings and victims for sin, that could not make him that did the service, whether the priest who made the offering , or the person who brought it in the behalf of his soul, per - feet as pertaining to the conscience — could not take away guiit from the mind, nor purify the conscience from dead works. The whole was a figure, or dark represen- tation, of a spiritual and more glorious 8}^stem : and although a sinner, who made these offerings and sacri- fices according to the law, might be considered as hav- ing done his duty, and thus he would be exempt from 24 Imperfect View of the Two Covenants. many ecclesiastical and legal disabilities and punish- ments; yet his conscience would ever tell him that the guilt of sin was still remaining, and that it was im- possible for the blood of bulls and^goats to take it away Thus even he that did the service best continued to be imperfect— had a guilty conscience, and an unholy heart. If I understand Wesley and Clarke, they are, both of them, as it looks to me, about equally wide from the meaning of the Holy Spirit in their comments above quoted: — Wesley in thinking that the imperfection spoken of in the verses upon which he comments, was imperfect pardon, or sanctification — as though there were no provisions under the old covenant whereby the vo- taries could be fully, or perfectly pardoned — as though they were still under condemnation, when fully keep- ing the covenant enjoined on them. To suppose that God holds men guilty, when fully keeping the covenant that He Himself has instituted and enjoined, is to severely reflect on His justice and moral character. And it is absurd, as it looks to me, to suppose that God does not perfectly pardon, whenever he pardons at all. But perhaps he means with Clarke, (in his comment on Heb. 3 ; 7, above quoted,) that the first covenant con- ferred neither 4 pardon nor purity, or a title to eternal life J But this is contrary to the Old-Testament Scriptures on the subject of pardon or forgiveness, under the old covenant. Impereect View of the two Covenants. 25 As far as my knowledge extends, there is nothing es- sentially different from this teaching of Wesley and Clarke, to be found among the writings of other stand- ard authors and commentators, in regard to the imper- fection of the votaries, or worshipers, under the old- coy enant dispensation . Therefore, for a summary statement of the imperfect view that is generally entertained in regard to the differ- ence between the two covenants, I would make use of the following : It is a failure to comprehend distinctly and definitely what the old covenant did do, and what it did not do, for those who kept it; and consequently a failure to understand definitely what the new covenant does for those who keep it, that the old covenant did not do. CHAPTER III. The imperfection j or faultiness, existing under and belonging to the old covenant, explained. In pursuance of this subject, I would say, First, The imperfection existing under the old covenant could not have been imperfect pardon, or justification. Pardon, I beseech thee, the iniquity of this people according unto the greatness of thy mercy, and as thou hast, forgiven this people, from Egypt even until now. And the Lord said, I have pardoned accord- ing to thy word, — Num. 14: 19-20. Thou hast forgiven the iniquity of thy peo- ple ; thou hast covered all their sin. — Psa. 85: 2. Let the wicked forsake his way, and the un- righteous man his thoughts : and let him return unto the Lord, and he will have mercy upon him ; and to our God, for he will abundantly pardon. — Isa. 55 : 7. All but willful or presumptuous sins were forgiven under the old-covenant dispensation. Imperfection, etc., of the Old Covenant. 27 And the man that will do presumptuously, and will not hearken unto the priest that stand- eth to minister there before the Lord thy God, or unto the judge, even that man shall die : and thou shall put away evil from Israel.— Dent. 17: 12. The above passages of Scripture, with many others, prove that there were full provisions for the pardon of sins under the old-covenant dispensation. And if God pardoned at all, to say that he did not 'perfectly pardon, or that there was any imperfection about the work accomplished, is to charge God with do- ing His own work imperfectly. Secondly. The imperfection existing under and be- longing to the old covenant, could not have been im- perfect love; for God required of His people, under the oM covenant, to love Him with all the heart. And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might. — D-eut. 6 : 5. The imperfection attending the votaries under the old covenant was a necessary concomitant of the covenant. The covenant being faulty, there was a corresponding faultiness or imperfection attending those who kept the covenant perfectly. Now if we can ascertain wherein the old covenant was faulty, we may then be able to understand wherein those who kept the covenant were not made perfect. 28 Imperfection, etc., of the Old Covenant. In instituting an inquiry in regard to the faultiness of the old covenant, I notice that the promises upon which it was established were not as good promises as the promises upon which the new covenant is established, Brit now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was establis hed up- on better promises. — Heb. 8: 6. The promises of the new covenant are better than those of the old. Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Isr ael, and with the house of Judah : Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers, in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, al- though I was a husband unto them, saith the LrAd : But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith tile Lord ; I will put my law in their in- ward parts, and write it in their hearts. — Jere. 31: 31-33. The promise, " I will put my law in their inward parts and write it in their hearts, " is a better promise than the old covenant contained. Imperfection, etc., of the Old Covenant. 29 The following promise seems to refer to the same days, and to belong to the same covenant : Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you and ye shall be clean : from all your filthines, and from all your idols will I cleanse you. A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you : and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and will give you a heart of flesh. — Ezek. 36 : 25-26. The foregoing promises belong to the new covenant only. The old covenant had no promises of the same import. There were, therefore, no provisions, under the old covenant, for the writing of the law of God in the heart. The promises by which this great work can be realized belong to the new covenant. The putting of the law of God in the "inward parts" or the ' writing of it in the heart/ so that this law was the law of the heart, or it was natural for the heart to keep the law, was what the old covenant did not do, and what the new covenant does do. Notwithstanding the transgressor was pardoned, yet the law of God was never the law of his heart. It was not natural for him to keep the law; for God did not put the law in the " inward parts," or " write it in the heart." The lack of the promise, in the old covenant, to write 30 Imperfection, etc , of the Old Covenant. the law of God in the heart, constituted the faultiness of the covenant. The absence of this law in the " inward parts," or in the heart, was the imperfection which was a necessary concomitant of the covenant, and which in all cases at- tended the votaries under that dispensation. Said lack, or defectiveness, is sujaplied, or made up, under the new covenant, and is Christ-like, or Christian perfection. The perfection of having the ' law of God written in the hearty could not, therefore, exist under the old cove- nant. The lack of this perfection was the imperfection, or faultiness, existing under and belonging to the old-cove- nant dispensation. If therefore perfection were by the Leviti- cal priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that an- other priest should rise after the order of Mel- chizedek, and not be called after the order of Aaron?— H^b. 7:11. For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually, make the com- ers thereunto perfect. — Heb. 10: 1. Imperfection, etc., of the Old Covenant. 31 For this law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did. — Heb. 7 : 19. The perfection brought in by the " better hope" is the New Birth, or Sanctification. CHAPTER IV. The writing of the law of God in the heart. There may be a difference of opinion in regard to the meaning of the Holy Spirit, in the language, " I will put my law in their inward parts 5 and unite it in their hearts," but to me, it can have but one signification. First, It cannot mean what is meant in Paul's lan- guage to the Romans, when he says : For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these having not the law, are a law unto themselves. Which show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing wit- ness, and their thoughts the meanwhile accus- ing or else excusing one another. — Rom. 2 : 14- 15. I understand the meaning of the above quotation to be this : the Gentiles to whom he refers, had a consciousness, or knowledge of what ought to be done, and of what Writing of the Law of God in the Heart. 33 ought not to be clone, given them by the enlightening influences of that Spirit " which lighteth every man that cometh into the world; 1 ' and which " reproves the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment." Under the elevating and restraining influences of the Spirit of God, and the voice of conscience, men do many things in accordance with the law of God, without any radical change of heart. A knowledge of wh&tought to be done, and of what ought not to be done, under the above named influences, was, I believe, what was meant by the*" work of the law written in the heart" in the above quotation from Romans. The above named knowledge, or consciousness, may exist in the heart without having the law, itself, written therein. That is, there may be a knowledge of righ; and wrong written in the heart, when it is not natural for the heart to do the right and forsake the wrong. There may be a consciousness of moral obligation to keep the law of God existing in the heart, when that law is not the law of the heart ; or it is not natural for the heart to keep the law. This consciousness was what was meant by the " work of the law written in the heart." But when the law, itself, is written in the heart, that law will be the law of the heart, and it will be natural for the heart to keep the law. Secondly, The state of the heart when the law of God is written therein, cannot be the state described by Paul, when he says : 3 34 Writing of the Law of God in the Heart. For I delight in the law of God after the in- ward man ; But I see another law in my members, war- ring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members. "— Rom. 7 : 22-23. For he immediately exclaims, verse 2*: " O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?" And then adds, verse 25: " I thank God through Jesus^ Christ our Lord." Now Christ is the mediator of the new covenant, in which the writing of the law of God in the heart is promised, and, as Paul declares, delivers from this ' body of sin and death.' If the new-covenant promise, of writing the law of God in the heart, means nothing more than the state described by Paul, (wherein was a law in his members * warring against the law of his mind, and bringing bim into captivity to the law of sin,') then, in that case, the new covenant does not accomplish^ what Christ, as its mediator, or surety, promised to do: viz., "save His people from all sin." Thirdly, The meaning of the new-covenant promise, " I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts," I believe is clearly and fully explained in Paul's letter to the Hebrews. After showing that sin could not be taken away by ^he offerings of the law, he says : For by one offering he hath perfected forever them that are sanctified. Writing of the Law of God in the Heart. 35 Whereof the Holy Ghost also is a witness to us : for after that he had said before, This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith the Lord ; I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them. — Heb. 10: 14-16. m Here we have Scripture to explain Scripture. The Holy Ghost, through Paul, explains what was meant by the new-covenant promise. This promise was made by the Holy Ghost, through Jeremiah, and is here re- ferred to, as a witness to the truthfulness of the statement just made: viz., " For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified." The perfection of *' them that are sanctified," is what was meant by the new-covenant promise. This perfection was the fulfillment of the promise. They both mean the same thing. To be sanctified, is to have the law of God written in the heart. k ' For after that he had said before" That is, the Holy Ghost had said the same thing in the new-covenant promise, through Jeremiah, that He now says by Paul : viz : '* For by one offering he hath perfected forever them that are sanctified. V On Hebrew 10: 15, Wesley has the following note: Verse 15. In this and the three following verses, the apostle winds up his argument concerning the excellency and perfection of the priesthood and sacrifice of Christ. He had proved this before by a quotation from Jeremiah ; which he here repeats, describing the new covenant as 36 WAITING OF THE LAW OF GOD IN THE HEART. now completely ratified, and all the blessings of it se- cured to us by the one offering of Christ, which renders all other expiating sacrifices, and any repetition of his own, utterly needless. Clarke on Heb. 10: 15. Verse 15. The Holy Ghost — is a witness to us. The words are quoted from Jere- miah 31 : 33, 34, (that is, the words that constitute the witness,) and we are here assured that Jeremiah spoke by the inspiration of the Spirit of God. Barnes on Heb. 10: 15. Whereof the Holy Ghost is a witness to us. That is, the Holy Ghost is proof of the truth of the position here laid down — that the one atone- ment made by the Redeemer lays the foundation of the eternal perfection of all who are sanctified. The witness of the Holy Ghost here referred to, is that which is fur- nished in the Scriptures, and not any witness in our- selves. Paul immediately makes his appeal to a passage of the Old Testament, and he thus shows his firm con- vie lion that the Scriptures were inspired by t'ie Holy Ghost. For after that he had said before. The apostle here appeals to a passage which he had before quoted from Jer. 31 : 33, 34. Now this sanctification which was the verification or fulfilment of the new-covenant promise, could not take place until the new covenant was ratified, or established by the blood of Christ, or, (which is the same thing,) by the "offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. 