« AnteriorContinuar »
pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall be lieve on me through their word : that they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us.—And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them, that they may be one even as we are one : I in them and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one, and that the world may know that thouhast loved them as thou hast loved me. Father, I will that they also whom thou hast given me be with me where I am, that they may behold my glory which thou hast given me. I have declared unto them thy name, and will declare it, that the love wherewith thou hast loved me may be in them and I in them."*
Here then we see the elect given to Christ by solemn covenant, as the reward of his stipulated obedience in the work of redemption, with an absolute engagement that they should be regenerated, kept, and saved. In fulfilment of that covenant we see them actually regenerated and perseveringly sanctified by the power of God, expressly as the reward of Christ and in virtue of his intercession. Thus their incipient and continued sanctification is wrought by the power of God, in fulfilment of a solemn covenant with his Son, and in payment of a debt due to him. Surely that sanctification must be secured either by efficiency or the absolute control of motives. It cannot be left to the casual operation of the self-determining power, under excitements which many resist. And yet the opposite theory represents God as merely foreseeing that the self-determining power would begin and finish the
* John 17. 9—26.
work if he brought forward such means: and his only decision respecting the whole concern was, to bring forward the means. He has nothing to do with decreeing or producing or even occasioning these effects, only as he presents the means with a foreknowledge of the issue. After the means are applied to both classes alike, they themselves produce the only difference. which exists between them. And now, when the Bible is filled with such representations as have been produced, does it all end in this, that the Father's decree and covenant with his Son were only to send to both classes alike the means of grace and the illuminating Spirit ? Then they were not two classes except in the mere foreknowledge of God.
· I have now finished the Scripture testimony to divine efficiency. I by no means suppose that I have found all the texts. Many which I have found have been cast, or will be cast, into other chapters to support related branches of the subject. But in this single chapter near three hundred texts are arrayed in direct support of the main point. Such a current of proof runs not through the Bible in support of any other doctrine, except what relates to the perfections and government of God, the depravity of men, the mediation of Christ, and eternal retributions. Nor could any language be more explicit. And lest one form of expression should be explained away as figurative, numerous forms are used, which go to explain and confirm each other. Nor, when we have spoken of the number of texts, have we said half. The relations among the various parts of this great system, which the texts explicitly support, and which cannot stand together if any of them are
changed, are altogether more decisive than the number of texts. In short, if the doctrine of divine efficiency is not revealed in the Bible, I know not in what language it could have been revealed. Nor is there a text in the whole range of revelation which contradicts it.
And after all, will you come forward and say, I can look far enough into the secrets of nature to see that divine efficiency cannot comport with human freedom? Dare you say this in the face of several hundred texts, as explicit as any language can furnish, and supporting relations which are inseparably jointed together? These are the real parties to the question : several hundred texts arrayed against your assumption, and your assumption against several hundred texts. And which ought to prevail, let God and the universe decide.
Sinless Creatures Dependent for Holiness. To me it appears as impossible for God to make a being who shall act independently of him, as to make a being who for the future shall be self-existent. He can make beings whose actions shall be completely their own, so as to deserve praise or blame; because moral good and evil do not lie in originating but in performing. This notion of communicated independence has been extended even to matter. Boyle and Lord Kames thought it more creditable to the Author of nature to suppose that he made the material universe to go alone; that he gave it powers which remained after he withdrew his hand,-powers which, in their continuance, were caused by him and not caused by him,-caused by him in being given at first as permanent powers, and not made permanent by his continued action. This supposes that God at twelve o'clock could give power to a machine to go alone at one. But if he could make a thing, whether a being or a power, that would exist and act after he had withdrawn, he could make a thing which for the time to come would be self-existent; and yet the self-existence would be communicated. A power derived from God to exist without God!
• Brown is of the same school. He has laboured to prove that the material universe, after deriving its existence and laws from the Creator, performs its operations without his further interposition; that God wills its operations only as he formed it with such powers and lets it go on when he could suspend its laws; that no power is necessary for its preservation, power always bearing a relation to some "change." But what can that existence or power be which God does not support? What causes it to be this moment? God causes a thing to exist the first moment, but what caused it to exist the second ? Its existence one moment was no cause of its existing another. What causes it then to exist now? God, by a previous act whose effect continues to the present time, but not by a present act. But what makes the effect continue to the present time if God's power is suspended? Is there any thing there to act in the place of God when he is withdrawn ? any thing to cause the effect of a former act to continue when the Actor is no longer there ? If you say, God imparted to the thing permanent existence, that is saying that God willed its permanent existence. Now as God's existence is not in succession, but in one eternal now, we must not think of him as willing a thing and afterwards ceasing to will it while the thing itself remains. What he wills he wills in one eternal now. And if at the creation he willed the eternal existence and laws of matter, he never ceases to will the same. And when we get upon the scale of creatures, and measure over successive days and hours and moments, we can say at every instant, God now wills the existence and laws of matter. And that