11 Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, God. He taketh away the first, (that is, the Writing of the Law of God in the Heart. 37 first covenant,) that he may establish the second. By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesns Christ once for all.— Heb. 10: 9-10. CHAPTER V. The reason why the law of God could not be written in.the heart, under the old covenant. The reason why the law of God could not be written in the heart, under the old-covenant dispensation, was simply because sin could not be taken away. For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins. — Heb. 10 : 4. For the law having a shadow of good things to come, a ad not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices, which they offered year by year continually, make the comers thereunto perfect. For then would they not have ceased to be offered? because that the worshipers once purged should have had no more conscience of sins.— Heb. 10 : 1-2. For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of a heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanc- tifieth to the purifying of tbe flesh ; How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself Why the Law Itself could not be Written. 39 without spot to God ; purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God. — Heb. 9: 13-14. And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. — Heb. 10 : 1L " The law of sin and death " must remain in the heart until it is freed therefrom by the " law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus." The freedom of the heart from the " law of sin and death, 1 ' could be accomplished only by the blood of Christ; which blood was not available under the old covenant, because it had not then been shed. For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh : That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. — Rom. 8 : 3-4. The putting of the law of God in the " inward parts, 1 or the ' writing of it in the heart,' is to make that law the law of the heart, and therefore free it from the " law of sin and death" This work could be accomplished by the blood of Christ only; for His blood alone could "purge the con- science from dead works." The " sending " of God's Son, in the " likeness of sinful 4:0 Why the Law Itself could not be Written. flesh, 1 ' must take place before the condemnation of sin in the flesh could take place. No faith in a Saviour to come, could at any time " purge the conscience from dead works. 1 ' " Suneidesin" rendered conscience, does not always mean that faculty of the soul which distinguishes be- tween right and wrong, and which prompts to do the right, and forsake the wrong. It sometimes means the soul. On Heb 9 : 14, Wesley has the following note: "Purge our conscience — Our inmost soul. 11 It means also the mind's apprehension, or conscious- ness of sin. The last clause of Heb. 10: 2, reads: Because that the worshipers once purged should have had no more conscience of sins. Here conscience means the mind's apprehension, or consciousness of sin. Wesley translates this clause thus : " Because that the worshipers having been once purged would have had no more consciousness of sins. 1 ' He that did the service of the law perfectly, must have been freed from a consciousness of guilt; for a faithful or perfect observance of the requirements of the law, was all that God required. It was all that the wor- shiper could do ; and therefore having kept the covenant enjoined on him, he was no^longer troubled with a guilty conscience. He was justified, or pardoned. His actual transgres- sions, or sins were forgiven. Why the Law Itself could not be Written. 41 Yet, he was not perfected, " as pertaining to the con- science.' 1 There was an apprehension or consciousness of something wrong remaining in the heart, which could not be removed by the offerings of the law, for these offerings could not take away sin. It was sin, inbred sin, that remained, and could not be taken away, except by the blood of Christ. And this blood had not then been shed, and therefore there was no perfection under the law, or " by the Levitical priest- hood;" "for the law made nothing perfect, but the bring- ing in of a better hope did." The purging of the conscience, or the " inmost soul," is the work of the blood of Christ, made available by being shed. When this blood was shed, then, the " better hope," or, " The gospel dispensation" (as Wesley explains the phrase, " better hope") was brought in. Since the bringing in of this " better hope," or of the gospel dispensation — the establishment of the new cov- enant, the conscience, or " inmost soul " can be purged, and the worshiper perfected. For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified. Whereof the Holy Ghost also is a witness to us : for after that he had said before, This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith the Lord ; I will put my laws in their hearts, and in their minds will I write them ; 42 Why the Law Itself could not be Written. And their sins and iniquities will I remember no more. Now where remission of these is, there is no more offering for sin. Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus, By a new and living way, which he hath con- secrated for us, through the vail, that is to say, his flesh ; And having a high priest over the house of God; Let us draw near with a true heart in full as- surance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water. — Heb. 10 : 14-22. The writing of the law of God in the heart, is the New Birth, or Sanctification. As has been shown, this could not take place until after the taking away of sin, by the shed blood of Christ. The existence of sin in the heart, excludes the expe- rience of the New Birth, CHAPTER VI. The entrance and office of the moral law. By the term law, is sometimes meant the moral law, and sometimes the ceremonial law. In the following quotation, the law of ceremonies, or the "handwriting of ordinances" is undoubtedly re- ferred to : But now we are delivered from the law ; that being dead wherein we were held. — Rom. 7 : 6. In the following, the moral law must be the law re- ferred to : For we know that the law is spiritual : but I am carnal, sold under sin. — Rom. 7 : 14. The moral law is of eternal obligation, and eoulcl not» therefore, have been added by Moses. It did, however, take on a written form by the hand of Moses, and entered into the field of conflict with sin, as the written word of God. The written word of God, (if I may be allowed the method of explanation,) became a verbal incarnation of His law ; and it may be said that the law of God was made words and dwells anion £ us. 4A Entrance and Office of the Moral Law. Since Moses, the law of God has been with us in written words, as not before, This is what I understand by the expression: " Trie law entered." Morever the law entered that the offense might abound. — Rom. 5:20. The word, "offense" here means the same a.s "sin" in the last clause of the verse. It means the Mien sinful state of heart that "passed upon all men " from Adam. It has this meaning in the next verse, and also in several places in the sixth chapter. In the sixth verse of the sixth chapter, the same thing is meant by the " old man" and the " body of sin " It is the "carnal mind, 1 ' or inbred sin. This state of the heart came upon all men through Adam. Therefore, as by the offense of one judg- ment came upon all men to condemnation ; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life. For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.— Rom. 5 : 18-19. Now, it does not mean that " many ivere made sin- ners" in the sense of being guilty, because Adam sinned ; but the meaning is, all men partook of the sinful, fallen state of heart that Adam had, after he sinned, and became sinners by nature, Entrance and Oeftce of the Moral Law. 45 In this way, " death passed upon all men" because all men partake of this sinful nature. Men do not know this sinful state of the heart — this fallen Adamic inheritance, except by the moral law. For by the law is the knowledge of sin. — Eom. 3 : 20. I had not known sin, but by the law : for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet. But sin taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. For without the law, sin was dead. For I was alive without the law once : but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died. And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death. For sin, taking occasion by the command- ment, deceived me, and by it slew me. Wherefore the law is holy, and the command- ment holy, and just, and good. Was then that which is good made death unto me ? God forbid. But sin, that it might ajopear sin, working death in me by that which is good ; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful. — Rom. 7 : 7-13. Sin, by the commandment, becomes exceeding sinful, not because the commandment makes it more sinful, but because its nature is thereby made to appear. 46 Entrance and Office of the Moral Law. " Sin was dead without the law,™ but the command- ment ( which is the written law) wakes up sin, or revives it, and its nature is thereby discovered. In this way, the " offense" is made to abound, God did not give his people a law, in order to make their sinful, fallen natures more sinful; but the " law entered" — became a written law, that the "offense" might be discovered. The office of the moral law is to give light, or under- standing, and to furnish a rule of life. The written moral law, as the " sword of the Spirit" is Sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discern- er of the thoughts and intents of the heart. — Heb. 4 : 12. " The law entered" therefore, not only as a rule of life; but that the nature of the "offense" inbred sin, might thereby be made to appear. The entrance of the moral law shows the necessity of the New Birth, or Sanctification. CHAPTER VII. Eeign of the death of inbred sin. Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come. — Eom. 5 : 14. This verse does not mean that the bodies of men died, or were subject to death, during the time from Adam to Moses. The declaration that " death reigned from Adam to Moses," of course is true in regard to the body; but the death of the body is not the death here referred to. The length of time that the body is subject to the reign of death, and the relation of this death of the body to the first and second Adam, is explained, 1 Cor. 15 : 21-22 : For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. The death referred to in the fifth of Romans is the death that God pronounced upon Adam, saying, In 48 Reign of the Death of Inbred Sin. the day that thou eatest thereof, thou shalt surely die." —Gen. 2:17. Adam died according to the word of the Lord. The death which came upon Adam in the day that he sinned, was the death of indwelling sin, or the " law of sin and death." It is the death of the " carnal mind" which is enmity against God : for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be. — Rom. 8: 7. For to be carnally minded is death. — Rom. 8 : 6. This death must reign until destroyed, or taken away by the " law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus." It reigned until Christ brought in the "free gift" The/ree gift is the " law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus" which makes "free from the law of sin and death." For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death. For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh. That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. — Rom. 8 : 2-4. This death " passed upon all men " from Adam. Wherefore as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin ; and so death passed Reign op the Death of Inbked Sin. 49 upon all men, for that all have sinned. — Eom. 5 : 12. The last clause of this verse : " For that all have sinned," as it reads, does not express the apostle's mean- ing. The death here referred to, did not " pass upon all men "for that, or because they had sinned. It passed upon them in consequence of Adam's sin, or " offense." The true meaning would be more clearly expressed thus : By whom all have borne the imputation of sin. That is, all men inherit inbred sin, or death, by the " one man" — Adam. It did not " pass upon all men" in consequence of their own transgression; for it reigned " even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgres- sion." It " passed»upon all men," except Adam, without the exercise of their free will or consent. No one was ever guilty for inheriting this Adamic death. Hence, it is called the " Paraptoma," (the " offense.") The word properly signifies a casual or involuntary fall, fault, offense, sin; and in the apostle's argument is con- trasted with the " Charisma" (the " free gift.)" Now as the " offense " "came upon all men" inde- pendently of their own choice; so also the " free gift" comes in like manner. Therefore, as by the offense of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation ; even so 4 50 Reign of the Death of Inbred Sin. by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life. — Rom. 5:18. The "free gift " is life in the soul, and the %i offense !1 is death in the soul. This Adamic death, or sin, was not imputed during the time from Adam to Moses, because the law bad not entered to expose it, and because there was no blood that could take it away. For until the law sin was in the world ; but sin is not imputed when there is no law. — Rom. 5: 13. By sin in this verse is not meant transgression, but inbred sin. Transgressions were imputed before the en- trance of the law, or before Moses. Inbred sin is the death referred to, as reigning from Adam to Moses. % It reigned, not only from Adam to Moses, but from Adam to Christ. It is said that " death reigned from Adam to Moses," not because it did not reign after Moses, but because the law exposed its reign after Moses, and not before. After the entrance of the moral law had exposed the reign of this death, it was not necessary to say that it reigned. Notwithstanding the reign of the death of inbred sin was discovered by the entrance of the law, {for the " law entered, that the offense might abound") yet, it was not Reign of the Death of Inbred Sin. 51 imputed until after the offering of Christ was made, be- cause there was no blood that could take it away. "The first man Adam" was a figure of the " last Adam," by way of contrast. " The first man Adam " brought in the reign of death, and the " last Adam " brought in the reign of life. The last Adam destroyed the reign of the first Adam, (as far as sin reigns in the heart) by destroying the reign of inbred sin. The reign of the death of inbred sin lasted from the first to the last Adam. Bat death reigns over the body from the first Adam to the resurrection. When the body shall have received the "adoption," or redemption from the bondage of corruption, then will "mortality be swallowed up of life" Then will Christ's victory over sin and its consequences be com- plete. For this corruptible must put on incorrup- tion, and this mortal must put on immortality. So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.— 1 Cor. 15:53-54. Then Christ will have put all enemies under His feet. The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.— 1 Cor. 15:26. That is, the reign of death over the body. 52 Reign of the Death of Inbred Sin. After showing how the reign of the death of inbred sin, or the " offense" came upon all men through the first Adam; and also after showing how much more abundant is the reign of life through the last Adam, Christ, the apostle proceeds, in the sixth chapter, to ex- plain and enforce the privilege of being free from the reign of this Adamic death. In the sixth, however, he calls it " sin" and the " old man." What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid: how shall we, that are dead to gin, live any longer therein ? Know ye not that so many of us as were bap- tized into Jesus Christ, were baptized into his death ? Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death : that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection : Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be de- stroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin. For he that is dead is freed from sin. Now if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him: Reign of the Death of Inbred Sin. 53 Knowing that Christ, being raised from the dead, dieth no more; death hath no more do- minion over him. For in that he died, he died unto sin once ; but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God. Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord. Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body that ye should obey it in the lusts thereof. Neither yield ye your members as instru- ments of unrighteousness unto sin, but yield yourselves unto God, as those that are alive from the dead, and your members as instru- ments of righteousness unto God. For sin shall not have dominion over you, for ye are not under the law, but under grace. —Rom. 6: 1-14. To be 4 baptised into the death of Christ ' (verse 3) means to have sin die in us, as Christ's body died. For in that he died, he died unto sin once — verse 10. Christ did not ' die unto sin ' in Himself, for " in him is no sin." The meaning is, His body died, or waa slain, in order to destroy the body of sin in ns. Knowing this, that our old man is crucified ivith him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin — verse 6. Sin reigns until destroyed. For he that is dead is freed from sin — verse 7. M Reign op the Death of Inbked Sin. That is, he in whom the " old man" is dead is freed from sin. Freedom from sin by the crucifixion of the " old man" or the destruction of the " body of sin" puts an end to the reign of death in the heart. The reign of the death of inbred sin excludes the experience of the New Birth. CHAPTER VIII. Allegorical explanation of the two covenants. Which things are an allegory : for these are the two covenants ; the one from the Mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.— Gal. 4:24. As has been previously noticed, Agar is an allegorical representative of the old covenant. She was in bond- age, and bore children to bondage. Ishmael, the son of the bondwoman, was born after, or according to the flesh; that is, in a natural way. There was nothing supernatural about his birth. Hagar, the bondwoman, was in no kind of bondage different from that in which the free woman was bound except a legal bondage. She was a servant, and by virtue of her position as a servant, was under certain rules of subjection, or obedience. By these rules she was in bondage to her mistress, the free woman. Sarah, the free woman, was not a servant, and there- fore not in bondage as a servant. The bondage of the bondwoman represents the bond- age of the old covenant. 56 Allegorical Explanation of the Covenants. The bondwoman was in bondage not only to inbred sin, but she was also in legal bondage to the law, or will of her mistress. Hagar, the bondwlfe of Abraham, was added as a wife, to supply (as far as possible) a deficiency in the free wife. The free wife bere no children. Therefore to obtain children, Hagar was added to Sarah, the free wife, as a bondwife to Abraham. But the children of Hagar were not the natural chil- dren of Sarah, the free wife. She could only claim them as adopted children. The covenant of promise could gender or bear no children until after it was ratified, or established, and the promise of the covenant fulfilled. No one could be made free from inbred sin, and be born of the Spirit, or experience the new birth. Therefore the law of ordinances was " imposed on them until the time of reformation," or the new birth. In the faithful observance of this law of ordinances they could be pardoned, and kept in a state of justifica- tion, and thereby treated as adopted children. This law of ordinances therefore supplied the defi- ciency of children in the covenant of promise, as Hagar supplied Sarah's deficiency, in bearing children to bond- age for Sarah's adoption. At the same time, the sacrifices or offerings of the ceremonial law pointed the worshiper to the offering of Christ as the only sacrifice or offering that could make him a child of the free woman, by the destruc- Allegorical Explanation of the Covenants. 57 tion of inbred sin, and the consequent experience of the new birth. The new birth was the promised inheritance promised in the covenant of promise, and to which the worshiper under the old covenant was entitled by virtue of his adoption into the family or church of God by the keep- ing of the law of ordinances. As Hagar was added to Sarah, the free woman, in order that the free woman might obtain adopted chil- dren; so the law of ordinances was added to the cove- nant of promise, that the covenant of promise, while in its barren state, might have adopted children. As Sarah, the free wife, did not obtain natural chil- dren by Hagar, the bond wife ; so neither did the cove- nant of promise obtain natural children by the addition of the law of ordinances. They were in bondage to inbred sin, and the law of ordinances, as Hagar was in bondage to inbred sin, and the law, or will of her mistress. Sarah, the free woman, before the promise of a son was fulfilled, represents the covenant of promise, pre- vious to its ratification, and the consequent fulfillment of the promise of the covenant. After the promise of a son was fulfilled to the free woman, she was a representative of the covenant of promise after its ratification by the blood of Christ. They both had children of their own. The son of the bondwoman was " born after the flesh. " There was nothing supernatural about his birth. The son of the free woman was " by promise." That 58 Allegorical Explanation of the Covenants. is, his parents were supernatu rally endowed with quali- fications for his birth. The birth of Isaac, by 'promise, does not show that he was not born with the same fallen nature, the same car- nal mind, or "law of sin, and death," that the son of the bondwoman had. But it shows allegorically that the children of the new covenant, or covenant o£ prom- ise, after its ratification, or establishment by the blood of Christ, were to be made free from inbred sin, or the "law of sin and death," The birth of Isaac by promise refers to the supernat- ural endowment of his parents to bring forth, or bear a son. The promise was a promise of physical, not spiritual birth. But this manner of birth, or way of being qualified to bear children, was an allegorical representation of some- thing spiritual. The supernatural physical birth of Isaac was a figure, or prototype of the spiritual birth of the children of God under the new covenant. That is, it showed that the children of God under the new covenant were to be spiritually born, free from inbred sin. Isaac was a child of promise because he was physical- ly born according to the promise made to Abraham. It is said that he was " bom after the Spirit,^ not be- cause he was spiritually born of God at his birth — not because he had a new heart, but because his parents be- lieved, " against hope" that they should have a son. To be "born after the Spirit," was the same as to be born "by promise." Allegorical Explanation of the Covenants. 59 The faith of his parents in the promise, being given or inspired by the Spirit, it is said he was " born after the Spirit." Isaac could be physically born according to the faith of his parents, but not spiritually, because no one ex- cept Christ has ever been born free from inbred sin. Therefore his being '« born after the Spirit 1 ' has no reference to regeneration of heart. All that transpired in reference to the supernatural physical birth of Isaac, came to pass in order to furnish an allegorical representation of the spiritual birth, or regeneration of heart that should be experienced by the children of God under the new covenant. In carrying out this figure, let it be observed : that as Abraham was a husband to both the bond woman and the free, according to the flesh ; so likewise God was a spiritual husband, or a husband according to the Spirit, to both covenants ; (or to the children under both cov- enants.) Abraham had bondchildren, according to the flesh, by the bondwoman. That is, Ishmael was in legal bond- age as a servant, according to the position of his mother. By the free woman he had free children according to the flesh. That is, Isaac was legally free from the bond* age of servant, according to the position of his mother. God, as a husband according to the Spirit, or spirit- ually, had bond children according to the Spirit or spirit- ually ', by the covenant of bondage. That is, they were not free from inbred sin, or the " law of sin and death." By the free or gospel covenant, He has free children 60 Allegorical Explanaiion of the Covenants. according to the Spirit or spiritually. That is, they are free from inbred sin, or the " law of sin and death." Thus in fleshly or material things, Abraham was a fig- urative representation of God in spiritual things. And this figurative representation of spiritual by ma- terial things is seen in the offering up of Isaac. For as Abraham offered up Isaac his only begotten son as a sac- rifice unto God, so God offered up His only begotten Son, as a sacrifice for the sins of the world. As has been previously noticed, Abraham could not have children by the free woman until after the promise of a son by Sarah was fulfilled. So neither could God have children by the free, or gospel covenant, until after the promise of the covenant was fulfilled by the shed blood of Christ. God must have free children, by the free covenant. They must be spiritually free. That is, free from inbred sin. This freedom would make them natural instead of adopted children. They would be like God — " conform- ed to the image of his Son. n Man was created, morally, in the image of God. The law of God was the law of his heart. He was alive to God, and dead to sin. When he sinned, he lost the moral image of God, and became dead to God, and alive to sin. The law of sin was the law of his heart. Inbred sin, the image of the devil, took the place of the lost image of God. Inbred sin must be destroyed, or taken away, before Allegorical Explanation of the Covenants. 61 the image of God could be restored, and the sinner be- came a natural or free child of God. Now inasmuch as the " strength of sin is the taw, sin could not be destroyed, or taken away, until the de- mands of the law were met. Christ must suffer the penalty of the broken moral law, which was death, be- fore inbred sin could be destroyed. Hence, God could not have free or natural children until the broken moral law was satisfied by the death of Christ. No one could be born of the Spirit, or bear the image of the last Adam, Christ, until the image of the Devil, inbred sin, was destroyed by the offering of Christ. For by one offering he hath perfected forever them them that are sanctified. — Heb. 10: 14. That is, them that are cleansed from inbred sin. Such are the children of the free, or gospel covenant. Such have experienced the new birth, according to the New- covenant promise : "I will put my laio in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts" Such have followed Christ " in the regeneration," and are the seed referred to in the following language : When thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the ^pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in his hand. He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied. — Isa. 53: 10-11. That is, Christ shall see sons born in His own image — His natural seed, or children. 62 Allegorical Explanation of the Covenants. The covenant of promise being now ratified by the blood of Christ, as described in the fifty-third chapter, the hitherto barren covenant, represented by Sarah in her barren state, now becomes fruitful; and the Holy Ghost in the fifty- fourth chapter, describes the covenant in its fruitful state, as represented by Sarah after she be- came a mother of children : Sing, barren, thou that didst not bear; break forth into singing, and cry aloud, thou that didst not travail with child : for more are the children of the desolate than the children of the married wife, saith the Lord. Enlarge the place of thy tent, and let them stretch forth the curtains of thine habitations : spare not, lengthen thy cords, and strengthen thy stakes ; For thou shalt break forth on the right hand and on the left ; and thy seed shall inherit the G-entiles, and make the desolate cities to be in- habited. Fear : not for thou shalt not be ashamed : neither be thou confounded ; for thou shalt not be put to shame: for thou shalt forget the the shame of thy youth, and shall aot remember the reproach of thy widowk)od any more. For thy Maker is thine husband ; The Lord of hosts is his name ; and thy Redeemer the Holy One of Israel; The God of the whole earth shall he be called. For the Lord shall call thee as a woman for- Allegorical Explanation of the Covenants. 63 saken and grieved in spirit, and a wife of youth, when thou wast refused, saith thy God. — Isa. 54 : 1-6. That this language is a description of the gospel cov- enant, after its ratification by the blood of Christ, as compared with its desolation and unfrnitfulness, or bar- renness before it was ratified, is proved by Gal. 4: 24-31, already referred to. The sense in which God, in Christ, was a husband, spiritually, to the bondwoman, or the old-covenant church, is seen in the following Scriptures : And did all eat the same spiritual meat; And did all drink the same spiritual drink ; For they drank of that spiritual Rock that fol- lowed them ; and that Rock was Christ. — 1 Cor. 10:3-4. As I understand it, the spiritual meat and drink here spoken pf are the spiritual blessings granted to the peo- ple of God through Christ, as figuratively represented by the manna that followed them, and the water that came from the rock in Horeb. Christ was the spiritual Bock that followed them, or was with them. That is, He was with them, or followed them, instead of being in them. As a husband, spiritually, to this bondwoman, the old-covenant church, He was with the church, to inspire, guide, instruct, and to be a present help in every time of need. But there was not that nearness or union exist- ing between Christ and the bond woman, that there is between Christ and the free woman. This difference of 64 Allegorical Explanation of the Covenants. relation is figuratively represented by the difference of relation existing between Abraham and his two wives. There was not that nearness or union existing between Abraham and the bondwife, that there was between him and his free wife. The difference of relation existing between Christ and the old and new-covenant churches (as figuratively represented by the difference of relation existing between Abraham and his two wives) is shown by the expres- sion, "followed them." He could not dwell in the old-covenant church, be- cause its members could not be cleansed from indwell- ng sin, or corruption. They were pardoned, but not sanctified. "The strength of sin being the law" the body of sin could not be de- stroyed until the law was satisfied by the death of Christ. He, by whose stripes they could be healed, must be smitten before they could be made whole. For this rea- son it is said He, (Christ, the spiritual Rock,) "followed them." On the same principle, (but not for the same reason,) God said in reference to the children of Israel : For I will not go up in the midst of thee ; for thou art a stiff-necked people : lest I con- sume thee in the way.— Exod. 33: 3. Christ was with them, and the Spirit was freely given, as shown by the waters from the Rock, the streams of which " ran down like rivers." He came to them by water only, as shown by the smitten Rock in Horeb. He must come by water and Allegokical Explanation of the Covenants. 65 blood, before inbred sin could be taken away, and the heart made a fit temple in which for Him to dwell. This is he that came by water and blood , even Jesus Christ ; not by water only, but by water and blood. — 1 John 5 : 6. As I understand it, ' to come by water,' 1 does not mean baptism, as some of our commentators have explained this coming of Christ. Baptism was only an ordinance to be fulfilled as an indication, or outward sign, of the pardon of sins. It became Christ to fulfill this righteous ordinance, the same as it became Him to be subject to His parents, in order to fulfill a righteous law. His baptism was not a witness that He was the Son of God, any more than His circumcision, or His subjection to His parents. It was the Spirit that bore witness that Jesus was the Son of God. saying, " This is my beloved son in whom I am well pleased." Water, as a symbol of the way or manner in which Christ came, was a witness. Blood, as a symbol of the way or manner in which He comes, is a witness. Both of these symbols of His manner of coming were manifested at His crucifixion. The blood and the water that came from His side were symbolical indications, or witnesses, that He had come in the way or manner indicated by these symbols. He came by water only, to the old-covenant church, as indicated by the smitten Rock in Horeb. At his cru- 5 66 Allegorical Explanation of the Covenants, cifixion, He came by water and blood also, as indicated by the water and blood that came from His side. The water and the blood, as symbolical witnesses, co- incide with the Spirit, in Christ: but these symbols were not His coming. As I understand it, to come by water, was to confer those blessings of which ivater was a symbol. To come by blood, was to confer that blessing of which blood is a symbol. In the Bible, water is used as a symbol of the Spirit. And it is used in cleansing, or washing away filth or dirt. Therefore, to come by water, was to come by the Spir- it, as water to the thirsty. To come by the Spirit to those that were filthy by transgression, was as water to the filth of the body. It washed away their transgressions. To ' come by ivater? therefore, was the sense in which God, in Christ, was a husband, spiritually to the old-cov- enant church, or Hagar, the bondwoman. Blood is the life of the body, and is therefore used as a symbol of the life of the soul. Therefore to come by blood, was to restore life to the dead soul. The blood of Christ takes away inbred sin, and makes the worshiper a " new creature," by restoring the " law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus." Therefore, to come by water and blood also, is the sense in which God, in Christ, is a husband to the new- covenant church, or Sarah, the free woman. Allegokical Explanation of the Covenants. 67 This sense is explained by Christ, as follows : Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, 1 say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. Whoso eateth my flesh and drink- eth my blood, hath eternal life ; and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him. — Mat. 6: 53-56. That is, he that so believes in the offering of the body of Christ, as to experience that change of heart Wuich the offering was intended to accomplish, has eternal life. Christ dwells in him. Christ in the heart is the bread of life. Siys Christ, I am the bread of life— verse 48. I am the living bread which came down from heaven : if any man eat of this bread, he shall live forever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world — verse 51. Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Moses gave you not that bread from heaven ; but my Father giveth you the true bread from heaven. For the bread of God is he which came down from heaven, and giveth .life unto the world — verses 32-33. That is, Moses gave you not Christ in the heart. Christ, through Moses, came to them by water only. 68 Allegorical Explanation of the Covenants. The blood of Christ, which restores life to the soul by the destruction of inbred sin, had not then beeu shed. For that reason Moses could not give them the ''true bread from heaven" or Christ in the heart. Christ and inbred sin could not dwell in the heart at the same time. The life of which the blood of Christ was a symbol, could not be given until that blood was shed. Christ must first come, before the life consequent upon the destruction of inbred sin could be imparted. The coming of Christ by blood, is the bread which Moses did not give, and is the sense in which Christ is a husband, spiritually, to the new-covenant church, or the free woman. Let it be observed that the law existing between ser- vant and master is made use of to represent the law of inbred sin; and that Ishmael was a representative of the children of the old covenant, and Isaac of the new. As Ishmael was the son of a servant, the bondwoman, he was a servant only, and as such ceuld not be heir to Abraham's possessions. Isaac was the son of a free woman, and therefore not a servant. Because he was not a servant but a so?i t he could be heir to Abraham's possessions. Abraham's worldly possessions, represent the inherit- ance in Christ. Now as Isaac was an heir to Abraham's worldly pos- sessions, (because he was a son of the free woman,) this heirship to a worldly inheritance represents the heir- Allegorical Explanation of the Covenants. 69 ship of the children of the new covenant to the inherit- ance in Christ. The children of the new covenant are free from the law of inbred sin, and can therefore come in possession of the inheritance in Christ, just as Isaac was free from the law of a servant, and could therefore come in pos- session of Abraham's worldly possessions. The children of the old covenant could not be free from the law of inbred sin, and could not therefore come in possession of the inheritance in Christ, just as Ishmael could not be free from the law of a servant and could not therefore come in possession of Abra- * ham's worldly possessions. Ishmael was born in a natural way, or according to the flesh ; that is he was not physically born according to promise. This shows that the children of the old covenant could not be spiritually born according to promise. They could be adopted, by the pardon of sins, and treated as adopted children, but could not experience the new birth consequent upon the destruction of inbred sin. They could not experience the " adoption of sons" or the '-soiship." (That is, the slate of being a son by birth.) They were heirs to the new birth, or natural sonship, but could not come in posssesion of it until they could be freed from the law of inbred sin. They occupied the position of servants, with refer- ence to the inheritance in Christ, just as Ishmael occu- 70 Allegorical Explanation of the Covenants. pied the position of a servant in reference to Abraham's worldly possessions. This relation of the children of the old covenant to the promised inheritance in Christ, is again explained by another similar figure, taken again from the rela- tionship existing in the family. It is the position of a child, while in a state of nonage, with reference to his father's possessions. Now T say, that the heir, as long as he is a child, (while in his nonage,) " differeth nothing from a servant, though he be lord of all; But is under tutors and governors until the time appointed of the father. Even so we, when we were children, (that is, when we were under the law,) were in bondage under the elements of the world : (That is, under the law of the carnal mind, in which the world is held, or bound.) But when the fulness of time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons. * * Wherefore thou art no more a servant, but a son.— Gal. 4: 1-7. That is, thou art no more a child of the old covenant, or the bondwoman ; but thou art a child of the new covenant, or the free woman, and a child of promise, spiritually, as Isaac was a child of promise, physically. Thou art born, spiritually, after the similitude of Isaac's Allegorical Explanation of the Covenants. 71 physical birth. Thou art Abraham's spiritual Isaac. Thou art born spiritually, according to the new-cove- nant promise, as Isaac was born physically, according to the promise made to Abraham. Thou art a son. That is, a natural, instead of an adopted son, or servant. All the children of God under the old covenant, are, by the above scriptures, counted as servants, compared with the children of the new covenant, because they were in bondage, under the elements of the world ; that is, under the law of the carnal mind. The covenant from Mount Sinai gendered to bondage. It bore children that were in bondage to inbred sin ; the outward token or sign of which was the law of ordi- nances from which they could not be free. The casting out of the son of the bondwoman from being heir to Abraham's worldly possessions, is made use of also, to show, figuratively, that all under the new covenant who depend on works for salvation, in- stead of faith in the promises of God, are in the bondage of sin, and cannot be Abraham's spiritual seed. That is, they cannot bo born spiritually, after the similitude of Isaac's physical birth. They cannot be the " chil- dren of promise." They are servants, and not sons, because they are not freed from inbred sin ; and as such cannot come in pos- session of the inheritance in Christ, any more than Ish- mael could come in possession of Abraham's worldly possessions. They have not, therefore, experienced the New Birth or Sanctification. CHAPTER IX. The bondage of the old covenant. But before faith came, were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should after- ward be revealed. — Gal. 3: 23. To be " kepi under the law, shut up unto the faith ivhich should afterward be revealed" means to be guarded, bound, or locked up as in prison, with no way or means of becoming free. This is the meaning of the words rendered " kept," and "shut." So also in the twenty- second verse : But the Scriptures hath concluded all un- der sin. In this verse, the word rendered " concluded," has the same origin and the same meaning as the one rendered "shut," in the twenty-third verse. " The Scriptures hath concluded ; " that is, shut or locked all up under sin. By sin, in this verse, is not meant the sin of trans- gression, or that all were sinners by transgression, and that therefore they were shut or locked up under the guilt of transgression. For, under the old covenant, or before faith came, pardon was offered to all who com- plied with the conditions of the covenant. Bondage of the Old Covenant. 73 To be shut or locked up under sin means the same as to be shut, or locked up under the law till faith came. Neither of these expressions mean that no one could be freed from guilt until after faith came. As I understand it, to be concluded, that is , shut or locked up under sin, means to be shut or locked up under the law of inbred sin. To be "kept under the lata, shut up unto the faith ivhich should afterward be revealed" means the same thing, with the exception that the law of ordinances is mcluded, as a law under ivhich they were shut or locked up. But the law of ordinances did not constitute the bond- age that is meant by the shutting or locking up referred to in these Scriptures. The bondage of the old covenant did not consist, primarily, in the cords that bound ♦ (that is, the law of ordinances,) but in a law lying back of the law of ordinances, namely: the law of inbred sin. God did not give His people, under the old covenant, a * hand-writing of ordinances that was against them, which was contrary to them, and then take it out of the way ; except on the ground of necessity. The necessity was the law of inbred sin, from which they could not be free till faith came. The law of inbred sin, or the carnal mind, being un- taken away, was against or contrary to the moral law, and consequently against them in keeping the moral law, And as the law of ordinances was a necessary concomi- tant of inbred sin, this law of ordinances was also against 74: Bondage of the Old Covenant. or contrary to them. It would have been uesless and burdensome could they have been freed from inbred sin But inbred sin must be guarded, and kept under prop- er check and control by some suitable law. The law of ordinances was just that law. It kept the worshiper in the way God w®uld have him walk, by pointing him to Christ. He was thus kept from idolary, and led to trust in Christ for redemption. It was a school-master to bring him to Christ. Its offerings were typical of the offering of Christ ; and the law in regard to these offerings must be strictly adhered to, or the worshiper was not accepted in the sight of God. In every complete offering for sin, there was some- thing typical of the offering of Christ. It pointed to Christ, and the worshiper was thereby enabled to keep Christ in view, and by faith in Him be justified, and ac- cepted in the sight of God. Christ must be kept in view. This was accomplished by the offerings pre- scribed by law, and the worshiper was enabled to take hold on Christ by a faith that was counted to him for righteousness. The law, or " hand-writing of ordinances," must therefore be faithfully observed, or Christ was not brought to view, and the worshiper could not die in the faith that was acceptable in the sight of God. He could have no title to the promised inheritance in Christ, namely : * ' The perfection of them that are sanc- tified:' Bondage of the Old Covenant. 75 If he kept the law of ordinance faithfutly, he died in the faith that obtained for him a good report, but could not receive the promise. That is, he could not receive the sonship, or redemption from under the law of in- bred sin. For this, he must wait until the " fulness of time was come. 1 ' He was thus "kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterward be revealed" Inbred sin bound him, or locked him up, as in prison, under its power, and made it necessary for him to ob- serve the law of ordinances as a means of justification, and consequent preservation, until the gospel dispensa- tion, or "faiths' 1 came. To be shut or locked up under the power of inbred sin, means that the worshiper could not be free from it. It does not mean that he was compelled to commit all manner of wickedness. It does not mean that the " old man," the " body of sin" could not be kept under sub- jection so that the worshiper could be free from guilt. It means that he could not be free from a law in his members, that warred against the " law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus" While thus in bondage to inbred sin, he could serve not in " newness of spirit, 1 ' but his service was according to the " oldness of the letter." It was not natural for the heart to keep the law of God, and worship Him in Spirit and in truth. It was a forced, and not a natural service. Know ye not, brethren, (for I speak to them 76 Bondage of the Old Covenant. that know the law,) how that the law hath do- minion over a man so long as he liveth? For the woman which hath a husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but it her husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband. So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress : but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law ; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man. Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God. For when we were in the flesh, the motions of sins, which were by the law, did work in our members, to bring forth fruit unto death. But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held ; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter. — Rom. 7 : 1-6. That is, the law held dominion over the worshiper as long as it was in force, or until he was dead to the law by the body of Christ, just as the law existing between husband and wife, binds the wife until the husband is dead. He must be dead to the law before he could be free Bondage of the Old Covenant. 77 from it, just as the husband must be dead before the wife could be free from the law that bound her to her husband. Now to become dead to the law by the body of Christ was to be freed from sin. The body of Christ must slay inbred sin, before the worshiper could be dead to the law. For he that is dead is freed from sin. — Rom. 6:7. That is, he in whom the " old man " is dead is freed from sin. The sixth verse reads : Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be de- stroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin. That is, he in whom the "old man" is crucified, is dead to sin— is freed from it. The body of sin is de- stroyed, and he is said to be dead, according to the seventh verse : For he that is dead is freed from sin. These Scriptures show plainly what is referred to as being dead, in the sixth verse of the seventh chapter. But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held. The fifth verse reads : But when we were in the flesh," (that is, be- fore the body of sin was destroyed,) " the mo- tions of sin, which were by the law, did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death." 78 Bondage of the Old Covenant, It is then added : " But now tve are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held.''' 1 It was the "old man" that held, or bound. It was the " old man," or the " body of sin," that was dead. This death of the " old man," or inbred sin, delivered the worshiper from the law of ordinances, just as the wife was freed from the law of her husband by his death. As has been previously noticed, the law of ordinances was a necessary, and not an arbitrary rule ; and when inbred sin, (that which made the law of ordinances necessary,) was removed, the worshiper was delivered from the law. He was dead to the law. What is meant, therefore, by the bondage of the old covenant, is the bondage of inbred sin, from which the worshiper could not be freed except by the body of Christ. That is, the offering of the body of Christ de- livered the worshiper from the law of ordinances, by destroying inbred sin. The worshiper was married to the law of ordinances, and could not be freed from that relation, and married to Christ until the body of Christ had slain inbred sin, and thereby rendered him dead to the law of ordinances. The last part of the fifth, the sixth, seventh, and the first part of the eighth chapters of Romans, Paul devotes to the subject of inbred sin. In the fifth, he shows its origin, and several times calls it the " offense" In the sixth, he shows the way of deliverance from it : Bondage of the Old Covenant. 79 namely, baptism into the death of Christ, and calls it the " old man,'' and the " body of sin." In the first part of the seventh, he shows how long inbred sin was to have dominion over the worshiper, and uses the term law, instead of sin. as in the four- teenth verse of the sixth chapter. In the last part of the seventh chapter, he describes the workings of inbred sin, as brought to life, or put in motion by the moral law, and then adds, verse 24; wretched man that I am ! who shall deliv- er me from the body of this death ? In describing the motions of inbred sin, he calls it -' sin that dwelleth in me" and " the body of this death." In the eighth chapter Paul closes this argument in regard to inbred sin, in the following language : There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death. For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh : That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit, — verses 1-4. 80 Bondage of the Old Covenant. To be made free from the " law of sin and death," by the " law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus " is to ex- perience the New Birth, or Banctification. CHAPTER X. Addition and office of the ceremonial laiv. Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made. — Gal. 3 : 19. To use a figure, the moral law was like a steel spring, holding the transgressor in the unyielding vise of its own inflexible justice. It held him under condemna- tion. The ceremonial law acted as a temporary lever, lift- ing the force of the spring from off the transgressor for the time being. It was a means of justification or pardon, whereby the guilt of transgression was removed, and the trans- gressor brought into favor with God. He was thereby accepted of God, as free from the guilt of transgression. The offerings of the ceremonial law made an atone- ment for transgression on the ground of faith in Christ. The faith of the transgressor must reach Christ through these offerings. 6 82 Office of the Ceremonial Law. The transgressor could be pardoned on the ground of a perfect offering, and the exercise of a perfect faith in Christ, vouchsafed through said offering. That is, the offerings of the law were designed to bring the trans- gressor to Christ through faith. The law was a " school- master " to bring him to Christ. An imperfect offering showed an imperfect faith, as in the case of Cain. The faith of the transgressor must fasten on Christ, in order to secure pardon. If the offerings of the law did not bring him to Christ by faith, they were of no avail. The offering of Christ was the only foundation, or procuring cause of forgiveness under the old covenant. By virtue of the offering of Christ, and through faith in said offering, God accepted of the offerings of the law, as an atonement for transgressions, until the debt of the transgressor could be cancelled by the offering of Christ. Guilt was removed for the time being, (for they were pardoned,) but had Christ failed to die, the guilt of the transgressor would have returned upon him in full force, and the offerings of the law would have been of no avail. And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were un- der the first testament they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inherit- ance. — Heb. 9 : 15. The end or object of Christ's mediatorial office, as Office of the Cekemonial Law. 83 mediator of the new covenant, is to purge the con- science from dead works. His blood alone could do this. " That by means of death for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they having been called," (instead of "they which are called,") " might receive the promise of eternal inherit- ance" Christ's death was the only means whereby the trans- gressor, under the old covenant, could be redeemed from the consequences of transgression. The consequences of transgression were, first, guilt. From the guilt of transgression he was freed by the offerings of the ceremonial law, because thereby he could reach Christ. Secondly, inbred sin was an effect of transgression. Fr >m this, the transgressor could not be free until the blood of Christ was shed. The purging of the conscience, (or the " inmost soul, 11 as the word rendered conscience sometimes means,) by the blood of Christ, is the " eternal inheritance " referred to, as being promised to those that were called under the old covenant. There was a will or testament specified in the cove- nant of promise. That will contained the promise of " eternal inheritance" which, they that were called were to receive on the death of the testator, Christ. The ' purging of the conscience from dead works, 1 and the '• eternal inheritance," are one and the same, and mean the destruction of inbred sin. 84 Office of the Ceremonial Law. This is what was meant by the fulfillment of the new- covenant promise : " I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts." The same thing is meant by the expression: " The adoption of sons." The word rendered " adoption of sons,' 1 ' 1 should here be rendered sonship ; that is, the state Of boing a son by birth. Now this sonship is the same as the " eternal inherit- ance;" and is that which was promised by the- will, or testament, contained in the covenant of promise. This will or testament was to take effect after the death of the testator, Christ. The law that governed this will, or testament, is ex- plained by referring to the law governing the testamen- tary disposition of property among men. The disposition of property by will and testament was practiced at an early date among civilized nations. The essential meaning, or correct definition of a " last will and testament," has been given, as "a disposition of one's property, to take effect after death" Death gave the will and testament its force. It was never in force until after the death of the testator. This law that governs the disposition of property in the ''last will and testament," is what Paul refers to, to explain the law by which the promisee, under the old covenant, was to come in possession of the promised, and " eternal inheritance." For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator. Office of the Ceremonial Law. 85 For a testament is of force after men are dead : otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.— Heb. 9: 16-17. That the benefits of the covenant of promise were not secured to the promisee until after the death of Christ, is still further explained and established, by referring to the fact that the benefits of the old covenant were not secured except through the blood of appropriate vic- tims. The old covenant was made valid, and the prom- ised benefits thereof secured by the shedding of blood. Whereupon neither the first testament was dedicated without blood. For when Moses had spoken every precept to all the people according to the law, he took the blood of calves and of goats, with water, and scarlet wool, and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book and all the people, Saying, this is the blood of the testament which God hath enjoined on you. Moreover he sprinkled likewise with blood both the tabernacle, and all the vessels of the ministry. And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission. It was therefore necessary that the patterns of the things in the heavens should be purged with these ; but the heavenly things them- selves with better sacrifices than these. — Heb. 9:18-23. 86 Office of the Ceremonial Law. By the offerings of the ceremonial law, the worshiper was freed from the guilt of transgression, and at the same time pointed to Christ, as the only offering by which the conscience could be purged, or the heart cleansed from all sin. But for this purging of the conscience, or the heart from inbred sin, he must wait until the offering of Christ was made, as the worshiper under the new covenant waits for the redemption of the body. The office of the ceremonial law was represented by the Scapegoat: — " Azazel" the averter. It averted, or turned away the force of the moral law, by averting or turning away the immediate penalty of transgression. By its observance, the worshiper was kept in a justi- fied state, until he could experience the New Birth, promised upon the death of Christ. " It was added be- cause of transgressions, till the seed should come to ivhom the promise was made." CHAPTER XI. Justification by the works of the law. Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight : for by the law is the knowledge of sin. — Rom, 3: 20. As I understand this verse, and other similar passages, they do not mean that no man could be justified in the sight of God, in the sense of pardon and acceptance, by the keeping of the law, for, " the man that doeth them shall live in them.'''' But the meaning is this: no man by keeping the law of the old covenant could be made holy in the sense of being freed from all sin. He could not be cleansed from all unrighteousness in the inward parts by the blood of Christ. The word justified, in the above quotation, and in other places in the Bible, is a relative term only, having various standards by which its signification is deter- mined, Thus : But wisdom is justified of her children. — Mat. 11:19. For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and 88 Justification by the Works of the Law. by thy words thou shalt be condemned. — Mat. 12:37. To be justified in the sense of pardon and acceptance with God, under the old covenant, was to keep the law of that covenant. Ye shall therefore keep my statutes, and my judgments : which if a man do, he shall live in them. — Lev. 18: 5. But as the old covenant did not require righteousness in the inward parts, the man who kept the law of that covenant only, could not be considered justified, or righteous in the sense of righteousness in the inward parts, and consequently in the sight of God, whose moral purity required such righteousness. God accepted of those who kept the law of the old covenant, because it was all that they could do: but as the keeping of the law of the old covenant did not come up to the standard of righteousness, which God looks upon as righteous, (namely, righteousness in the inward parts,) it is said : " Therefore by the deeds of the law shall no flesh be justified in his sight.' ' It is not said that they were not justified in the sense of pardon and acceptance with God, because this would contradict the whole tenor of the Old-Testament Scrip- tures on the subject of forgiveness. To be justified in the eyes of the law of the old cove- nant, required one standard of righteousness. To be justified in the eyes of the moral law, or in the sight of God, required another standard of righteousness. Justification by the Works of the Law. 89 And all that is said in the Bible, in reference to the in- sufficiency of the law to make perfect, or to justify in the sight of God, is said in reference to the latter stand- ard of righteousness. For Moses describeth the righteousness which is of the law, That the man which doeth those things shall live by them, But the righteousness which is of faith speaketh on this wise, say not in thine heart, Who shall ascend into heaven ? that is to bring Christ down from above : Or, who shall descend into the deep ? that is, to bring up Christ again from the dead. But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart : that is, the word of faith, which we preach. — Rom. 10 : 5-8. Now the righteousness which was of the law, was by faith ; but the righteousness which was by the faith of the old covenant, was different from the righteousness which is by the faith of the new covenant. The faith of the old covenant took away the guilt or condemnation, that came upon the transgressor on ac- count of his transgression of the law of that covenant. It justified him in view of the standard of righteousness required by the old cjovenant, and was all that God re- quired of him. But the faith of the new covenant takes hold on Christ as a sanctifier, and takes away inbred sin, or " purges 90 Justification by the Works of the Law. the conscience from dead works," and justifies the wor- shiper in the sight of the moral law, or in God's sight. And by him, (Christ,) all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses. — Acts 13 39. By the law of Moses, the worshiper could be justified from all things except inbred sin. All, under the new covenant, who believe in Christ as a sanctifier, can be justified or cleansed from inbred sin, from which no one could be justified or cleansed by the faith of the old covenant. They can experience the New Birth, or Sanctification. CHAPTER XII. The sonship, or state of being a son by birth. The word rendered adoption signifies the act by which a child is taken out of one family, and incorporated with another. A child thus taken into another family, or under the care and protection of one who is not its real parent, by a legal process in law, is said to be an adopt- ed child. A stranger child thus taking the place of one who is a child by birth, and made an heir to its adoptive parent's estate, is an adopted child in the primary and literal sense of the word adoption. But this is not the meaning of the word rendered adoption, as used in the Bible, with one exception: namely, Rom. 9 : 4. In this place, the word is used in its proper sense. In Bom. 8 : 23, the word rendered adoption is ex- plained as meaning the redemption of the body. With these two exceptions, as used in the Bible, it means sonship, or the state of being a son by birth. Under the old covenant, the children of God were in bondage to inbred sin, and consequently could not be the children of God by birth ; but were adopted children. 92 The Sonship. By virtue of their adoption they were entitled to the sonship, or the state of being a son by birth, in due time Hence, the following Scripture : But when the fulness of time was corae, Goc sent forth his son, made of a woman, made un- der the law, To redeem them that were under the that we might receive the adoption of sons.- Gal. 4 : 4-5. The word rendered adoption in this verse should bo rendered sonship ; that is, the state or condition of being sons by birth — the new birth. All the children of God, under the law, were adopted. Hence, they could not receive the adoption, or the state of being sons by adoption, when Christ came. But thej could receive the sonship at that time. They were children by adoption, placed in the condi tion of servants, with reference to their adoptive father's estate. The estate to which they were heirs was the new birth or sonship. The spiritual condition of the children of God, unde^ the old covenant, is explained by the following figure : Now I say, that the heir, as long as he is child differeth nothing from a servant, though he be lord of all ; But is under tutors and governors until the time appointed of the father. Even so we, when we were children, were in The Sonship. 93 Dondage under the elements of the world. — Tkii. 4 : 1-3. ri Wlien we were children " — when we were under the law, and children by adoption. Were in bondage under the elements of the world" — were in bondage to the law of the carnal mind, under which the world is held, or bound. The children of God, under the old covenant, were in the same condition, spiritually, that the child is in pecu- niarily before he becomes of age. The child before he is of age, is an heir to his father's estate ; but is in bondage, or under tutors and governors, and does not come in possess ; on of his father's estate any more than a servant. He is not free to use his father's estate any more than a servant, although he owns it by virtue of his heirship. " The time appointed of the father," is the time when he becomes of age, and takes possession of his legal in- heritance. Even so, the children of Gocl under the old covenant, were in bondage to the law, or that which made the law necessary, inbred sin; and were of course under the ele- ments of the world, and could not come in possession of the promised inheritance of their father's estate until they became of age. That is, they could not come in possession of the bless- ings conveyed by the "last will and testament" con- tained in the new covenant, until they were free from thf the world, but that the names were written in the, >ook, from, or before the foundation of the world. The sense would be more clearly expressed with the I.ast clause of the verse transposed, thus : And all that dwell upon the earth shall wor- ship him, whose names are not written, from he foundation of the world, in the book of life )f the Lamb slain. This understanding of the text is sustained by the ighth verse of the seventeenth chapter ; where the same 126 Chhist not Slain fkom the Foundation, etc. expression is made use of to designate the true children of God, but with the adjunct, " Lamb slain," left out: And they that dwell on the earth shall won- der whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is. — Rev. 17. : 8. Wesley has the following note on the passage under consideration: .Averse 8. And all that dwell upon the earth will worship Aim-All will be carried away by the torrent, but the little flock of true believers. The name of these onlv is written in the Lamb's book of life." And if any of these " make shipwreck of faith," he will blot them "out of his book;" although they were written therein from (that is, before) the foundation of the world." ' It is true that Christ was not slain before the founda- tion of the world, and the evidence that He was consid- ered as slain, or the proof that that the faith of the wor- shiper, could fasten on Christ as a slain sacrifice, and be blessed in just the same way that he could h.ive been, had Christ in reality been slain before the foundation of the world, is nowhere found in the Bible, as I understand its teaching. Christ was promised, but the fulfillment of the prom- ise was " seen afar off." The worshiper could be pardoned through faith m a promised Saviour; but not sanctified, because this was not the covenant. CHAPTER XVII. Two passages of Scripture regarded as proof that sanctification was attainable under the old- covenant dispensation, considered. 1. Speak unto all the congregation of the children of Israel, and say unto them, Ye shall be holy : for I the Lord your God am holy. — Lev. 19 : 2. All the children of Israel who kept the covenant en- joined on them, were considered holy, .because it was all that they could do. Thus doing, they were free from the condemnation of sin, and were considered holy. They lived up to God's requirements. They were all that He- designed they should be ; and were therefore free from any charge of sin, and in this sense were holy as God was holy. And as the covenant enjoined on them did not require the taking away of inbred sin, they were considered holy without its removal. The people of God under the new covenant are con- 128 Levitcus 19 : 2, Considered. sidered holy when not fully redeemed from the effects of the fall. With our many faults and infirmities, lack of under- standing, and errors in judgment, together with these " vile bodies" which cannot be fully redeemed from the ruins of the fall, until this " corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and th ; s mortal shall have put on im- mortality," even in this partially redeemed state, we are considered holy, if we keep the covenant. The new covenant requires freedom from inbred sin. It requires the full* restoration of the moral image of God in the soul, through the blood of Christ. For His blood cleanses from all unrighteousness in a moral sense. But it does not change these " vile bodies," and * fashion them like unto Christ's most glorious body,' while in this life. The new covenant does not fully redeem us from the ruins of the fall in the present tense. It will not until 1 death shall have been swallowed up in victory.' For we know that the whole creation groan- eth and travaileth in pain together until now : And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the first fruits of the Spirit, even we our- selves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body.— Horn. 8 : 22-23. Notwithstanding we are not in this life redeemed from the bondage of corruption, yet we are to present our "bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God." Psalm 51 : 10, Considered. 129 Now if the new covenant made provision for the re- demption of the body here in this life, then, in that case, the body would have to be redeemed before the offering thereof would be- regarded as " holy, acceptable unto God." But as the covenant does not make provision for the redemption of the body here in this life, the offering thereof is regarded as holy, although yet in the bondage of corruption. So also under the old covenant ; as there was no pro- vision made for the taking away of inbred sin by the blood of Christ, the people of God were called holy, when this work was not accomplished. 2. Create in rne a clean heart, God ; and renew a right spirit within me. — Ps. 51 : 10. This is one of the utterances of David, contained in a prayer for the forgiveness of sin, or transgression. The prayer commences with the following language : Have mercy upon me, God, according to thy loving kindness : according unto the multi- tude of thy tender mercies blot out my trans- gressions. Wash me thoroughly from mine iniquity, and cleanse me from my sin. For I acknowledge my transgressions : and my sin is ever before me. Against thee, thee only, have I sinned, and done this evil in thy sight. — Ps. 51 : 1-4. 130 Psalm 51 : 10, Consideked, Again in verse seven he says : Purge me with hyssop, and I shall be clean : wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow, Again in verse nine — Hide thy face from my sins, and blot out all mine iniquities. Then comes the passage under consideration — " Create in me a clean heart, God : and renew a right spirit within me." This expression of the Psalmist I understand to he a hendiadys— the first part of the figure meaning the same as the last. " Create in me a clean heart, God" means the same as, " renew a right spirit within me ; n which right spirit he had lost by transgression. He continues his prayer in the same form of speech and immediately adds in verses eleven and twelve : Cast me not away from thy presence ; and take not thy Holy Spirit from me. Bestore unto me the joy of thy salvation ; and and uphold me with thy free Spirit. When God forgives sin, He does it perfectly. It was, therefore proper for the Psalmist to say: " Wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow.' 1 '' Come now, and let us reason together, saith the Lord : though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow ; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool. — Isa.l : 18. All who kept the covenant, under the old-covenant Psalm 51 : 10, Considered. 131 dispensation, were made c&an, or purged from the guilt of transgression. In this sense they were holy. In this sense Job was a perfect man — perfect because he kept the covenant en- joined on him, and was therefore what God required him to be. When the worshiper sinned, he was to repent; and 1-y repentance and the observance of the ceremonial law, he was considered washed thoroughly from his iniquity. The clean heart prayed for, means the pardon of sin. CHAPTER XVIII. Necessary criticism on the Wesleyan, or prevail- ing mode of teaching sanctification. According to the Wesleyan explanation of the doc- trine of sanctification, pardon, being a work done for the worshiper, is always accompanied by a work wrought Jin the heart, called "regeneration" or the 44 new birth" This is, I think, the prevailing sentiment among those who teach the doctrine of sanctification. It is also said that this work wrought in the heart at the time of pardon, called 44 regeneration" or the "new birth" is sanctification commenced. That is, regenera- tion is sanctification commenced, but not completed. This work said to be wrought in the heart at the time of pardon, called " regeneration," or partial sanctifica- tion, (that is, sanctification commenced but not complet- ed,) is to be succeeded by a second work of blessing called " entire sanctification," or 44 holiness." Now I look upon this theory as involving an impossi- bility with God, as not necessarily true in experience, Wesleyan Theory of Sanctification. 133 and as being without Scriptural foundation on which to sustain itself. 1. It involves an impossibility with God. Regenera- tion, or sanctification commenced, being a distinct work wrought in the heart, by which the heart is partly re. newed, (according to the theory,) supposes that God commences the work of sanctification at the time of pardon, and leaves it incomplete. That is, He puts a new nature into the heart at the time of pardon, and at the same time leaves sin remaining theuein. This theory, as I understand it, involves an impossi- bility with God. For, regeneration being a distinct work wrought in the heart, whereby the heart is re- newed in righteousness, and made holy, is never partly, or imperfectly wrought. Regeneration, being a renewal of the heart whereby a new nature is imparted, cannot be imparted until the old former nature is taken away. The old former nature to be removed, or taken away is inbred sin, or the carnal mind, which is " enmity against God," and which cannot be subject to the law of God. The taking away of this carnal mind being a distinct work, wrought by God only, is never accomplished ex- cept on certain conditions. These conditions are estab- lished by God Himself, and must be fully complied with, on the part of the seeker, before^any part of the work can be accomplished. God's justice and holiness make it impossible for Him to take away this inbred sin, until after the seeker 134 Wesley an Theory op Sanctification. has fully complied with the conditions upon which He has^promised to do the work. And it would be as much of an impossibility with God, to do a part of the work, (that is, regenerate or partly sanctify,) before the terms were complied with, on the part of the seeker, as it would be for him to do the whole of it. And when the conditions upon which God has prom- ised to take away inbred sin, are fully complied with, on the part of the seeker, it is an impossibility with God not to do the work, because He has promised to do it. It would be just as impossible* with God not to do the work, when the terms were complied with, as it would be for Him to lie. And it would be just as impossible for him to only partly do it, as it would be for Him not to do it at all. God's holiness makes it impossible with Him to sanc- tify or cleanse the heart, except on His own conditions. And the same holiness makes" it impossible for Him to partly sanctify, or cleanse it, when those conditions are complied with. According to the Wesleyan explanation of the doc- trine of sanctification, sanctification commences at the time of justification. This is Wesley's explanation in regard to the time : " Question. When does inward sanctification begin? •• Answer. In the moment a man is justified. (Yet sin remains in him, yea, the seed of all sin, till he is sane- Wesleyan Theory of Sanctification. 135 titled throughout.) From that time a believer gradually dies to sin, and grows in grace.— Plain Account, p. 48. According to Wesley, the believer is partly sanctified when he is justified. He is then born of God, and this new birth is the beginning of sanctification The new birth is the same as sanctification, as far as it goes. The new birth partly destroys, or takes away inbred sin, and entire sanctification completes the work. According to Wesley, justification, or the new birth, (as he speaks of these two states, as one and the same,) is a real, but not an entire change of heart. " Question 17. But what need is there of it, seeing sanctification is a real change, not a relative only, like justification? Answer. But is the new birth a relative change only? Is not this a real change? Therefore, if we need no witness of our sanctification, because it is a real change, for the same reason we should need none that we are born of or are the children of God. 11 — Plain Account, p. 119. Wesley bore confounds the new birth with justification* The new birth, of course, is a real change, but not a partial one. But he claims that the new birth is the beginning of sanctification. That is, it partly sanctifies or renews the heart, and at the same time leaves the "seed of all sin " remaining therein. According to the statement of the question, justifica- tion is a relative change only; but is not necessarily accompanied by the new birth, as Mr. Wesley probably means, when he confouuds it with justification. 136 Wesleyan Theory of Sanctification. It is just as much of an impossibility with God to partly sanctify, as it is for Him to partly pardon ; and for the same reason. God alone can forgive sin, and he never partly forgives, or justifies. God alone can sanc- tify, or cleanse the heart, and he never partly cleanses it. If the work of sanctification was the work of men, they might partly do it; thus leaving a part unsanctified — a foot-hold, fort, or fortification, in which for the Devil to intrench himself, (as in his own possessions) and thence command the whole field, unless God should con- sent to occupy a part of it with him. But God does not thus do Bis work. When the whole heart is given to Him, He sanctifies, or cleanses the whole of it, It is a perfect work; as in the case of justification 4 . The sinner is perfectly cleansed from the guilt of transgression, when he repents, and believes in the Lord Jesus Christ. All his guilt is thus removed. When the pardoned sinner is made to see and feel the leprosy of inbred sin, and comes to Christ with all the heart, he is cleansed perfectly, 'wholly, from this inbred sin. I hope it may not be considered impertinent to the notion of partial sanctification, to ask its advocates the following questions: If the heart is partly sanctified at the time of justification, what part is left unsanctified ? What part, or how large a proportion remains to be sanctified? Wesley an Theory of Sanctification. 137 The word sanctification, as used in the New Testa- ment, (when haying reference to the moral state of the heart) means its cleansing, or purification from all sin. It is only another way of expressing the renewal of the heart in righteousness, called sometimes "regenera- tion," or the " new birth." It signifies the taking away of sin, and the writing of the law of God in the heart. It means, " to put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness." That the word sanctification, as used in the New Tes- tament in describing the moral state of the heart, means the same as the " washing of regeneration, and renew- ing of the Holy Ghost," (whereby the heart is cleansed from all sin, and made perfect in Christ,) will appear from Heb 10: 1-22. In this reference, sanctification is spoken of as a per- fection whereby the heart is cleansed from all sin, and is declared to be the same as the writing of the law of God in the heart. As the heart cannot be regenerated, or born again, when sin remains therein (because the new birth makes a new creature b} r the taking away of the sinful heart, and the giving of a new heart that is not sinful) : so neither can it be sanctified, when sin remains therein; for sanctification is the cleansing of the heart from sin. For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices, which they of- 138 Wesleyan Theory of Sa notification. fered year by year continually, make the comers thereunto perfect. For then would they not have ceased to be offered ? because that the worshipers once purged should have had no more conscience of sins.— Heb. 10: 1-2. The perfection here spoken of, is the perfection of being cleansed from all sin. This perfection is called sanctification. By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. — verse 10. For by one offering he hath perfected forever them that are sanctified. — verse 14. As I understand it, all sin must be taken out of the heart, before the heart can be made new. It cannot be a new or changed heart, while inbred sin remains therein. The image of God cannot be restored, as it was before the fall, until all sin is taken out of the heart. A little sin would destroy it. In Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new crea- ture.— Gal. 6: 15. No one can be a " new creature in Christ Jesus," until he has a new heart. And he cannot have a new heart, while sin remains therein, because it would be the same old heart. A little seed would be the seed of all sin. West.eyan Theory of Sanctification. 13£ The perfection of sanctification takes all sin out of the heart. Now this is what I understand by the new birth. A man that is born of God, bears the image of God. He is like God, in heart. And to be like God, in heart, he must be cleansed from all sin. They that are born of God, Have put off the old man with his deeds : And have put on the new man, which is re- newed in knowledge after the image of him that created him. — Col. 3:10. They that are born of God, are conformed to the image of Christ. And in that image, there is no sin. For whom he did foreknow, he also did pre- destinate to be conformed to the image of his Son.— Rom. 8: 29. Therefore, if the seed of all sin remains in the heart, the image of Christ cannot be there. It cannot be a new heart. It cannot be born of God. It will be seen by investigation, that regeneration, and the new birth, or " a being born again," are synony- mous terms. When Jesus said, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God, (John 8 : 3,) lie used the word 4t gcnnelhe" from " gcnnao" which means, to beget, generate, to bring forth, bear, give birth to. 14:0 Wesley an Theohy of Sanctification. When he said, Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me in the regeneration, (Mat. 19: 28.) He used the word " paling e?iesia" rendered regener- ation. A being born again, a new birth, is the literal sig- nification of " paling enesia" It has the same meaning as " gennethe." Therefore when Jesus says, " Ye which have followed me in the regeneration," the meaning is, ye which have been made like unto me by the new birth. " Regeneration " is used twice in the Bible. Titus 3 : 5, reads: Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renew- ing of the Holy Ghost. Tn this place, regeneration has the same meaning as in the former reading; and the washing referred to, as I understand it, is the washing of the heart from sin, inbred sin. " The washing of regeneration," the new birth, and sanctification, all mean the same thing: namely, the cleansing of the heart from sin, and its renewal in the image of Christ. I think this plainly appears from the nature of the work, and from the Scriptural terms used to express it, — all of which mean a new heart. As I understand it, the Wesley an error in regard to sanctification, consists in teaching, first, that the nevf birth is always experienced at the time of justification. Wesleyan Theory of Sanctification. 141 Secondly, in teaching that the ''seed of all sin" may remain in the heart, subsequent to the time of the new birth. As experience proves, inbred sin may remain in the heart subsequent to the time of justification, at which time Wesley understands the new birth to take place. It must therefore be true that the new birth does net take away inbred sin, or else it is not experienced at the time of justification, according to the Wesleyan theory. And inasmuch as to " be born again," is to be made a "-new creature" and as the believer cannot be a " new creature " while the seed of all sin remains in the heart, therefore the new birth is not experienced at the time of justification, according to the Wesleyan theory. Now the latter named error grows out of the first. For, if the first is a truth, (as Wesley teaches,) the lat- ter must be a truth also. If the believer does experience the new birth at the time of justification, the " seed of all sin " remain in the heart after the new birth ; for experience proves that it is not taken away at the time of justification. And out of the latter named error grows the notion of partial sanctification. For if the believer can be born again, and yet the " seed of all sin " remains in the heart, he can be partly sanctified. Hence the expres- sion: *' Entire sanctification " — as though the believer had previously been partly sanctified ; which has been shown to be an impossibility. 2. The notion of being partly sanctified is not sus- tained by experience. 142 Wesleyan Theoky of Sanctification. It undoubtedly has its foundation in the supposition that when the believer is jnstindd, there must necessarily be a change of heart, because he always loves the things he once hated, and hates the things he once loved. He has the peace of God filling his heart, and the supposition is, that he is a " new creature ; n or, that he is partly a ' ; nevv creature ,: — so much so. at least, that he is partly sanctified, or, which is the same thing, (according to Wesley,) regenerated or born again. It is not supposed possible that the great change which invariably accompanies the pardon of sins, can be effected by anything short of the new birth. Whereas, the whole change is effected simply by the gift of the Spirit, which is never withholden when the worshiper is at peace with God. Where the Spirit is given, there of course are all the fruits of the Spirit. The change effected by pardon under the old cove- nant, was the same as that which is effected by pardon under the new covenant. Peace with God, and the gift of the Spirit was the re- sult of justification under the old covenant, as much as it is under the new. Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ. — Rom. 5:1. In both cases, the believer being filled with joy and peace through the presence of the Spirit, has a desire to do the will of God. His will has been conquered and brought into harmony with God's will. His will is to Wesley an Theory of Sanctification. 143 be right, and to do right; but he finds a 'law in his members warring against the law of his mind.' It is the " law of sin and death.' 1 ' 1 Now the pardoned worshiper under the old covenant was never free from this law, because the promise by which it is removed did not belong to that covenant. And yet the pardoned or justified worshiper under the old covenant exhibited all the fruits of the Spirit — love, joy, peace, gentleness, meekness, faith, etc., and delight- ed in the law of God. Fie enjoyed the presence and communion of the Spirit of God, and ' spake as he was moved upon by the Holy Ghost/ The gift of the Spirit produced all the results exhibited in his life and conver- sation, and that without any regeneration or new birth. As the true worshiper under the old covenant exhib- ited the fruits of the Spirit, or the traits of character, and all the genuine marks, or signs of regeneration that are clamed for those who are said to be partly sancti- fied, or born again, under the new covenant, and as there was no regeneration or new birth possible, under the old covenant, therefore the believer, under the new covenant may be justified, without experiencing regen- eration, or the new birth. As the believer under the new covenant gives no more evidence of being born again, when he is par- doned, than the believer under the old covenant did, when he was pardoned, therefore it is not necessarily true that he is born again at the time of justification. For pardon or justification is the same under both cove- 144 Wesleya.n Theory of Sanctification. nants ; and the fruits exhibited in this state of grace are the same in both cases. When God made the following new-covenant promise : "Twill put my law in their inward parts and write it in their hearts,' 1 '' He did not promise to partly do it. The fact, howeyer , which is abundantly proved by ex- perience, that inbred sin is found to exist in the heart, subsequent to the pardon of sins, is sufficient proof that it has nerer in any degree been destroyed or taken away. For God cannot partly do it. 3. The theory of being partly sanctified has no Scrip- tural foundation. The principal passage quoted in support of this dogma is the following: And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly ; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. — 1 Thess. 5:23. In this verse, the pronoun you has a collective, as well as an individual application. It means the whole church, as a body, as much as it means the individual member separately. Paul commences this letter to the Thessalonians thus : "Paul, and Silvanus, and Timotheus, unto the Church." After this, the word " church" does not occur, but a rep. resentative pronoun takes its place. If, instead of the present reading the apostle had said : "And the very God of pea ze sanctify the church wholly" Wesleyan Theory of Sanctification. 145 the meaning would have been the same, as in the present reading. With this exchange of words, the apostle's meaning is obvious. A part of the church was sanctified, and a part of it was not. That the apostle in his letters to the churches, speaks of the church, as a body, and regards it as a unit, is ev- ident from the following language : And he gave some, apostles ; and some, proph- ets ; and some, evangelists ; and some, pastors and teachers : For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ.— Eph. 4: 11-12. From whom the whole body fitly joined to- gether and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual work- ing in the measure of every part, maketh in- crease of the body unto the edifying of itself in love. — verse 16. Who now rejoice in my sufferings for you, and fill up that which is behind of the afflictions of Christ in my flesh for his body's sake, which is the church. — Col. 1 : 24. These Scriptures prove that the church, the body of Christ, is regarded Iry the apostle, as a unit. It is not, therefore, inconsistent with the apostle's manner of address, to pray that the church of the Thessalonians, as a body, should be wholly sanctified. 10 146 Wesleyan Theory of Sanctification. It is just as consistent to suppose that some of them were sanctified, and some of them not sanctified, as it is to claim that some of them were "unruly," and some of them " feeble minded ; " which is plainly declared in the fourteenth verse. It is just as consistent, grammatically and logically, to apply the apostle's language to the collective body of the church, as it is to apply it to the members separately — thereby assuming that they were partly sanctified. And inasmuch as it has been shown that it is an im- possibility for the believer to be partly sanctified, the same as it is impossible for him to be partly born again , or partly pardoned, there is no other consistent way to explain the passage under consideration. This passage does not, therefore, sustain the dogma that the believer can be partly sanctified. Another portion of Scripture referred to as proving the notion of partial sanctification is the following : And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ. I have fed you with milk, and not with meat : for hitherto ye were not able to bear it, neither yet now are ye able. For ye are yet carnal : for whereas there is among you envying, and strife, and divisions, are ye not carnal, and walk as men ? — 1 Cor. 3 : 1-3. It is thought by those who teach the dogma of partial sanctification, that the Corinthians were regenerated or Wesleyan Theory of Sanctification. 147 born again because they are spoken of as babes in Christ, And as they are spoken of at the same time as being carnal, the inference is drawn that they were but partly sanctified. It is thought that they would not have been spoken of as babes in Christ, unless they were born again ; and that they would not have been spoken of as carnal, after they were wholly sanctified. The conclusion is therefore reached, that they were partly, but not wholly sanctified. All that need be said in answer to the above reasoning is, first: men are not babes in Christ, as a matter of course, until after they are born again. Secondly, they are, and always have been, liable to fall from this new birth ; and as soon as they do fall, they are always carnal. I think it is generally admitted by those who believe in what they call " entire sanctification, " that those in possession of this blessing may lose it, or fall from it. As I understand the spiritual condition of the Corinth- ian brethren, they were babes in Christ by virtue of the new birth, or what is the same thing, regeneration, or sanctification; and as babes, they were weak, and unac- quainted with the wiles of the enemy. As a very natural consequence growing out of this infantile state of experience, they had fallen into these errors, or carnal disputations, and were therefore carnal. They had been sanctified, as stated in the first part of the epistle, chapter 1:2: Unto the church of God, which is at Corinth, to them that arc sanctified in Christ Jesus. 148 Wesleyan Theory of Saxctieioatiox. ' k To them that are sanctified,-' does not mean them that are partly sanctified. They had fallen from this sanctification into carnal practices, and in this state, Paul could not speak unto them, as nnto spiritual, but as unto carnal. They could not bear strong meat, because they were carnal. They had fallen into this carnal state, because of their weakness, and inexperience, as babes in Christ. If men do become carnal, after they are sanctified, whv not the Corinthians? CHAPTER XIX, Conclusions reached,. The conclusions at which I arrive from the foregoing considerations are the following: 1. Pardon only, was bestowed by the old-covenant ministration. Sanctification, or the new birth, in addition to pardon is bestowed by the new-covenant ministration. 3. Pardon, or justification, by the old covenant minis- tration was just what it is by the new. It is no part of sanctification, or the new birth. It does not include any destruction of the body of inbred sin. Sanctification, or the new birth, does not necessarily accompany it. Hence, no one should think that because his sins have been forgiven, that therefore he is regenerated, or horn again; or that thereby he has a title to eternal life. 4. The new birth, and 3anctification, are synonymous terms, and signify the renewal of the heart in •' right- eousness and true holiness." 150 Conclusions Reached. They both mean what is expressed in the following language : And that ye put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holi- ness. — Eph. 4 : 24. 5. By the foregoing premises, a state of justification was salvable ground for the believer under the old covenant* because this state met the conditions of the covenant : but under the new covenant, the believer must be sancti- fied, or born again, because this state only, meets the conditions of the covenant. 6. By the foregoing premises, two inconsistencies are avoided : (1.) The inconsistency of teaching that a second work, or blessing, must be experienced subsequent to the new birth, before the heart is cleansed from all sin. In regard to this contradiction, or inconsistency, there has been much disputation ; and it has never been either logically or scripturally explained how a man can be born of God, and at the same time have the seed of all sin remaining in him. But if we understand that justification is no part of the new birth, the contradiction is avoided. It is easy to understand how the believer can be justified, and have 'the seed of all sin remaining in the heart. Whosoever is born of God doth, not commit sin ; for his seed remaineth in him : and he can- not sin, because he is born of God.— 1 John 3 : 9. Conclusions Reached. lol Whosoever is born of God retains the seed by which he was born. And the seed by which the believer is born of God, and the seed of all sin cannot remain in the heart at the same time, unless the tree can be both good and corrupt at the same time. Either make the tree good, and his fruit good ; or else make the tree corrupt, and his fruit cor- rupt ._ x \lat. 12: 33. (2.) The inconsistency of teaching that ' without holi- ness no man shall see the Lord,' and at the same time teaching that the believer is on salvable ground when justified"— that is, when partly sanctified, or partly holy, (according to the Wesleyan theory.) Among those who believe in the doctrine of sanctifi- eation, some teach that the believer is not on salvable around unless the heart is cleansed from all sin. te Others think that he is on salvable ground when in a justified state only. This last class say, that when justified, the believer is born of God, and that God will not cast off His own children; but will cat short the work in righteousness, and save the soul. Now if we understand that the new covenant requires the new birth, or sanctification, by which the heart is cleansed from all sin, we shall see at once? that the con- ditions of the covenant are not met, and that consequent- ly the believer cannot be on salvable ground short of said sanctification, or new birth. 7. By the foregoing considerations, the error of con- 152 Conclusions Reached. founding the new birth with justification, and the^conse- quent dogma of partial^ sanctification are exposed, and clearly shown to be unscriptural. 8. By the foregoing premises, justification is shown to be a relative change only, and sanctification, or Hie new birth, the only real change; and that never partial. By these premises, the confusion of ideas, conflicting sentiments, and controversy, which must naturally flow, as results of dividing sanctification, or the new' birth' into two separate works, or parts, are avoided; and the doctrine of Sanctification, or the New Birth, simplified according to the Scriptures. EEEATA Iii giving the foregoing pages a hasty reading from the press, 1 find the following typographical errors ; some of which materially affect the sense of the reading matter, but which it is now too late to correct in the proper place. Also, other errors of the same class, in punctuation, too numerous and unimportant to mention : Page 21, line 13 from top— for " motion," read notion. Page 31, line 1— for " this law," read the law. Page 75, line 33 from top— for, " he could serve not," read, he could not serve. Page 105, line 18 from top— read by, after the word worshiper. Page 100, line 7 from top—read that, after the word fact. Page 132, line 4 from bottom—read or, for " of" before the word blessing. Page 141, line 19 from top— for "remain" read remains. Also, line 24 from top— for " remains," read remain. T 1 1 E N E W B 1 Li T H . OR Bible Sanctification. fbT 7. i c< c c < Cc r'c G cc a cc: cc c di cc cc: C C C *L_ clc cc: CjCLiCj^ c c c ^ssl: c c c c_ c ..«£.. C _ CC «C~ Cc cc ::_ c c c cc , c ca c cc C C C c o CcC c cc Ccc c c c ^C c cc -dec cc«& - » dXcc ^ r5C /. C.'<3&£ C< c C Cc : ccc cdc ccc c: dc CCC c cc ccc "'((" d^ c «C d r 5: <:c